| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (17)

Posted: Jul 31st 2008 12:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Got this in my email from Gamestop and according to what i've been reading on some forums, it is true: WAR will launch Sept. 18.

Thank you for pre-ordering:

Warhammer Online Collector's Edition

The release date for this product has changed:

New Release Date: September 16, 2008

Please Note: Servers will not go live until 10:00am EST on 9/18/08. See site for additional information and updates.
This date is our best estimate based on the information
available, and the date is subject to change at any time.
In our efforts to keep you informed, we are in constant communication with our vendors, and we are committed to
providing you with the most accurate release dates possible.

Posted: Jul 31st 2008 1:15PM Anatidae said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I wonder when open beta will hit. I signed up for the beta when the form first appeared. Somehow, though, not everyone gets all the associations. Like I get the emails (have since the start) yet my account does not show that association. On the flipside, somehow it knows I was an Ultima Online subscriber ages ago, and that is associated.

Well, my point is, WAR is a game I am looking very much forward to playing. The only other two that really stand out to me would be Jumpgate (if it ends up being fun to dogfight in ships like X-Wing vs Tie-Fighter was) and Champions. Well, Champions could rock the MMO world. City of Heroes is fun, I love a custom hero and if Champions really gives what they say in customization and put in fun places to adventure (I'd settle with even more office/warehouse/cave textures!) I would be totally hooked.
Reply

Posted: Jul 31st 2008 2:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
But WHEN will the missing content make it's appearance?
That's the key question that needs an answer, and it can't be answered right now.
Things are just too often too slow when adding in content that didn't make the cut for release.
I'd love to see someone release an MMO that actually has all the things they say it will have.

Posted: Jul 31st 2008 5:27PM wjowski said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I see EA's banking on the 'Fool And His Money' economic principle. Anyone stupid enough to shell out extra cash for *core* content deserves the piss-poor game they're most likely going to get.

Posted: Jul 31st 2008 5:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What? Did you even read the article?
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 12:11PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Quoting the article
if/when we bring back those classes and these cities (sorry for the if, don't read more into it, just being careful) that players will not have to buy them from us as part of a paid expansion but rather just part of the content updates that we did so well for DAoC."

Quoting the article
will not have to buy them

Quoting the article
not

L2 Read
Reply

Posted: Jul 31st 2008 5:56PM wjowski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I can read just fine. They're mulling over lumping the core content into an expansion and charging extra for it. Oh, and there was more of Mark Jacob's lying about the reasons behind the cutting in the first place, but that's hardly worth noticing nowadays.

Posted: Jul 31st 2008 8:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm not really sure what MJ would have to gain from lying about the reason they chose to cut content - I think the "it wasn't up to snuff, so we decided not to include it" answer seems logical and even admirable to a degree. If, somehow, you have either an inside track here or have perfected the art of remote viewing then I'm sure we'd all love to hear what you know WJ.

Beyond that - all I see is him mirroring what they've been saying ever since shortly after the initial announcement about the cuts. "If these things get done to our level of satisfaction, then we'll give them to you as part of a content update". It gets a little muddied with his personal views on how charging for content isn't morally or ethically wrong - but it's pretty much spelled out in black and white that this is what they have every intention of doing.

Maybe I'm reading a different set of posts than you are...

Posted: Jul 31st 2008 8:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
We're looking at a lot of "new patch but no cities yet" posts methinks. If the two cities in now are as indepth as they say they are, this could be a bit.

More power to them if they make them "free" content patches though. Can't go much wrong with adding additional content, provided that what you've already delivered is good enough to keep people interested until then.

Posted: Jul 31st 2008 10:02PM wjowski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The content cut had nothing, absolutely nothing, to do 'improving' the game and had everything to do with EA enforcing an arbitrary deadline (one that's only going to hurt WAR in long term). Anyone with any familiarity with EA's history can see this. Not to mention this wouldn't be the first time Mythic's lied ("The layoffs weren't responsible for the delay at all!" anyone?)
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 5:07AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, that may well be, I just can't judge it. I feel Mythic downplayed the cuts a tad too much, but then who wouldn't?

EA certainly has the history for something like you suggest, though I feel they have been getting better of late.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 1:21AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Okay, I'm still a little lost.

Are you saying that you think if EA were not involved that Mythic wouldn't have a deadline? That sounds kind of naive honestly. All game developers have deadlines - whether they are set by their money reserves, their investors, or their stockholders they still have deadlines.

All game companies are in business to make money. Some focus less on their product, but they are all in business to make money. In order to do this, you have to make good business decisions.

Would delaying WAR until it's right on top of that 600 pound gorilla in the corner be a good business decision? No.

Would delaying WAR until some point next year in order to wait until that 600 pound gorilla has begun running out of steam be a good idea? No.

So ultimately, in order to do good business, they have to take certain things into consideration. That's one big consideration, and anyone that thinks it doesn't impact WAR's deadline is braindead. This is the market to come out into, and if you have to cut a few things that aren't there yet or risk releasing content that sucks - you cut stuff. As long as everything you have there will actually blow people away those cuts will be fine, and as long as you patch new content back down you keep people happy.

This is good business. It doesn't always synch up with what would happen in the perfect world, but I don't think we need to go boiling things down to quasi-conspiracy theories in order to see the reasons things are happening. As long as the product is good as-is, that content won't be missed (nobody has played in those cities, they were pure concepts from our point of view - few people have played those classes, and they said they weren't finished/fun/good enough).

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 8:23AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The whole thing smacks of time boxing and poor project managment.

30 minutes into Beta was enough for me to question buying this. But then I was a first day WoW player that played 30 minutes and said "crap game" and went back to EQ2.

That being said...right now I love AoC and don't really think I'll drop it for the Hammer.

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:22AM Nadril said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
time boxing and poor project management....

...right now I love AoC.


what?
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 12:16PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah seriously was it just me or wasn't there quite a stink about Age of Conan not having enough servers to cover all the Headstarts they sold? Also I' curious about AoC, in that game are you actually Conan? Because if Not are you like... James Earl Jones?
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 4:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I know AoC is a bit broken but for some reason it is the funnest game I have played in a long time.

You don't play as Conan....just as some tool trying to work his way up the ladder.

I am told the end game stuff is broken and while I was into capping ASAP in EQ2 I am in no hurry here (level 39). To much work in RL right now.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 12:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Okay I have jabbed at naysayers Here's my opinion so you can have a shot at me.

A. They removed 4 classes. I didn't think any of them were that cool ESPECIALLY if the mechanics of them were so lame that mythic didn't want to spend their time making them.

B. They said that they intend to rotate in new cities on the same level as the New Altdorf and Inevitable city FOR FREE. You are not going to have to buy them. this is in THIS article.

C. None of the racial pairings are subjugated to worthlessness due to forts so there are still 3 racial conflicts spanning 4 tiers

D. There's still a lot of game here, they intend to add even more for free later, if they don't, cancel your subscription, but seriously, what they have scheduled for launch looks to be about the greatest thing ever.

E. I'm so tired of WoW another 3 months would crush me.

Rip me a new one

Featured Stories

Make My MMO: October 19 - 25, 2014

Posted on Oct 25th 2014 8:00PM

Perfect Ten: My World of Warcraft launch memories

Posted on Oct 25th 2014 12:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW