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

Reader Comments (105)

Posted: Oct 5th 2011 8:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wasn't the whole reason behind NWN not being a full MMO that Turbine owns the rights to "Dungeons and Dragons Online"? I recall quite a bit of legal wrangling a while back due to exactly that.

Did that ever get resolved, or is PWI just planning to go to court?

Posted: Oct 5th 2011 11:48PM Omali said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

The lawsuit was over a couple of things. Remember the roles, Turbine was developer, Atari licensed and acted as publisher.
1.) Turbine alleged that Atari failed to live up to their end of the publishing deal, despite Turbine paying heavily in both royalties and paying them to advertise and publish the game.
2.) Turbine also alleged that Atari was under-representing the game out of a plan to make Turbine look in the wrong, nullify their agreement, take over DDO, and shut it down for their own D&D MMO speculated at the time to be based on Neverwinter and pretty much confirmed that that game was Cryptic's Neverwinter.

The lawsuit was settled and documents sealed, but that's when Cryptic announced Neverwinter, specifically mentioning it wasn't an MMO. All of this is moot, though, because Atari later settled with Hasbro in a separate lawsuit and lost the rights to license D&D games.
Reply

Posted: Oct 6th 2011 7:32PM DancingCow said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

Cryptic made a decision to scale back their plans for NWN from being a proper MMO to an RPG with online elements because of their dismal failure with CO and STO.

The decision was a financial one. They didn't feel they could develop a NWN MMO and turn a profit from it.
Reply

Posted: Oct 5th 2011 9:10PM Faith said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Cryptic should just be renamed to "IP Killers". They already killed Champions, they made damn sure any future interest in a quality Star Trek MMORPG by a competent Dev team was crushed, and now they'll make sure we'll never get that Forgotten Realms MMORPG we've all wanted since UO, never gets made.

Sorry, if you're going to make a D&D game by reskinning a crappy game like Rusty Hearts, you might as well just call it Golden Axe Online.

Posted: Oct 10th 2011 5:07AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Faith The funny thing is that people are buying their games. I hope you aren't one of them....
Reply

Posted: Oct 5th 2011 9:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
After what Cryptic did to Star Trek, God help us. That taste in your mouth, yep .... its your own .... you know what.

Posted: Oct 5th 2011 9:10PM Randomessa said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So......how will this affect the henchmen we were going to get?

The fact that it will be hub-based is neither surprising nor disappointing, since that was pretty much how it was touted in the first place. However, the action slant has me concerned (and how many times will we be repeating the same dungeons over and over to unlock the next one?), and I want my henchmen, darnit!

Posted: Oct 5th 2011 10:17PM Softserve said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I want any MMO to turn out, but honestly? Cryptic has tried a few times now and it's pretty arguable that they've yet to really be successful. I really just can't come up with a reason why I should invest in this title.

Posted: Oct 10th 2011 6:57AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Softserve I don't know what you mean by "really succesful" but they have been succesful enough and selling a lot of games....

The problem for me is not if they are successful or not, the problem is they are making mainstream and childish cookie-cutter MMO's and PWE even more so....
Reply

Posted: Oct 5th 2011 10:20PM Skyydragonn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
well there goes ANOTHER amazing franchise RUINED by Cryptic, and this time they can't even blame Atari.

Yet another beloved franchinse from my adolescence that I will be forced to not enjoy due to crappy developers ruining them.

/furiousface

Posted: Oct 5th 2011 10:25PM augustgrace said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Slightly off topic but I'm wondering about the setting change. Wizard was awfully keen to promote Eberron but now we have a game set in FR along with a book series to back it up; both novels and campaign books. Does this mean that Eberron has fallen out of favor?

I wonder if the Cryptic or PW or whoever, holds the rights to do an online Neverwinter game, or a D&D based game period.

I would prefer they resurrected Greyhawk. Greyhawk is old enough that any game developer would have a pretty open field for making decisions, and the setting hasn't been tainted by the Spellplague nonsense.

Posted: Oct 5th 2011 11:06PM psycros said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What a disaster. An new LAN-style RPG is what many of us have been praying for longer than I care to think about. And now...this. I just got done checking out Forsaken World, and it's just as bad as I expected. Fundamental controls and features are nowhere to found. PW could manage to ruin Pong.

Posted: Oct 6th 2011 12:00AM Ryukan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Why do the D&D based MMO's become hack and slash games when D&D was never about hack and slash.

And this is going to be lobby and session based? Feels as if though it will make Star Trek Online look like an open world game.

Posted: Oct 10th 2011 7:00AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ryukan I wouldn't go as far as to say that D&D never was hack'n slash but at least I think most so called "roleplay" games of today are a LOT more actiony than I am used to from older computer RPG's

Hopefully at some point some developer/producer will realise this and make something more like the good ol' Neverwinter Nights 1....
Reply

Posted: Oct 6th 2011 2:02AM Space Cobra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
1) I do agree about "what is action based stuff doing in D&D?!?!", but I am reminded these are the 4th edition rules so...it's a bit of "of course", but that's not what DnD is about for me, so strike one there. (Still, action could be fun)

2) The way things are framed is concerning, about Vindictus and short-plays. DDO does this and it could work. Something feels "not right", but I have to wait and see.

3) No one has made any mention of previous NWN forays in which players design content and while we've gotten lots of sketchy things that amount to the old Atari/Cryptic alliance moving that stuff to THEIR servers (instead of yours and connected via lobby), no mention of that is here. Sure, I could see Cryptic using their tools to accommodate this, but I am worried about the "shot playthrough" language in this regard; such a system should accommodate BOTH long sessions AND short sessions, especially if you get players involved in making adventures. I am not seeing this with PWI and worried that since things have changed, this aspect will also be discarded.

Posted: Oct 6th 2011 9:13AM Lafajet said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Space Cobra

Just curious, but how do the 4th edition rules make it any more logical for this to be an action oriented game? If anything 4th edition places even more emphasis on character placement and the ranges and effects of special abilities. To me it almost seems like the most logical way to make a 4th edition D&D video game is to make it a turn based tactical game in the vein of Fire Emblem or something. If I misunderstood what you were saying please feel free to correct me though.
Reply

Posted: Oct 6th 2011 2:41PM Space Cobra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Lafajet

Well, I only know a smattering of 4th Edition rules, but I'll say, having grown up with DnD somewhere in my background, I can see that after 1st Edition, there has been a subtle push to make the game more "friendly with computers" or "video game friendly". Early on, the use of stats and random number generators were adapted and put into a few computer games that were not licensed DnD products to begin with, but the folks liked what they saw. A few true licensed DnD products eventually hit the shelves.

Basically, throughout DnD history, there has been this push to make it playable on the computer. 4th Edition, as I understand it, takes certain elements of things like WoW and puts it in a PnP setting, so it's kinda reverse-engineered. It also simplifies things. (Although, the DnD Diablo setting was pretty dull and not so deep from an RP-standpoint. But they got the endless hacking/slashing of monsters right.)

But you are right, placement is the key, but this makes 4th Edition a bit more like "Warhammer lite" (which is an amazing thing for me to say, IMHO, because Warhammer is a pretty simple system already!). Still, even with hex-spacing and flanking, the thing I hear the most about 4th edition is that you can play fast and simple games. I think that is what they are sorta going for: the visceral and fast combat element and maybe just a bit of flanking (but avoiding the hex-square tactical game).

Concentrating on the "action" part of the PnP and putting it in the online game, as it were. (I can't see them going the HeroClix route.) That has always been a complaint (by some players) about DnD, even though some (like me) enjoy the tactics and RPG elements. DnD has always headed subtley toward gaming disks and ultimately online, although I (and others) think it's strength lies in the tactics and even face-to-face elements and the slow, RP times of dealing with an NPC(s) without the need for combat.

But 4th Edition doesn't seem to think that from what I hear from people who have played it. It seems to be a constant battle map, one after the other. So, in that regard, 4th Edition is more heavily combat-promoted.
Reply

Posted: Oct 6th 2011 3:51PM Lafajet said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Space Cobra

Ah, alright, I'm getting where you are coming from. I still maintain that the system itself doesn't lend itself any more to an action based MMO then any other edition of the game, but if we're talking about the game in terms of it's philosophy I guess you have a point. On the other hand, D&D has historically been a roleplaying game that focuses pretty extensively on the dungeon crawling (at least from the official sources, obviously I can't speak for any home mods) so I'd say that the combat/dungeon delving focus has alwas been there. I'm not very happy about though, a more slow and tactical game had been more ecxiting for me personally.
Reply

Posted: Oct 6th 2011 2:30AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Think players got pissed the second they read Neverwinter got changed to action combat....

not a MMO just a Mo, and no one likes just Moe.

Posted: Oct 6th 2011 3:59AM Elikal said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I know neither Vindictus nor Rusty Hearts, but I appreciate the move to make Neverwinter more MMO-ish. I mere co-op game sounded always a bit weird and lame.

Cryptic has been very creative and worked well since it moved to PWI, so one can hope here.

Featured Stories

One Shots: Grim Raider

Posted on Dec 27th 2014 2:00PM

Perfect Ten: New MMOs to watch in 2015

Posted on Dec 27th 2014 12:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW