Feb 17th 2011 9:08AM I think it's exactly the other way around: if you are going to do it exactly the way WoW does it - then you fail! Why should someone want to play a copy of WoW? I rather go play the original right away instead of just another copycat.
Look at Warhammer, Age of Conan and all the other near 1:1 rip offs. They failed because they tried to hard to be like WoW.
It's the other way around. You have to go your own way, build something different than WoW to be successfull.
Bioware burnt more than 300 mio. Dollars (insane!) so far on their mmo. There is no way they will be able to get that back (or even make any profit) just by presenting yawc (yet another Wow clone).
Feb 5th 2009 6:56PM I'm so glad that I don't even have a mana bar on my main. Decreasing the regeneration will just screw it up even further.
Jan 20th 2009 9:12AM If a president is not capable to do anything useful within 8 years to fix something that has been caused by the previous presidency and leaves a country in the worst state for decades then this president is just crap - oh, wait - this president was crap!
Jan 16th 2009 8:29AM They should probably introduce something similar to the tenacity buff for those extremely imbalanced realms to even it out a little.
I could imagine a buff that increases your hp by 10 % that is applied when more than twice as many players are on the opposite side which stacks for another 10% if the opposite side has 110% more players, another 10% when it is 120%, etc.
It might be necessary to adjust healing and damage as well, otherwise it would just take a little longer to kill the underdog without him having any chance to fight back because a single healer would compensate his hp, no matter how many of those stacks he has.
Jan 14th 2009 5:46PM I still don't understand why ppl play Blood Elves without being forced to. They are so incredibly ugly it's beyond funny.
The female all look like Paris Hilton which alone is reason enough not to play one and the male BE look as if they gave been directly transferred from the gay parade (but only the worst cliche ones).
Nov 19th 2008 7:00PM How many times do we need that topic? Didn't we just have this discussion 2 days ago?
No, it's not too easy. If anything then BC was too hard.
There is no point in creating instances for less than 1% of the people playing while rest doesn't even set a foot into it.
Blizzard is making money with the crowd of 11 mio. people, not with those 150 hardcore gamers.
It was a huge mistake to tune the top instances for the high-end, sponsored top guilds. Seems that they have realized that and focus on casuals now, the people that actually pay the servers, that pay the development.
Why waste hundreds of hours to create an instance for a handful of people if you can create an instance for 99% of the people in the same time.
Who cares about the pro-gamers except the pro-gamers themselves?
Nov 18th 2008 3:27PM The graphical output is rendered on the client, yes - but all the calculations have to be done on the server, 3D calculations!
The server decides:
- wether a bullet hit your char or if it missed
- how much money you have
- if you splash when you jump from the cliff or not
- if you draw aggro from the mob that you just fly by
Those calculations have to be done on the server and they are far more complex than you can imagine.
Nov 18th 2008 3:22PM Apparently you have not the slightest clue about the technical backround of a mmo compared to a web service like Google.
Otherwise you would know that the requirements are not comparable.
Nov 8th 2008 3:24AM I dislike the new behaviour.
You could easily achieve exactly the behaviour that we have now with the old system and a simple macro. But you cannot get back the old system in any way, at least not to my knowledge.
That pretty much sums it up.
Nov 6th 2008 5:10PM The middle column is far to small. It's less than 1/3 of my screen size (before it was around 1/2). That's a lot wasted space without gaining everything (except for huge black bars left and right).
The old design was cleaner and easier. The new one looks better but is impractical.