www.Tobold.com
Tobold@GMail.com
A blog with my thoughts regarding games I am playing and other stuff in life. Please read my Terms of Service
RSS Feed
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Does genre matter?
Today I'm taking you to the hypothetical parallel universe called "what if?". This universe is exactly like ours, only that Blizzard in 2004 didn't release World of Warcraft, but released World of Starcraft (WoS) instead. But having been made by exactly the same people, this hypothetical World of Starcraft plays *exactly* like World of Warcraft in our universe. Instead of mages with firebolts, WoS has a blaster class with laser bolts. Melee classes swing lightsabers instead of metal weapons. WoW's gryphon flight paths in WoS become hovercraft flight paths. And so on. All the differences between WoW and WoS are purely cosmetical, all the numbers behind it are exactly the same. So would this hypothetical World of Starcraft have been as successful as World of Warcraft? Or would the fact that it is SciFi instead of fantasy have mattered? Does genre matter?
Historically SciFi MMOs haven't had as much success as fantasy MMOs. But maybe that was an accident of history. World of Warcraft is simply a better game than Star Wars Galaxies, people don't just play WoW because it has elves and orcs and SWG doesn't. In the series of "Diablo"-like action RPGs, which is somewhat related to MMOs, the last big hit was Titan Quest, and the next big hit will be Hellgate London. Neither of those has elves and orcs: Titan Quest is pseudo-historical, playing in a mythical version of the antique, just like Gods & Heroes will. Hellgate London plays in a post-apocalyptic London underground, in a genre which I'd call SciFi horror. Titan Quest sold quite well, and judging by the hype, so will Hellgate London. So if action RPGs don't need fantasy to succeed, maybe MMORPGs don't need it either.
The opportunity, which at the same time is the challenge, is that certain game features go together better with certain genres. For example melee combat goes well with fantasy and pre-19th century historical, while ranged combat goes well with SciFi and modern historical. Ship-to-ship combat probably wouldn't do much for World of Warcraft, but is essential for Pirates of the Burning Sea, or space SciFi like EVE Online. And as soon as you have ships in a game, you can introduce trading, buying goods cheap at one end of the world, and transporting them to the other end, where they sell for more. The heroes travelling with a group of minions of Gods & Heroes fits well into the mythical antique genre, although it would have been possible in other genres as well. But I couldn't imagine solo combat being a central feature in a World War II genre game.
I would go so far as to say that we *need* MMORPGs of other genres if we want to see major innovation of features. Developers making yet another fantasy MMORPG have a tendancy to stick to what they know that it works, and not dare to move too far away from the established state of the art. Sure, WoW's quest system is great. But did you notice that since then there hasn't been a single major MMORPG developed which didn't have quest givers with floating symbols over their head? Yes, that works, but this isn't the only possible way to tell a story in a MMORPG, and sometimes it appears that developers have just stopped thinking about whether there aren't any better ways. So if one day some game company develops a major SciFi MMORPG, we have a better chance of stories and missions reaching you by the cool holo communication device of your space ship, and not by you having to get quests by flying close to an NPC space ship with a golden exclamation mark floating over it.
Fantasy is the archetypical geek genre. But as MMORPGs move into the mainstream, that should open them up to other genres. I don't know about you, but I played cowboys and indians in the garden as a kid, not elves and orcs. And if we look at other kind of computer games, we see other genres dominating there. There are far more World War II RTS games than fantasy RTS games. And fantasy is barely represented in tactical or first-person shooter games. Rockstar never released Grand Theft Horse Chariot. Fantasy has become rare in point-and-click adventures. There is no reason for fantasy being the only viable choice for MMORPGs. All we need is a couple of really good games of other genres. I just hope we don't need to wait for the real World of Starcraft to get there, because that might still take many years.
- posted by Tobold @ 8:12 AM Permanent Link
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
Why is it that WoW keeps getting the credit for the floating exclamation marks ? I think it first appeared in Guildwars, I'm fairly certain in a beta weekend quite a while before WoW came out the exclamation marks were present then.
# posted by 
: 9/8/07 09:28
: 9/8/07 09:28
I remember playing some RPG on the N64; there were no exclamation marks, but you still had to talk to people to get quests (in fact Ocarina of Time is similar in that respect).
So you ended up talking to every NPC you could see in order to advance your story, and for the most part what they had to say was utter drivel. Once you had completed that particular phase of the story, you went round asking them all again, just in case something had changed. Not good.
I don't know if you can call Red Orchestra a MMORG. It's a more 'realistic' version of Medal of Honor etc, set on the Eastern Front in WW2. You can play either as a German or Russian soldier, and you take part in mass PvP. I have heard it is good fun, but only for people willing to put a lot of effort into it.
There are plenty of people interested in playing games set in WW2(maybe not in Germany, Tobold), but I don't see Red Orchestra appearing in the best selling games charts.
The great thing about fantasy (or SF) games is you can keep introducing more and more races (eg Draenei) and monsters (eg Skettis) without any problem.
A game with a Cowboys and Indians theme for example, very much restricts you to a limited set of scenarios, eg Defend the fort, escort the wagon train, rescue the hostages, rob the bank, round up the cattle.
Remember when WoW came out? It was vastly oversubscribed. Servers were crashing and queues were a big problem.
Were people aware that it was such a great game even before release, were they just RTS fans wanting to follow on the story, or did it just fill an empty slot in the market?
To get such a large number of people joining a new MMORG seems unlikely at the moment, unless it is something really special.
So you ended up talking to every NPC you could see in order to advance your story, and for the most part what they had to say was utter drivel. Once you had completed that particular phase of the story, you went round asking them all again, just in case something had changed. Not good.
I don't know if you can call Red Orchestra a MMORG. It's a more 'realistic' version of Medal of Honor etc, set on the Eastern Front in WW2. You can play either as a German or Russian soldier, and you take part in mass PvP. I have heard it is good fun, but only for people willing to put a lot of effort into it.
There are plenty of people interested in playing games set in WW2(maybe not in Germany, Tobold), but I don't see Red Orchestra appearing in the best selling games charts.
The great thing about fantasy (or SF) games is you can keep introducing more and more races (eg Draenei) and monsters (eg Skettis) without any problem.
A game with a Cowboys and Indians theme for example, very much restricts you to a limited set of scenarios, eg Defend the fort, escort the wagon train, rescue the hostages, rob the bank, round up the cattle.
Remember when WoW came out? It was vastly oversubscribed. Servers were crashing and queues were a big problem.
Were people aware that it was such a great game even before release, were they just RTS fans wanting to follow on the story, or did it just fill an empty slot in the market?
To get such a large number of people joining a new MMORG seems unlikely at the moment, unless it is something really special.
# posted by : 9/8/07 10:27
: 9/8/07 10:27
I would probably not have bought World of Starcraft. I have played WC 1-3 and tested StarCraft (did not appeal to me) and liked the fantasy theme of WOW.
*But* that does not mean I am not interested in a SF MMORPG. As long as the story is compelling and the characters / classes interesting, I will play it. I loved KOTOR, I would have probably played SWG but it did not have the final 'kick' as WOW had (my real entry-MMORPG).
But I know I will play Star Trek Online, as I am an avid ST fan. I did not enjoy Babylon or some other SF series on TV as much as ST but I can imagine that fandom plays a big role. If you like the series, you are more likely to play the game.
By the way, the Single Player Role Playing Game I am looking for most is going to be Mass Effect. I was caught right after I read the first news.
On the other side, as long as the genre is interesting, I might be compelled to try to play it. I also like Pirates themes, so if I could clone myself for more time I would probably be trying to play Pirates of the Burning Sea, the ship fight, duel stuff and trade part sounds really promising. But, alas, my time is restrained. WOW with 3 chars eats a good chunk of my spare time, LOTRO and other single player games (Tomb Raider, Medieval II, Colin McRae Dirt all sitting on my hard drive and collecting dust) the rest. I already took the casual approach with LOTRO, supported by the founders option, I simply cannot spare more time for other MMORPGs.
*But* that does not mean I am not interested in a SF MMORPG. As long as the story is compelling and the characters / classes interesting, I will play it. I loved KOTOR, I would have probably played SWG but it did not have the final 'kick' as WOW had (my real entry-MMORPG).
But I know I will play Star Trek Online, as I am an avid ST fan. I did not enjoy Babylon or some other SF series on TV as much as ST but I can imagine that fandom plays a big role. If you like the series, you are more likely to play the game.
By the way, the Single Player Role Playing Game I am looking for most is going to be Mass Effect. I was caught right after I read the first news.
On the other side, as long as the genre is interesting, I might be compelled to try to play it. I also like Pirates themes, so if I could clone myself for more time I would probably be trying to play Pirates of the Burning Sea, the ship fight, duel stuff and trade part sounds really promising. But, alas, my time is restrained. WOW with 3 chars eats a good chunk of my spare time, LOTRO and other single player games (Tomb Raider, Medieval II, Colin McRae Dirt all sitting on my hard drive and collecting dust) the rest. I already took the casual approach with LOTRO, supported by the founders option, I simply cannot spare more time for other MMORPGs.
Want a good analogy for the quest-npc-exclamation mark? Until Apple released the iPod, all MP3 players had a classic Walkman-like navigation. Big clunky buttons and Windows-like UIs. Since then, everyone is trying to built something scroolwheel-like without getting a lawsuit handed to them. Why is nobody trying to invent something new and unique, or why is nobody going back to clunky old Walkman buttons? Because all those solutions do not improve the user experience.
As for why fantasy and no sci-fi, first and foremost, the setting is secondary. Sci-fi doesn't always instantly mean superior at this point. Just look at Tabula Rasa.
Blizzard did not only choose this fantasy IP, cause it was more alive than SC. Still the main and big argument for fantasy is its demographic advantage. You can catch a bigger female audience with fantasy than with sci-fi. Sci-fi still is a male dominated setting, while fantasy is more balanced. Yes this is an important factor if you schedule your MMO to last for 15 years. EVE is a very good example. From what i read, female percentages there are lower than what EQ1 had. That says something. With females getting more attention from game studios, i guess we will see a lot more fantasy to come.
Though gameplay stays above all settings. So two thumbs up for the golden "!" ;)
As for why fantasy and no sci-fi, first and foremost, the setting is secondary. Sci-fi doesn't always instantly mean superior at this point. Just look at Tabula Rasa.
Blizzard did not only choose this fantasy IP, cause it was more alive than SC. Still the main and big argument for fantasy is its demographic advantage. You can catch a bigger female audience with fantasy than with sci-fi. Sci-fi still is a male dominated setting, while fantasy is more balanced. Yes this is an important factor if you schedule your MMO to last for 15 years. EVE is a very good example. From what i read, female percentages there are lower than what EQ1 had. That says something. With females getting more attention from game studios, i guess we will see a lot more fantasy to come.
Though gameplay stays above all settings. So two thumbs up for the golden "!" ;)
# posted by : 9/8/07 11:40
: 9/8/07 11:40
I already commented on this in the Chore Wars post; it really just comes down to a personal preference when choosing your escapism. If I had to guess at why fantasy themes kick the ass of technology themes, I'd say it's because it presents an impossible world, which may be more engaging to play in. If graphics technology can be seen to enter an uncanny valley visually, it may be that imaginatively we have the same thing for SciFi. That is, a laser weapon seems (potentially) too real for players to really get in to compared to a magic weapon. On the other end of the spectrum is an MMO like I'm developing, Subsume, which is presented as an abstract board game and might require too much imagination to get in to it.
On the topic of features (e.g., melee, vehicles, trade, etc.) that seem to fit best with certain genres, I challenge you to think of those mechanics as abstractly as you're considering genre now. They, too, are just numbers in the computer that have been given a particular form by the game developer. For example, melee and ranged combat can be seen as identical if you are able to view the battle from a large enough scale (a particular interest of mine, since there is a heavy fractal element in my own game). If you look beneath the surface, I think you'll find even more interesting topics on what the underlying mechanics of those features add to (or possibly detract from) the game play.
On the topic of features (e.g., melee, vehicles, trade, etc.) that seem to fit best with certain genres, I challenge you to think of those mechanics as abstractly as you're considering genre now. They, too, are just numbers in the computer that have been given a particular form by the game developer. For example, melee and ranged combat can be seen as identical if you are able to view the battle from a large enough scale (a particular interest of mine, since there is a heavy fractal element in my own game). If you look beneath the surface, I think you'll find even more interesting topics on what the underlying mechanics of those features add to (or possibly detract from) the game play.
# posted by : 9/8/07 12:00
: 9/8/07 12:00
Yes, I think a Starcraft mmo would have been just as successful. As long as the word Blizzard was on the Box; nothing else mattered.
# posted by : 9/8/07 14:07
: 9/8/07 14:07
"and not by you having to get quests by flying close to an NPC space ship with a golden exclamation mark floating over it."
Good one :D
Good one :D
I would not have bought World of Starcraft. I played the three WC games but never even touched Starcraft, it did not appeal to me at all. I tried C&C, Total Annihilation, WH40K, and a few other SciFi-themed RTS games but never got into them the way I did the WC series.
I'm not speaking for the average gamer, but there are avid gamers like me who probably also didn't enjoy SC or even play it, so I don't think WoSC would have been quite as popular. Maybe just a 7,000lb gorilla instead of a 9000lb one ;)
I'm not speaking for the average gamer, but there are avid gamers like me who probably also didn't enjoy SC or even play it, so I don't think WoSC would have been quite as popular. Maybe just a 7,000lb gorilla instead of a 9000lb one ;)
Apologies for the double-post, but I felt it necessary to add this.
I'd seen the WoW Trailers and thought they were pretty cool, but they weren't enough to get me into the game. What finally did the trick was watching a coworker play WoW on her Laptop during lunch. The coworker enjoyed the fantasy aspect of WoW and also played with her husband, an aspiring fantasy author. Her husband may have still bought WoSC (instead of WoW) but I can't say for sure, but I do know his wife would not have. She liked Fantasy, not SciFi.
When I went back home in 2005 I got my brother-in-law hooked on WoW, and he eventually got my sister hooked and they bought a second game & account. Now unlike me, BIL also played SC and he works in the computer industry, so even if I'd never shown him WoSC (because I wouldn't have been playing it), he may still have checked it out and got hooked all on his own, but there's no way my sister would have got into WoSC enough to buy a second game/account.
So of the four people I personally know (five inc. myself) who play WoW, only two of us would have got into WoSC, because the SciFi setting would have put off the rest of us. I'm not saying WoSC wouldn't have been a success, but I don't believe it would have generated the numbers WoW did.
I'd seen the WoW Trailers and thought they were pretty cool, but they weren't enough to get me into the game. What finally did the trick was watching a coworker play WoW on her Laptop during lunch. The coworker enjoyed the fantasy aspect of WoW and also played with her husband, an aspiring fantasy author. Her husband may have still bought WoSC (instead of WoW) but I can't say for sure, but I do know his wife would not have. She liked Fantasy, not SciFi.
When I went back home in 2005 I got my brother-in-law hooked on WoW, and he eventually got my sister hooked and they bought a second game & account. Now unlike me, BIL also played SC and he works in the computer industry, so even if I'd never shown him WoSC (because I wouldn't have been playing it), he may still have checked it out and got hooked all on his own, but there's no way my sister would have got into WoSC enough to buy a second game/account.
So of the four people I personally know (five inc. myself) who play WoW, only two of us would have got into WoSC, because the SciFi setting would have put off the rest of us. I'm not saying WoSC wouldn't have been a success, but I don't believe it would have generated the numbers WoW did.
My first post :) First of all I love your blog Tobold. Stumbled across it looking for WoW articles one day, and now I read it every day.
I think the fantasy genre does have an edge. I don't know why but this seems to be true. My best friend and I had this discussion back when we were playing (and getting bored with) Earth & Beyond. We were trying to figure out what the draw was to fantasy vs. a space based game like E&B. What's the difference between running through a field or flying through an asteroid field? Why did a humanoid avatar with crude weapons seem more appealing then a ship avatar with missles and lasers?
Earth & Beyond was my first MMORPG so I was grasping at straws for those explanations. After E&B we tried EVE. Same thing. We got bored and decided to quit. We both agreed that if WoW yielded the same disappointment, we would concede we are not MMORPG players and abandon the genre.
But WoW did not disappoint. Besides being a well designed game, it wasn't in space. This was far more appealing to us. We discussed fantasy vs. sci-fi even more.
We came up with two basic reasons for why the two of us were happier with fantasy. The first reason was the lore we grew up with from other sources. Fantasy was more prevelent for us while growing up. We both love the LotR trilogy and Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. We both played D & D when we were kids. Sword play from the middle ages also fascinated us. Add all of these up and what you have is a strong draw to a universe that let's us play out these interests as a hero of that universe.
The second reason was how easy it seemed to put ourselves in that role vs. the role of a space explorer. We all played with swords growing up. Pirates, knights of the round table etc. How many of you chased your school yard friend around in your space ship shooting lasers?
For us, this made it easier to jump into the roll of a sword wielding dwarf or magic wielding gnome. EVE and E&B were fun, but I'll take a sword over a pulse cannon anyday.
I think the fantasy genre does have an edge. I don't know why but this seems to be true. My best friend and I had this discussion back when we were playing (and getting bored with) Earth & Beyond. We were trying to figure out what the draw was to fantasy vs. a space based game like E&B. What's the difference between running through a field or flying through an asteroid field? Why did a humanoid avatar with crude weapons seem more appealing then a ship avatar with missles and lasers?
Earth & Beyond was my first MMORPG so I was grasping at straws for those explanations. After E&B we tried EVE. Same thing. We got bored and decided to quit. We both agreed that if WoW yielded the same disappointment, we would concede we are not MMORPG players and abandon the genre.
But WoW did not disappoint. Besides being a well designed game, it wasn't in space. This was far more appealing to us. We discussed fantasy vs. sci-fi even more.
We came up with two basic reasons for why the two of us were happier with fantasy. The first reason was the lore we grew up with from other sources. Fantasy was more prevelent for us while growing up. We both love the LotR trilogy and Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. We both played D & D when we were kids. Sword play from the middle ages also fascinated us. Add all of these up and what you have is a strong draw to a universe that let's us play out these interests as a hero of that universe.
The second reason was how easy it seemed to put ourselves in that role vs. the role of a space explorer. We all played with swords growing up. Pirates, knights of the round table etc. How many of you chased your school yard friend around in your space ship shooting lasers?
For us, this made it easier to jump into the roll of a sword wielding dwarf or magic wielding gnome. EVE and E&B were fun, but I'll take a sword over a pulse cannon anyday.
# posted by : 9/8/07 17:52
: 9/8/07 17:52
IMO I feel that fantasy games are rooted in history, regardless of how abstract they may be from reality. This is a large draw for many people who see very familiar themes (war, combat, "barbaric existence", that they can easily relate to.
Sci-fi, on the other hand, is very abstract (in the main). It's about looking forward, which is difficult for many people, rather than looking back (i.e., historical fiction & fantasy). Concepts about science and machinery are hard to grasp where as swords and magic are easier. Perhaps if people were more capable of understanding the concepts of a SciFi world they would flock to WoSC just as they have WoW.
Sci-fi, on the other hand, is very abstract (in the main). It's about looking forward, which is difficult for many people, rather than looking back (i.e., historical fiction & fantasy). Concepts about science and machinery are hard to grasp where as swords and magic are easier. Perhaps if people were more capable of understanding the concepts of a SciFi world they would flock to WoSC just as they have WoW.
# posted by : 9/8/07 22:06
: 9/8/07 22:06
I do think there may be some differences between fans of sci-fi games and fans of fantasy games (although to the outside world we're all just dorks =). I don't think a World of Starcraft game would have done anywhere near as well as WoW. The reason, I think, is that WoW taps into a long heritage of fantasy RPGs, starting from pen and paper D&D up through all the single player RPGs like HOMM, then into EverQuest, etc. Sci-fi RPGs are few and far between - BioShock and FFVII are the only ones that come to mind.
This part is totally my own opinion , but when I think of fantasy games they usually are more romantic - good guys vs bad guys, heroes rescuing maidens, that kind of stuff. On the other hand, I find sci-fi to generally be a little darker - there are no good guys, the future is a dystopia, life sucks and then you die. I think the darker themes appeal to a different group of people.. if I had to make broad generalizations, I would guess that Starcraft players tend to be more like Quake players than WoW players. If you ever go to one of the big Starcraft communities like TeamLiquid, you can detect an undercurrent of disdain for WoW - the game is too easy, too shallow, and not competitive enough (which are all true, compared to Starcraft).
Personally, as someone who played Starcraft something like 20+ hours a week back in its prime, when WoW first came out, I thought it didn't look fun at all. I resisted it until 5 months ago, when my girlfriend decided she wanted to play. Since then I've come to appreciate WoW's features, but it's still nothing like Starcraft. If it hadn't been for my gf, I most likely would have skipped straight from War3 to SC2.
Also, as a SC player, the fanboy in me winces a little bit at Tobold's first paragraph - it makes it sound like you've never actually played Starcraft (which may be true, I dunno). Part of the reason I like WoW is that it's true to the Warcraft lore, which is pretty engaging. It's also cool having used the Blizzard spell in the RTS, and then seeing mages using Blizzard in WoW. So please forgive me as I geek out: THERE ARE NO LIGHTSABERS IN STARCRAFT!!! I'll even rewrite the sentences for you:
"Instead of mages with firebolts, WoS has a Marine class with Gauss Rifles. Melee classes use futuristic weapons. WoW's gryphon flight paths in WoS become shuttle flight paths." There, was that so hard? =P
This part is totally my own opinion , but when I think of fantasy games they usually are more romantic - good guys vs bad guys, heroes rescuing maidens, that kind of stuff. On the other hand, I find sci-fi to generally be a little darker - there are no good guys, the future is a dystopia, life sucks and then you die. I think the darker themes appeal to a different group of people.. if I had to make broad generalizations, I would guess that Starcraft players tend to be more like Quake players than WoW players. If you ever go to one of the big Starcraft communities like TeamLiquid, you can detect an undercurrent of disdain for WoW - the game is too easy, too shallow, and not competitive enough (which are all true, compared to Starcraft).
Personally, as someone who played Starcraft something like 20+ hours a week back in its prime, when WoW first came out, I thought it didn't look fun at all. I resisted it until 5 months ago, when my girlfriend decided she wanted to play. Since then I've come to appreciate WoW's features, but it's still nothing like Starcraft. If it hadn't been for my gf, I most likely would have skipped straight from War3 to SC2.
Also, as a SC player, the fanboy in me winces a little bit at Tobold's first paragraph - it makes it sound like you've never actually played Starcraft (which may be true, I dunno). Part of the reason I like WoW is that it's true to the Warcraft lore, which is pretty engaging. It's also cool having used the Blizzard spell in the RTS, and then seeing mages using Blizzard in WoW. So please forgive me as I geek out: THERE ARE NO LIGHTSABERS IN STARCRAFT!!! I'll even rewrite the sentences for you:
"Instead of mages with firebolts, WoS has a Marine class with Gauss Rifles. Melee classes use futuristic weapons. WoW's gryphon flight paths in WoS become shuttle flight paths." There, was that so hard? =P
# posted by : 9/8/07 22:54
: 9/8/07 22:54
I think =##= is about right. With Blizzard on the box, WoSC would have sold huge quantities - maybe not as much as WoW, but it would have attracted huge customer markets. People forget SC is still being played today and not just in Korea.
I *do* think that there does need to be some kind of upheaval in the fantasy-saturated MMO market. Saying that it's hard to introduce new elements to a Cowboys & Indians MMO beyond cowboys or indians is just silly - there are plenty of ideas sitting there waiting to be picked up.
The big problem though is customer attraction - would there be enough of a market to play such a game?
Probably not...
I *do* think that there does need to be some kind of upheaval in the fantasy-saturated MMO market. Saying that it's hard to introduce new elements to a Cowboys & Indians MMO beyond cowboys or indians is just silly - there are plenty of ideas sitting there waiting to be picked up.
The big problem though is customer attraction - would there be enough of a market to play such a game?
Probably not...
(Quote Tobold)
"Fantasy is the archetypical geek genre. But as MMORPGs move into the mainstream, that should open them up to other genres. I don't know about you, but I played cowboys and indians in the garden as a kid, not elves and orcs"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bang%21_Howdy
http://www.banghowdy.com/
While I probably wouldn't call the game a typical MMO I think its something you should have a look at, simply from a design perspective... It has micro-payments, Turn-based strategy combat!, and its "Cowboys!"
Before WoW I used to play Puzzle Pirates and got to play Bang Howdy! in Beta and have to say it was very enjoyable...
"Fantasy is the archetypical geek genre. But as MMORPGs move into the mainstream, that should open them up to other genres. I don't know about you, but I played cowboys and indians in the garden as a kid, not elves and orcs"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bang%21_Howdy
http://www.banghowdy.com/
While I probably wouldn't call the game a typical MMO I think its something you should have a look at, simply from a design perspective... It has micro-payments, Turn-based strategy combat!, and its "Cowboys!"
Before WoW I used to play Puzzle Pirates and got to play Bang Howdy! in Beta and have to say it was very enjoyable...
# posted by : 10/8/07 03:41
: 10/8/07 03:41
Genre absolutely matters. Myself, my girlfriend and most of my friends would not have bothered playing "World of Starcraft", although some other folks in our guild salivate over the idea.
Or maybe... maybe it's just the particular universe overall, because I find Starcraft's universe rather forced, but I'm strongly interested in where Bioware is going with Mass Effect.
Fantasy can get away with being generic, oddly. I dunno, vaguely mythical material has so much deep history to work with. Sci-fi on the other hand has less of a pool to work with, so it takes a greater effort to create a rich complete world.
Post a Comment
Or maybe... maybe it's just the particular universe overall, because I find Starcraft's universe rather forced, but I'm strongly interested in where Bioware is going with Mass Effect.
Fantasy can get away with being generic, oddly. I dunno, vaguely mythical material has so much deep history to work with. Sci-fi on the other hand has less of a pool to work with, so it takes a greater effort to create a rich complete world.
<< Home
