Ah shit. Blizzard to make all franchises MMOs.

http://f13.net/?itemid=167

Quote:

---

Vivendi Universal Games gave a presentation to Wall Street today. Too much to report on everything said, but the big one was:

"All Blizzard franchises will become MMOGs."

All. They claim they have a model now to develop an MMOG in 3 years for $50 million. WoW cost 50 million euros and took 4 1/2 years.

They have bifurcated the MMOG market into two parts: long session games (more than two hours per session) and short session games (less than two hour sessions.) They will also be rolling out a bunch of short session games under the Sierra Online brand. An example is FreeStyle, a pick-up basketball online game scheduled for 2007 release. No details on pricing model for the short session games.

Shiznitz sent this in this morning and all I can say is good for them. Apparently splitting what will probably end up as 8-10 million customers (maybe more, asian gamers are unpredictable about things like STARCRAFT) across 3 games isn't a concern to them. They're lucky stock brokers know nothing about video games.

---

Please tell me this shitty website is dumb and doesn't know what the fuck they are talking about.

I love WoW, but man, I don't want a Blizzard MMO sweatshop. :(

*cue Empire March theme*

StarCraft 2 pls.

http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/a...id=19643&stc=1

I have no plans to make time in my life for any MMOs, but I'll be damned if a Diablo MMO wouldn't be incredibly tempting.

Sweet. Rock N Roll Racing, Lost Vikings, and Blackthorne MMOs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/a...id=19643&stc=1

---

Morphix's haul for 2006?

Blizzard sucks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy

StarCraft 2 pls.

---

No, Blizzard can't beat Starcraft.

Just because games will become MMO does not mean they will all be RPGs. I fail to see how this isn't good news. You can take anything, say a basketball game, and make it MMO, which could mean something as simple as walking around a city to pick someone to play ball with.

if this results in a good sci fi mmo, then im all for it, bring on world of starcraft. that said, as much as i play mmo's they are absolutely parasitic. they require a large time investement to see the full content, they package substandard gameplay(yes even my beloved city of heroes dosent even stand up to the worst 3d adventure game game), you really cant see any long term effect on the gameworld because it has to be unchanging enough for everyone to get a shot at content, and monthly subscription rates suck, yeah i can afford it, but that dosent mean that its a gaming model i like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valgar

No, Blizzard can't beat Starcraft.

---

I agree. Look what happened when they made Warcraft III, a game that improved on its predecessor in every conceivable way yet was different enough that it left many fans cold. As a result, WC3 sold well yet not as well as expected.

If Blizzard tried to make a Starcraft sequel, I fear the reaction would be the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy

StarCraft 2 pls.

---

This blows. I dont do much PC gaming, but 90% is Blizzard and NONE of it is MMOs. Damnit. Just give me Diablo 3 first please. I know, not gonna happen.

Why do we need more than one? Wouldn't another Blizzard MMO just compete with their own WoW?

Fix the lag in Diablo II imo.

WoW is a fun game, but the constant server problems drove me away. I think they're better off making Starcraft 2 rather than going gung-ho for MMOs. They probably won't do a Diablo 3 since all those people are now working on Guild Wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChaoofNee

Why do we need more than one? Wouldn't another Blizzard MMO just compete with their own WoW?

---

MMOs have a very high attrition rate -- but a lot of players will bounce from game to game, instead of quitting the genre entirely. Keeping those players under the same publisher even as they bounce from game to game is a huge win, in that instance.

This is why you see companies like NCSoft and Netmarble try to build up a lineup of online games that is ludacrisp -- for diversity and redundancy.

(That's the omfg short analysis of it.)

So while it may cause WoW numbers to dip when WoS comes out, if they can keep people who get burnt out on WoW in-house they still get their monthly subscription.

-Dippy

If this means Warcraft 4 is more like the original plans for Warcraft 3 (with large epic worlds and continents getting taken over Risk-style and armies that level up), I'm all fucking over it.

Otherwise, fuck MMOs. WOW is fun, but I'm not ever playing one ever again. WOW is enough.

Indeed. Once I got done with WoW I was pretty much convinced I wont pick up an MMO ever... unless its totally different from the genre as we know it today. WoW supposedly was different from all the rest, and it was... for the first 70 or so hours. Then it becomes the same grindfest as every other game. I dont know how you guys kept it up for so long. PvP is now an even bigger grindfest than the instances.

WoW is a masterpiece of this generation of MMOs, it rises above its peers... but its still in the micro not a very good game. Much work needs to be done. UO had the right idea IMO but it was castrated long ago... if Blizzard does make a new MMO I hope they build it on the UO model rather than the EQ one.

See, that's what happened with me. I played EQ for a year, got tired of it, didn't play anything. Played RO for a year or so in beta, to live, got tired of it, played WoW...

it'll have to be something different, but never 2 MMO's at once.

Yeah um, whatever happened to StarCraft Ghost?

Indefinitely delayed. Otherwise known as cancelled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by napalm

Just because games will become MMO does not mean they will all be RPGs. I fail to see how this isn't good news. You can take anything, say a basketball game, and make it MMO, which could mean something as simple as walking around a city to pick someone to play ball with.

---

Holy shit, napalm finally posted something really logical and nobody seemed to notice it. Yeah, I'm all up for MMO games that are not RPGs. There are some interesting things to be done.

However, it seems like maintaining a large amount of MMO games would become expensive. Lord knows blizzard has a hard enough keeping up all the WoW servers, although they do well and keep updating content. I'm not sure this will last if there are multiple massive online games all at the same time.

Refuted, kind of. - post number 9.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drysc

I believe this was a misquote. We haven't announced any specific development plans beyond the upcoming expansion for World of Warcraft, and we don't have any intentions to focus on only one genre or platform with our future games.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GameGandalf

This blows. I dont do much PC gaming, but 90% is Blizzard and NONE of it is MMOs. Damnit. Just give me Diablo 3 first please. I know, not gonna happen.

---

Just go play Guild Wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleeveboy

I agree. Look what happened when they made Warcraft III, a game that improved on its predecessor in every conceivable way yet was different enough that it left many fans cold. As a result, WC3 sold well yet not as well as expected.

If Blizzard tried to make a Starcraft sequel, I fear the reaction would be the same.

---

They could just make an expansion pack for SC.

It would sell ten billion copies.

StarCraft 1 is perfected. There is nothing left to do to the game.

An expansion pack with more units and shit would destroy the play balance that millions of hours over 9 years has brought forth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy

StarCraft 2 pls.

---

And StarCraft: Ghost magically coming out and actually being good would be nice too. That game looked so cool when it was announced, like, 15 years ago.

I wouldn't be that worried about them having multiple MMOs out at once. Blizzard has pretty much always kept their main focus on just one large title at a time. The Warcraft and Starcraft games never overlapped one another. Its always years between each of their big titles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TaekwondoNJ

Blizzard has pretty much always kept their main focus on just one large title at a time.

---

that is EXACTLY why they shouldn't be doing multiple MMOs. MMOs need constant attention. SOE, once they release the new hot shit they just want to get people off the old. I maintain it is very close to impossible to fully support more than one MMO at the same time.

Anyway, some people from Blizzard went on the forums and refuted this, so we're back to speculating until they announce something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

SOE, once they release the new hot shit they just want to get people off the old.

---

This is definitely true. They had EverQuest then EverQuest 1.5 in Space then EverQuest II. What blew up in their face is that no one who played the first two wanted any part of the third, so now they're stuck supporting three games and not doing a good job with any of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

StarCraft 1 is perfected. There is nothing left to do to the game.

An expansion pack with more units and shit would destroy the play balance that millions of hours over 9 years has brought forth.

---

Finally one who understands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valgar

Finally one who understands.

---

And I dont even like the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

This is definitely true. They had EverQuest then EverQuest 1.5 in Space then EverQuest II. What blew up in their face is that no one who played the first two wanted any part of the third, so now they're stuck supporting three games and not doing a good job with any of them.

---

Sony really fucked it up. I can imagine them sitting around saying, "we'll make EverQuest 2 bigger and better, and make it good for noobs, that way we'll get the EQ audience + new people! $$$". And then they made a game totally different from EQ1, but with the same setting and story, except nobody plays MMOs for settings and stories.

Since the game is so different, they cant import characters, and nobody is going to throw out a character they spent thousands of hours on.

This example has proven to me that Blizzard cannot count on a built-in audience for their wares, all the more reason not to do this. Not to say they cant make another WoW-sized hit but less people will move from WoW than you think.

A MMO-Diablo, that fits into their "short-session" market would be the best idea.

"oh i'm tired of farming in WoW... lemme hop on diablo and clear a dungeon in an hour and a half"

*hour passes by*

"oh, it's time for the Molten Core raid, better hop back on WoW!"

*four hours pass by*

*pays two monthy fees*

There goes what little social lives we've all had in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

And I dont even like the game.



Sony really fucked it up. I can imagine them sitting around saying, "we'll make EverQuest 2 bigger and better, and make it good for noobs, that way we'll get the EQ audience + new people! $$$". And then they made a game totally different from EQ1, but with the same setting and story, except nobody plays MMOs for settings and stories.

Since the game is so different, they cant import characters, and nobody is going to throw out a character they spent thousands of hours on.

This example has proven to me that Blizzard cannot count on a built-in audience for their wares, all the more reason not to do this. Not to say they cant make another WoW-sized hit but less people will move from WoW than you think.

---

Microsoft/Turbine committed the same exact error with Asheron's Call. AC1 was archaic, but it was fun and a group of dedicated players. AC2 was complete crap and all the AC1 players dropped it like a hot potato a few months after release.

So now.....

PC games = huge startup costs + huge upgrade costs + monthly subscription costs + 3000 hours of your time

PC games = lol

I honestly think it is impossible to make a sequal to a MMO and not have it fail. There is too much social interia, and unless you forcibly move people into the new world, they are not moving on their own. Of course, if you forcibly move people into the new game, you will get a lot of people to leave because they will not be happy with some random change (even if the changes are for the better, overall).

....

In an interesting twist, Blizzard has no idea what the hell Vivendi is talking about. From Kotaku (who quotes a forum post from a Blizzard developer on the WoW forums, but doesn't actually cite it. Way to be, toolbag.)

Quote:

---

Nothing in that rumor is true in regards to Blizzard. If I had to guess, there was some confusion between what Vivendi has planned for its game division versus what Blizzard has planned. While Blizzard is owned by Vivendi, their game division operates seperately from Blizzard.

---

So we're just getting shitty Vivendi properties? File under 'no one cares'.

-Dippy

it was cleared up today that isnt true, i would love a starcraft MMo though.... :sonic:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

So now.....

PC games = huge startup costs + huge upgrade costs + monthly subscription costs + 3000 hours of your time

PC games = lol

---

90% of your posts are really, really, really stupid. Please stop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

So now.....

PC games = huge startup costs + huge upgrade costs + monthly subscription costs + 3000 hours of your time

PC games = lol

---

ur dum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

PC games = huge startup costs + huge upgrade costs + monthly subscription costs + 3000 hours of your time

PC games = lol

---

Console games=huger startup costs + horseshit peripheral costs + online subscription costs+ games that cost way more with far less replay value

Cheebs = lol.

Seriously, we don't know how many times we're gonna have to say this shit. I recently figured out that it isn't 1998 anymore, and I hope you do the same soon. My entire rig plus all my games costed less than a 360. My next will be more expensive, but that will be a lot of vanity spending,yet still a fraction of what a console, memory card, 2nd controller, game(s), s-video cables, and online service, not to mention HDTV would cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vasteel

Seriously, we don't know how many times we're gonna have to say this shit. I recently figured out that it isn't 1998 anymore, and I hope you do the same soon. My entire rig plus all my games costed less than a 360. My next will be more expensive, but that will be a lot of vanity spending,yet still a fraction of what a console, memory card, 2nd controller, game(s), s-video cables, and online service, not to mention HDTV would cost.

---

Get the F outta here!! You must have a really shitty rig with NO new games. Im still on dial up, and my "rig" is from 2000, but I had Diablo 2 plus LoD and Warcraft 3 plus Frozen Throne when they came out! Not to mention AoK plus expansion. Yes, I had to upgrade to a VooDoo whatever for $180 in 2002, but it was worth it and I havent had to upgrade since...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vasteel

HDTV

---

You don't need an HDTV for console gaming any more than you need a 30 inch Apple Cinema Display for PC gaming.

Cheebs is right. It sucks to think that all 8 million WOW subscribers had to pay over $9000 in upgrade and monthly fee costs just to play that game.

I just did my yearly $2000 upgrade to stay relevant. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by omfgninjas in iraq

I just did my yearly $2000 upgrade to stay relevant. :(

---

Okay, that covers the video card, but what about everything else? Man, your computer must suck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GameGandalf

Get the F outta here!! You must have a really shitty rig with NO new games. Im still on dial up, and my "rig" is from 2000, but I had Diablo 2 plus LoD and Warcraft 3 plus Frozen Throne when they came out! Not to mention AoK plus expansion. Yes, I had to upgrade to a VooDoo whatever for $180 in 2002, but it was worth it and I havent had to upgrade since...

---

$300 shit disposable computer not intended for gaming, 512 MB, 2.66 Ghz, decent monitor, ass speakers, all that, Free wireless card after rebate, very good inkjet/scanner combo $20 after rebate, free router after rebate, $80 256MB, DX9 Geforce gpu, $10 mouse. Grand total: $510. Well, may be a little more than a non-tard 360, but not much.

Newest games I'm running are Guild Wars, HL2 (admittedly not terribly taxing) and GalCiv2 ( a bit more hardware intensive). The only thing I've really had to adjust settings down unacceptably was Oblivion, and I had some issues with Rome:Total War but I think it was just software in that case.

Okay, so maybe I exagerrated about the cost of the games, and I do admittedly play a lot of older stuff. but I think you get the picture. I'm now looking at buying good speakers or headphones. I'll definitely need to upgrade after this year though, but it isn't like I'll need a new monitor, keyboard, mouse, speakers, etc. And I can use it to do a lot more than just play games on.

It's one thing to compare PC's to consoles in the $100-$200 dollar range, yet quite another once you reach the $300 dollar mark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Okay, that covers the video card, but what about everything else? Man, your computer must suck.

---

I bought a new $5000 computer in January and I have to turn down all the settings in every new game =(

Time to build a new one...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

You don't need an HDTV for console gaming any more than you need a 30 inch Apple Cinema Display for PC gaming.

---

I need an HDTV for console gaming, and I need a 21" Apple Cinema Display for PC gaming. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

I need an HDTV for console gaming, and I need a 21" Apple Cinema Display for PC gaming. :D

---

I concur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

So now.....

PC games = huge startup costs + huge upgrade costs + monthly subscription costs + 3000 hours of your time

PC games = lol

---

I'll break my shit down to the best of my knowledge.

zboz2000 = 400
HDTV = $600
Component/HD Switch = $50 (eBay, got the pelican one that retails for $100)
Component Cables for my PS2 $20ish (zboz2000 has them packed in, and well GCN doesn't need them since the Wii will probably have them)
P.Scan DVD Player/Reciever/Surround Sound $200 (On Sale)
Entertainment Center to hold all this shit $100
Extra Controller for my zboz2000 $50
Plantronics Headset for zboz2000 $30
Total $1350

Case $50
Radeon 9800 Pro (I got this as a gift but I think it was $189)
1gb Ram $100
19" LCD screen $250
SB Card $25
Speakers $30
Logitech Gaming Headset $30
300gb HD $100
120gb HD $70
DVD Burner $70
Windows XP (If I were to have purchased it) $120
Wireless Router $70
MS Wireless KB/Mouse combo $100
ABIT Mobo $89
Pentium 4 3.3ghz $150 (Gift)
Desk $29
Total $1479

My PC thought it was hot shit until Oblivion slapped a dick in its mouth.

Oblivion slapped a dick in everyone's PC.

Truth, that's why I put it on my zboz2000.