Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
From an alpha tester
Published on March 19, 2004 By Draginol In PC Gaming

After my dismal experience with Ultima On-line years ago, I never thought I would ever play another MMRPG, let alone get addicted to one. Especially one in alpha.

But that's exactly what has happened since I got involved with World of Warcraft. It's very addictive. But at the same time, the game does make the parody of MMRPG's, known as Progress Quest all that much truer.

So what makes it so fun and addictive for me? The environment, the monsters, the graphics, and yes, the progress quest aspects of it of building your character up so that you can get to that next level to get that new spell or weapon or whatever.

The graphics are fantastic. And it runs surprisingly well. I ran the alpha on my laptop which ran the game off a USB drive that I could, if I had to, put onto any other computer in the house to play on. That was a nice touch I thought.

When I played on the Horde side, I played as a wizard. The wizard was not very good during the alpha push I played one and I don't like playing orcs or trolls or whatever.  But on the Alliance side, I played as a Paladin and that was when I really got addicted.

The world itself is just breathtaking with the latest graphics, sound, and immersion techniques built in. It also helps that the latest advances in MMRPG are in there to make it relatively easy to trade items, have guilds, have party chats, manage quests, etc.

Now, let me take my fan boy hat off and talk about the things I haven't liked so far in the ALPHA:

1) The quests. There's really only three quests in the game. a) Deliver something. Execute X number of things/bring X number of body parts back c) Escort someone.

It's very cut and dry and it does get pretty old when you realize that you're on the same quest over and over again. Sure, the creatures change but the Diablo as a 3D engine does get a bit old after awhile. This is something, I suspect, they will enhance because I did play a few quests that seemed to be more complex and compelling.

2) The character building. The characters are fairly simplistic. Don't expect Baldur's Gate style sophistication. Which I found very surprising. Sure, they want this for mainstream gamers, but you would think that after you reached, say level 12, that they'd start to let you really focus on the nitty gritty of your character.

3) The armor/weapon system in the game is very simplistic and yet overly complicated (presently in the beta that is).  Plate mail reduces damage. But only as a percent. Which is a bit odd. But it doesn't affect your agility. That is, your odds of being hit wearing full plate mail are the same as if you were wearing leather. That doesn't make sense. It shoudl work that plate mail makes you easier to hit but you take less damage.

I posted during the alpha a suggestion that every 10 points of armor simply remove 1 point of damage. Therefore, later on, low level creatures simply woudln't be able to hit through your armor.  If I'm a walking tank, how exactly is a rat going to bite through it? The plate mail armor shouldn't just remove 50% of the rat's attack, it should prevent any damage at all.  Instead, the alpha's system actually looks at what level you are as if this is relevant. Why would 400 armor protect you more at level 12 than at level 30? That's not intuitive. Why would 400 armor in cloth be different than 400 armor in plate? Why not simply have cloth be a lower number?

Keep in mind, this is all alpha/beta stuff that may be totally changed by release or in some subsequent update.

4) Camping of creatures. This is common in other games I'm told but it's maddening to literally wait in line with other parties to kill some quest named boss. I.e. 2 parties in front of us killed Tharax, they leave, party in front of us moves up to the spawn point and waits and so on. That kind of kills the whole RPG thing and makes me painfully aware that I should be doing other things.

But don't let these things make it sound like the game isn't great. It's incredibly addictive. I think Everquest is doomed to be perfectly honest. I know everyone who played Star Wars Galaxy that I knew who was in the alpha said this blew it away. Which is susprising since my friends in SWG who switched to WoW were totally into SWG with control of huge chunks of worlds and millions of credits and such in teh bank and now they're not going back to SWG.

 As for me...

During the alpha/beta I'm in the Guild Digital Marines. But most of the Digital Marines will be going on to be on the Horde's side when the beta is over while I will continue to play on the Alliance side and create a new guild with friends I meet on the Alliance side.


Comments
on Mar 19, 2004
If I had any real life to spare, I would probably try it. Between JU and Everquest I am running on empty, lol.
on Mar 19, 2004
Sadly I didn't make the first cut for public beta, just gotta hope my name gets pulled in later phases (though, with 400,000 other applicants, that's going to be tough). From your preview, it sounds like WoW is more in it's formative stages than we were led to believe at this point. Looks like Blizzard worked on making a stable client and engine and is now filling with content and characters. I've seen nothing but positive reviews thus far, but everyone seems to agree that it's way too early to tell (sorta like the early tests for SWG... we had sand... one outfit, and we all stood around emoting at each other)

Hope I get an email for the next phase, I'm a beta test junkie

-Z
on Mar 19, 2004
You must have played UO in the EARLY days, it eventually got much better,....but is now down the tubes and geared towards young teens.   Beware though...most of these new games suffer from the same problems.  They're really addictive but they are based on content.   They become repetitive and selfish.  What happens is that the hard core players do most of what there is to do while most people still havent bought the game in the store.  Then the game company rushe out more content to keep them entertained.   A single player can rush through any new content in less time than it takes to develop that content (the developers have to plan for all possibilities, the player only worries about ONE possibility).  Rinse, repeat.    Usually after the first 6-12 months, the game becomes what can only be described as:   50,000 single-player games happening in the same place.     A GOOD online RPG is one that gives tools for players to form their own communities and in some way create their own content.
on Mar 20, 2004
I have to agree about the armor things, I wish more games would do the heavy armor lets you get hit more often but take less damage, whereas no armor gives you the best chance to avoid being hit, but if you do get hit, it will do serious damage.

One thing I would do different to you however is to make it both percentage based and damage reducing. So for example you take the square root of the armor rating and thats the damage reduction %. You then take the armor rating divide it by 10 and subtract that number from the damage after its been reduced by the percentage. If its less than zero make it zero. This way once you have a bit of decent armor that rat should be no threat, but it gets harder and harder to completely block damage from creatures.

If you want you may make it so things like a crossbow bolt divide your armor rating by 10 first since they are designed to pierce armor. The best games for the armor modelling that I can remember are dragon wars and darklands. In dragon wars you had the chance to be hit value, which was penalised by most armor, and the armor rating which reduced damage.

Darklands went into much further detail having different weapons having different effects on the armor, and also even if you didnt damage the person if you used something like a warhammer you did concussive damage and damaged the armor so it was less effective after each attack. In fact if you knew your enemy was well armored (such as a lord in full plate) then the best tactic was to throw one of the acid potions an alchemist could make, to seriously damage the armor first. However given they are going after the mainstream something like the darklands model would be too detailed and complex I suspect.

I have to agree with the level thing, that always annoyed me in diablo that your level was so important, if you want level to be important why not give stat boosts on level up then the bonus can come from the stats.

Having played a few MMORPG I can see they have the usual quests, which some people wont like. What I would like to know is what sort of quest do you want? At the basic level mosts quests can be broken down to the deliver x, kill y, or guard z type quests. Although I remember when I was playing Everquest one of its nicknames was Ever quest? due to the fact early on very few quests were worth doing.

If I am true to form I will get the game and play it intensely for about a month then begin to get bored of it and cancel my subscription, but hey long as for that month I'm really enjoying the game, then its well worth the money. As for Everquest being doomed, I really doubt it everyone keeps saying the next big game will kill it, but it keeps on going. At the end of the day Everquest has a huge playerbase which has invested huge amounts of time into the game and so long as SOE keeps adding bits to it I think a substantial number will keep playing. At worst It will lose its top spot although I suspect it will lose that to Final Fantasy XI first as they already have a large number of users and are about to release the PS2 version in the USA. Its a nice game although I wish they had given the PC version a PC interface rather than porting the PS2 interface to it.
on Mar 20, 2004
Well if anyone is going to dethrone EQ, it's WoW. Blizzard is the juggernaut of the PC gaming industry and EQ is running in place rather than taking steps to improve their core game. I suspect they are trying to ramp up EQ2 development...but if they allow this transitional period to occur while WoW releases, the chances of them getting smashed get that much higher.
on Mar 23, 2004

Wont happen, all these news games that are coming out are "more of the same", just with more choice, and prettier pictures.   THey need to evolve the concept.....


 


http://literaryhigh.joeuser.com/index.asp?AID=10391


 

on Mar 23, 2004

JeremyG, I wasn't aware you were playing WoW. 

Most things are evolutionary. It's when you take a step back for a few years you see how revoluationary they are. I played Ultima Online when it first came out and the difference between that and WoW is massive. I'm not talking in terms of "pretty graphics" or "more choice". The feature set and concepts have dramatically changed for the better.

on Aug 11, 2006
can you tell me some good nicknames
please????please
on Oct 31, 2008

muthu12
(invisible spam)

Thread necro.. If you want pictures follow these simple steps:

1. Go to google

a. Go to google images

2. Type "World of Warcraft" without quotion marks

3. Press Enter

4. Look at the images.

 

By the way I am not responsible for whatever content comes up.

Or you can watch this vid on youtube:

on Oct 31, 2008

Honestly, my first two characters leveled wicked slow (a trial character and my Dranei thing). My second character I used a whole time card on and got to level 26. Finally my third character: I bought a time card and made an Ork named Waaaghaghnon (awesomest name for an Ork, might of been two AAs in Waaagh, I forget what the max characters for a name was). I got to level 42 on that time card. Then I realized, its the same thing over and over and over again and really isn't worth my money. I was even in a big guild of cool people that were really nice and mixed up PvPing and questing/ group questing, and I found it was the still the same thing over and over again.

 

My last hopes for MMORPGs are the 40k one (I think its a RPG. Its atleast a MMO) and The Old Republic.