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

Reader Comments (20)

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 9:54AM wjowski said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Warcraft and Warhammer's similarities are unsurprising given that Warcraft was originally supposed to be a Warhammer RTS.

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 11:51PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
CoH wasn't the first to have an "achievement" style system - Star Wars Galaxies had badges, too.
I'm not going to claim it was first but it certainly predates CoH. ;)

Good to see a Weblogs Inc person openly admitting the Tome is not a new concept though. When I dared to suggest it was a clone of the LOTRO system I got an email "correcting" me. Better watch out, Kyle. ;)
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 10:16AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
My biggest problem with people comparing WAR to WoW is that it implies WoW was the first MMO ever made. Somehow, WAR is copying WoW by being similar to it. But DAoC came before WoW, so I think it would be much more accurate to say WoW copied from Mythic first. Of course, both copied a lot from EQ as well.

The tone of the article, as well as the tone of the many threads to which it refers, is that WoW appeared fully-formed from nothing, and somehow all other games must be the ones to make the effort to be "different." I would like to see the author make a list of things in WAR that are in WoW, but NOT in DAoC or EQ. It will probably be shorter than the list of things that WAR has been hyping for a year or more, and now appear on the list of features for WoW's next expansion.

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 11:27AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Come now, you can't reasonably believe that comparing WAR to WoW implies that WoW was the first MMO ever made. In fact, the first MMO ever made was Meridian 59.

As for the comparing of EQ, DAoC, WoW and WAR: If you want to talk about copying features, you should look at more MMOs than WAR and WoW, or even those four games. The Tome of Knowledge's achievements were not the first in an MMO. Actually, the first game to do THAT was City of Heroes with badges. Since DAoC was Mythic's first MMO, it was the original title to have both RvR and Keeps/Sieges. Trophies (which you get for completing certain criteria) are a lot like the costume pieces you unlock for getting badges in City of Heroes.

Actually, the only irrefutably innovative idea in WAR is Public Quests. The Tome of Knowledge is more of a culmination of everything other MMOs have been doing over the past five years or so and as cool as it is, it isn't a totally new concept.

But so what? The game is still the better for it, even if it is similar to what other developers have been doing. They all "borrow" ideas from each other anyhow, so where's the harm in calling it out?
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 12:06PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What player1 said...

For a lot of us "older" MMORPG fans, it's hard to accept that for the vast majority of current gamers there simply IS no other game to which they can compare it.

Double that for those of us who've been playing Games Workshop tabletop games for the last 20 years.

The reason the mechanics are similar is that they're ALL based on D&D. When designers are faced with the same problems, the solutions often look the same. The problem: there is no DM! The solution: a class and level based game with pre-defined character progression. They could have gone with a skill-based system, but with a game that really centers around RvR, that would have been almost impossible to balance. SWG couldn't do it, and their GCW was strictly optional.

As to whether its "Tolkein based", I'd point out that the Warhammer IP draws as much from Moorcock, Howard, and Lovecraft as it does from Tolkein. Y'know. Elric of Melnibone? Chaos gods? Where elves are just as corrupt as anybody else, just... better groomed?

I think for most of the people who object to the comparison, it's more about the PERCIEVED lack of perspective of the people MAKING the comparison. I'm not refering specifically to the author here... but in most cases it's kinda like being lectured on Japanese culture by someone who's only seen Hello Kitty anime.

It's the lack of depth that's irritating. ;)


Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 12:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Some comparisons are unavoidable - WoW is the big boy in the market, and it's the only MMO many people have ever touched. It would certainly be better to make more generic comparisons (XP, levels, loot, etc... ) that can be applied to the genre as a whole, or probably to simply leave them be if they are not revolutionary, but people are lazy and don't want to be bothered with researching every MMO that's out there (self included).

I do happen to agree that on the surface there are many comparisons that can be drawn - it's when you get under the hood that many of the contrasts begin to come out, and there are plenty of things to contrast between the two games.

Ultimately, using WoW as the 'standard' that you compare a game to may not be to everyone's liking - but it does get the point across to a larger audience. I think there is a line though between making thoughtful comparisons and basically rehashing the tired old "it's a WoW clone" rhetoric of fanbois everywhere. Some of the author's comments tread that line very closely, though it seems he's more sick of the genre than anything else.

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 12:22PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, one should not forget that Warhammer comes from a pen and paper roleplay system which came out a looooong time ago. I am pretty sure that WAR uses rules from the pen and paper system (as much as they can be adapted for the platform anyway). So did Blizzard steal all the things they have in common with the Warhammer P&P rules from them?
And then there are other P&P roleplay systems that also have levels and skills etc and I am pretty sure that some existed before the P&P Warhammer even (not an expert but I thought that AD&D was first).
So what?
I do not think that it hard to base conclusions about the quality or the entertainment value of a game on how much it "borrowed" from other games or game systems.
It will be much more important whether WAR can make up for WOWs shortcommings (and there are plenty) in those areas that really piss people off every day like bad class balancing, to little variation in the game play( e.g. to much useless and stupid and boring grinding), lack of character customization, as well as outdated graphics and a slackish customer support.
If they manage to overcome all these shortcomings, they can be a perfect Warcraft clone otherwise, they will still be able to print money.
CU
Skipjack

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 12:29PM Softserve said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
WoW definitely is the king of the heap. I think most games are going to wind up getting compared to it, like platformers are. It's just by the time I read about what's in both games many, many times across many sites months ahead of the second game's release, there's definitely fatigue setting in lol.

That's just a personal thing and I know its exacerbated for me by visiting random forums (mmorpg.com things I've read come to mind) and such and seeing similar comments from people who haven't even really looked at other MMORPGs in the first place. It's almost like a fanboy mechanism for those people.

I don't even know if Warhammer will be good and I've been debating canceling my pre-order to begin with... something I did only because they don't charge me until it ships. I also don't have an undying hatred of WoW or feel it's "stopping innovation" or whatever else.

It's just that after reading that sort of argument over several dozen sites months prior to a release of a game I've not even gotten to play yet, it gets tiresome. And even more tiresome considering it happens for every MMORPG's release.

I don't think these arguments imply that WoW was the first MMORPG ever made (as was stated earlier)... but to continue that line of thought:

When someone brings up something new in Warhammer and are told "oh, that's just a culmination of what other MMORPGs did first!", shouldn't that same argument have held true for WoW?

WoW certainly does a lot of things well and certainly, as king of the heap, things should and will be compared to it. At the same time, all of the things that inspired WoW didn't simply disappear when it came around.

I guess no one can expect a writer to talk about every feature from every MMORPG ever when truly, as far as overall public consciousness goes, only one really matters much.

But I suppose that doesn't mean it can't be frustrating for certain groups of people.

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 2:54PM Jouka said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think people, specially dev's, get upset cause its like comparing every book to a Stephin Kings book.

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 3:25PM Valdur said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's always irritating when you see people referring to WoW as if it's the MMO which invented everything.As a veteran player may I ask the author what WoW has invented?nothing ,nada,niet.The whole Warcraft universe is a rip off of GW Warhammer,they also rip off EQ and AC1.Even the upcoming Warlock armor is a rip off of Warhammer Zealot.The only thing they can have credit for is making mmo mainstream.

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 4:58PM Wouldzey said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah borrowing ideas is fine as long as they are developed well and implemented in a fun perhaps even innovative way.

The problem i have is ripping off ideas, especially if those situations where some MMOs add a feature in, talk about it just so they can say "oh we have that too" when another game launches. I happens too much.

Whilst i think if something is done well, people shouldnt be afraid to use it, i really dont like similarities being used as a negative.

I had an issue with a previous massively article, not on the grounds of the subject of comparing WAR and WoW, but just that the similarities drawn between them were used as a negative towards WAR. I dont really think its deserved and i mentioned that.

Similarities are good and innovation can come from bringing lots of previous ideas and features in new ways and i really hope we see more of it. I dont like these rip off features where a developer will just say they need a crafting system so they use the generic template, or a pvp system and just go for the generic template of that. PvP system will be similar, but wheres the innovation in adding new ideas to it or approaching it in new ways.

You dont have to reinvent the wheel to see innovation. You can use the same wheel, add tyres and air to create a better wheel. I hope developers start to realise this and stop putting in clone systems.

Mythic and Cryptic especially are really making grounds with this type of thing. Just because there are similarities to previous games, it shouldnt be seen as a negative. They are building on existing ideas and features, taking them in their own direction and adding new innovations as they go. I hope we see more of it.

Posted: Aug 3rd 2008 9:49PM Ozmodan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You should also remember War is derived from a board game just like Dungeons and Dragons Online was and comes with a long history of lore behind it. You also have Lord of the Rings Online also based on a genre with significant lore.

One thing these three games have in common, they don't own the lore like Blizzard does, they have to provide content that is somewhat control;ed by the owners of the lore.

Basically none of the above developers have the freedom to make changes as they see fit, like Blizzard does. That is a point to consider when making comparisons.

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 6:00PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I didn't mean to say Kyle Horner actually thinks WoW came first, I meant that the way you (and most others) talk about it is as if WoW was the 1st MMO. You don't think it is, but you feel that it is, if you catch the difference. An example from your article:

"I know there are going to be those of you who hate me for saying this, but WAR is not immensely different from WoW."

True enough, but your own preface shows that this will be seen as an attack on WAR. The only way for this to be a valid accusation is if WoW somehow has 'dibs' on making games with the current formula. Why is WAR the copy-cat bad guy, and WoW the innovating good guy?

For the most part, however, I agree with much of your article. My one reservation is that I also tend to agree with Paul Barnett's recent statement about a good game being 80% old material and 20% new stuff. People themselves, not just cheap publishers, want to be comfortable with a game. New things scare and confuse people.

Also, those who try to put too many new things in a game often screw up a lot of stuff that is obvious in hind sight, but not so obvious when you are implementing it for the 1st time. SB fell into this category, and some mythic dev statements would put DAoC RvR into this category. Pre-WoW games screwed up in a lot of ways, leaving the field open for WoW to 'borrow' the good ideas they had come up with and add a little bit of new stuff (mainly polish) to create a massive success. When it comes to innovation, it can be either the situation that the early bird gets the worm, or the 2nd mouse gets the cheese. Too much new stuff that can fail tends to put a game into the 2nd category more than the 1st.

If you are also talking about people who freak out when WoW is used as a point of reference for a new game, I completely agree with you. Usually it's someone that HATES WoW with a passion because it's the worst game they have ever played... and they should know cuz they played that 'crappy' game 40+ hours a week for 4 years ;)

Like it or not, they need to accept that WoW is the lingua franca for MMO comparisons. Even people that haven't played WoW (both of them) know the comparisons with the games that they have played. More importantly, they need to accept that the new game that promises everlasting salvation is going to be more of a variation on a theme than a truly new experience.

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 10:57PM Crode said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report

Listen people get it. Anyone looking at a screenshot of WAR will think of WoW. I dont think the public requires 2 news flash entries and a podcast to let them know.

You people as 'reporters' should be letting people know what is different and let people draw their own conclusion.

I dont remember people comparing Bioshock to Quake (or any other FPS) since they are so similar. You run around and shoot things in 3D. It must be a Quake clone!

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 11:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I remember people comparing Bioshock to System Shock 2. Among other things.
Not to Quake specifically that I can recall, but they certainly did compare Bioshock to other games in a similar style.
Reply

Posted: Aug 5th 2008 11:41PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/6872/warvswow6teik3.jpg
Can you really say that they're similar when WAR updated WOW's graphics and made it more realistic not cartoony
Reply

Posted: Aug 5th 2008 11:44PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/6872/warvswow6teik3.jpg
Can you really say that they are the same Warhammer has a much more realistic graphics rather than the cartoony that WOW has
Reply

Posted: Aug 3rd 2008 1:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Comparing War to WoW IS wrong, because many people who make the comparison say it something along the lines of "war is wow wrapped in a different skin".

Frankly, the way things are implemented makes it very different, and those kind of comments seem specifically designed to discourage people from ever trying war.

And bioshock vs system shock 2... they called the game a "Spiritual successor", and it is, but theres plenty of differences in the actual storyline that people never demeaned it by this comparison.

I do not dislike wow, theres a difference between people saying "similar to wow" and "WoW wrapped up in new lore", which is just insulting. Most comments that say these things never point out whats DIFFERENT, they just make that comment based on the 30 minutes of game time they played and leave it at that... I should mention the graphics also lean more towards lotr than wow.

Posted: Aug 4th 2008 2:03AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Having Mythic be required to run any lore changes through Games Workshop isn't necessarily a bad thing - look at what Blizz has done rewriting their lore so far...

Posted: Aug 5th 2008 6:43AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ah, reminds me of pre-NGE SWG, back when you could *completely* customise your character.

It allowed you to really focus on a particular area but still be pretty good in another. You could even make the typical jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none. And if you ever decided you tired of one branch of skills, you could drop them and start again in an entirely new direction, the equivelant of changing classes in most MMOs or primary/secondary sets in CoX.

I really miss that system.

Featured Stories

Make My MMO: August 24 - August 30, 2014

Posted on Aug 30th 2014 6:00PM

PAX Prime 2014: ArcheAge is a go for launch!

Posted on Aug 30th 2014 5:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW