# WoW--What's all the hype about?



## Felon (Nov 23, 2004)

I'm hearing everyone and his brother whipping themselves into a frenzy  about WoW like it's the next evolution of the MMORPG. And not a lick of explanation for it. I've gone to the website, read the FAQ, read about the classes, looked at the screenshots, downloaded the vids...and I still have yet to find one revolutionary concept, or even a real step forward.

I gave some friends who were on the beta for a couple of weeks and loving every second of it a little questionaire in order to get some specifics about what all the hubbub is about. They answered frankly enough, and the answers really didn't sell the game that well. I'm going to post the questions below in the hopes that some of you beta folks are interested in answering. I'll share my friends' answers too if anyone's interested. 

1. Is the grind starting to set in? Does the gameplay seem at all repetitive yet?

2. How much content is geared towards solo players? How necessary is it to group up?

3. How much is there to do outside of running around in the wilderness ganking random spawns that are just standing around minding their own business? Supposedly, WoW is very quest-driven, so do you have to hunt at all?

4. Is there a lot of instanced content ("instanced" meaning that dungeons and such are only accessable by yourself and your allies)? 

5. Does WoW force players to go on "hell runs" out into the middle of nowhere? You know what I mean: you get a mission appropriate for your level, but the locale you're sent to in order to complete it is some remote spot. It takes you 45 minutes to run to but it only takes 8 minutes to complete the task, and the spawns that you have to avoid on the way make anything you encounter at the actual mission look like a cakewalk by comparison.

6. Do the classes each do interesting and unique stuff? Does every class have a distinct role? Is every shaman or warrior the same as every other shaman or warrior in terms of abilities? What do characters strive to gain as they advance? There are no advanced classes IIRC, so what's left? Phat l3wt?

7. How interesting is combat? Do you have to change tactics, or does a class use the same chain of attacks in every fight like DAoC? Is it like CoH where [one of my friends] set up a macro where he'd just sit at his station mashing one key repeatedly for hours at a stretch?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Nov 23, 2004)

I'll answer your stuff point by point, but first, I'm going to be lazy, lazy, lazy and link to two very long write-ups I've already done on this. (Note that they're for MMORPG vets, so excuse a bit of jargon in the first one.)

http://www.graffe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15526
http://wow.crgaming.com/editorials/vieweditorial.asp?Id=143


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Nov 23, 2004)

Felon said:
			
		

> 1. Is the grind starting to set in? Does the gameplay seem at all repetitive yet?



No. I played the game a full year (from human push in alpha through the last day of closed beta), and due to races being locked in alpha and new ones being introduced for testing, probably have done the first thirty levels of the game nine or ten times. It still isn't boring.



> 2. How much content is geared towards solo players? How necessary is it to group up?



You can solo from 1-60 without any problem. Now, having said that, the game is totally geared around quests. You will NOT be able to do every quest in the game solo, and certainly not the elite quests at a level where they still give you experience -- those are intended for groups. Having said that, if you have no interest in groups, you can still have a lot of fun and experience the vast majority of the content slower. The groupers will do it a few levels before you, and might have better overall gear, but you won't be having any less fun.



> 3. How much is there to do outside of running around in the wilderness ganking random spawns that are just standing around minding their own business? Supposedly, WoW is very quest-driven, so do you have to hunt at all?



WoW is nearly 100 percent quest-driven, and the quests give enormous experience point rewards. Having said that, it's still the World of WARcraft, so very few of these quests involve quilting bees. A fair number of them, especially at the lowest levels, involve "go kill me X number of whoozles" or "bring me Y number of whatsit body parts." But you absolutely NEVER have to sit on your tuchus and kill 10,000 rats just to get to the next level. If you find yourself doing that, you're missing out on some quests to do. (Quest givers have big yellow exclamation points over their heads, Warcraft III style, so they're hard to miss.)



> 4. Is there a lot of instanced content ("instanced" meaning that dungeons and such are only accessable by yourself and your allies)?



There are roughly a dozen dungeons in the game like this now (more, probably) and more are on the way, as well as special PVP and raid instances.



> 5. Does WoW force players to go on "hell runs" out into the middle of nowhere? You know what I mean: you get a mission appropriate for your level, but the locale you're sent to in order to complete it is some remote spot. It takes you 45 minutes to run to but it only takes 8 minutes to complete the task, and the spawns that you have to avoid on the way make anything you encounter at the actual mission look like a cakewalk by comparison.



There are maybe a handful of such runs, at best. And WoW has a much more user-friendly travel system. Once an hour, every player can teleport back to the inn they're bound to. And they can also pay an NPC to catch a ride on a griffon, hippogryph, giant bat or wyvern. Flight routes connect nearly every town and capital city. So if there is a long "hell run," it's a quick hop back. (Honestly, all I can think of are a few Horde quests to the Hinterlands. This really hasn't been an issue in WoW. You could, in theory, choose not to do any of the quests at the destination you run to, but the point of those quests are pretty much to lead you to more quests -- they're called "breadcrumbs" in-house.)



> 6. Do the classes each do interesting and unique stuff? Does every class have a distinct role? Is every shaman or warrior the same as every other shaman or warrior in terms of abilities? What do characters strive to gain as they advance? There are no advanced classes IIRC, so what's left? Phat l3wt?



First, there are relatively few classes (for an MMORPG), only nine. This means that, say, mages aren't just damage, they also do crowd control, can summon, can teleport, etc. Every class has a variety of things they can do.

Atop that, starting at level 10, they can pick up talents. These aren't as impressive as D&D feats -- they're closer to Alternate Advancement abilities in EQ. They let you specialize in something your class already can do (there are three talent trees per class). They won't make your priest into a whole new class, but a priest with maxed-out shadow magic talent tree looks and plays fairly differently than one who maxed-ou the discipline tree.

And advanced classes are coming: At level 60, characters can begin work on their "hero classes," which turn them into Warcraft III heroes through the mechanism of an race/class-specific talent tree.



> 7. How interesting is combat? Do you have to change tactics, or does a class use the same chain of attacks in every fight like DAoC? Is it like CoH where [one of my friends] set up a macro where he'd just sit at his station mashing one key repeatedly for hours at a stretch?



It's similiar to CoH in that abilities have a cooldown timer (or, rather, CoH is similar to the Warcraft series in that regard), but mashing the same abilities over and over would be counterproductive at best. Each class works slightly differently, but let's say you're a rogue.

Rogues develop "combo points" based on successful opening attacks, and can gain up to five of them. At any time, they can use a "finishing move" to cash in all their combo points. The more they've got, the more powerful the attack. But all of this also requires energy, which decreases with each attack. And, of course, there's the issue of what sort of weapon you're using for what attack, where you are relative to your foe, etc.

While the rogue is unique in how it's set up, this sort of combat management is an issue for most classes, one way or another.


----------



## Thanee (Nov 23, 2004)

Having played in the Open Beta, I like it very much. 

 I don't think WoW is _the_ ultimate revolution in MMORPG and certainly the hype about it is a bit much (hey, it's Blizzard, what do you expect, all their games are hyped to no end and pretty much all of them are great games with a huge long-time motivation), but it is one very well rounded game and promises a lot of fun and diversity, especially if you like the Warcraft world (if not, I can see that being a huge hindrance there, then maybe EQ2 might be a better buy). I _do_ think, that WoW is one of the best MMORPGs out there so far, with EQ2 probably sharing that position. Both have been developed to specifically address many issues with MMORPGs in the past, and it looks like they both succeeded on that behalf.

 As for your specific concerns:

 About 1.) Well, havn't played that long, so no, quite the opposite. Can't really say about the future, but so far it looks like there is so much left to do and to explore (the world is huge), that it will be a while before that happens (it will set in eventually, of course, as with every game, unless new content is added, which - considering the great success the game is already before it even really started - is quite certain to be done).

 About 2.) While the game is obviously meant to be played in groups, there is no lack of solo content, as you can do pretty much everything (except for very few group specific things, which simply make no sense for solo players, like large raids and battles) alone.

 About 3.) Of course random monsters are standing (or walking, patrolling) around in the wilderness, but in general they are nicely integrated into the world (some even attack other NPC) creatures, like wolves attacking sheep, if they find any. It doesn't really seem that random, often they are spread around some kind of base, a camp or an occupied mine, etc. And there is no need to kill a single random monster, I think, at least as far as I have played, you can just do one quest after the other and will always have more to do. In some cases, you can even do multiple quests at the same time, if for example you need to kill certain baddies and collect something they have. Also with NPCs running around everywhere, the world seems very alife. In the cities there are a lot of NPCs which have no direct purpose (as in giving quests, selling equipment and so on), other than making the world feel more complete.

 About 4.) I guess there will be enough, but in the beginning I found it unnecessary as most often there were plenty of monsters around, even in areas, where characters were stepping on each others toes all the time. Respawn times are short, so there isn't really a huge "camping / killstealing" problem (which is, what instances are meant to fight), at least from my experience so far. Also, if you start attacking a monster and do not stop for too long, it locks on you and you will get the kill regardless of who helps you defeat it.

 About 5.) The first few dozen quests (don't know beyond that) are structured in a way, that they work well along a reasonable travel route (read: short travel time) and they lead you through the area step-by-step. Some send you into a new (neighboring) territory and very few send you to remote places, but they are even worded in a way, that "if you happen to come along that place, please check with ... and tell him ..." or something like that. There is no need to fulfill them immediately. And yeah, there are travel "shortcuts", but they are integrated into the world in a very cool way and also there are quests to lead you to them and let you learn how to utilize them. Basically the quests have a tutorial like character without being a tutorial themselves, just when there is something new to discover, you will most certainly stumble upon a quest to make you use or discover that something. And meanwhile, the story unfolds...

 About 6.) I think there are advanced classes, hero classes or something. And each class has a huge number of abilities (in the hundreds, where some are just higher ranks of previous abilities, however), and then you also gain talents, which improve your abilities in some ways, and which you cannot learn all, because of the limited amount of talent points, so you have to pick some to specialize in, which will lead to more diversity. In the beginning all the members of on class are very similar, but later on, these differences will be showing.

 About 7.) Just clicking on the enemy and waiting for your hero to finish is the best way to get you killed in combat, I suppose, unless you fight sub par enemies. Also the monsters are different and thus different techniques are needed against many of them. Different protections, different combinations of attacks. There surely are some very powerful combinations, which you will find yourself using a lot, but I'm pretty certain, that you can't just use them all the time, especially since you learn new abilities all the time to expand your repertoire. And of course, there are also mixed groups of monsters...

 Bye
 Thanee


----------



## Pielorinho (Nov 23, 2004)

*Felon*, for me it's hard to say why the game is so much fun.  I very rarely felt like I was grinding; there wsa always stuff to do.  Abilities come often enough, and quests are easy enough to complete, that I had real trouble stopping playing the game:  always within 10 minutes it felt like I could reach another milestone, whether it was finishing a quest or increasing my alchemy enough that I could learn a new recipe or discovering a new waypoint or leveling up or whatever.

Blizzard doesn't make revolutionary games.  They take existing concepts, tweak them with minor improvements, polish the bejebus about of the whole deal, and make everything superfun.  That's been their model for success for over a decade.

Daniel


----------



## Felon (Nov 24, 2004)

Thanks for the info, guys. I hope others find it as useful as I did. I am installing WoW as I write this. On disk 2 of 4 (3.1 GB before patching! Yowza!).


----------



## Felon (Nov 27, 2004)

OK, having played WoW for 4 days now, I think I'll provide answers to my own questions, based on initial impressions.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> 1. Is the grind starting to set in? Does the gameplay seem at all repetitive yet?




As an 11th-level orc warlock, I'm still getting the hang of playing my class. I don't suspect the honeymoon will be over for at least another week.



> 2. How much content is geared towards solo players? How necessary is it to group up?




Now this is a real point of contention. I've been able to solo fairly well, but upon hitting 10th level, I am supposed to be able to attain a new pet. However, to get the pet, I actually have to go through a dungeon and defeat a number of other warlocks of equal level who already have that pet. Moreover, both those warlocks and their pets are immune to the fear spell that gives me breathing room and allows my DoT's (a warlock's primary attack form) to take effect. Think 1e D&D, where monks couldn't advance past a certain level except by defeating another monk of that level....this is like that, but you have to defeat a dozen or so of them.

So something that's integral to my toon's development requires a SWAT team to handle. I'm not seeing the point of that. Worse yet, I'm not seeing groups of warlocks gathering at the entrance to form teams. I think most folks who don't have a guild just do without for at least another 3 levels or so. 



> 3. How much is there to do outside of running around in the wilderness ganking random spawns that are just standing around minding their own business? Supposedly, WoW is very quest-driven, so do you have to hunt at all?
> [/quest]
> 
> I've read and been told by numerous sources that there are just so many quests that I will have a tough time completing one before I get another. Well, my trail of bread crumbs has reached its end. I have an elite quest that I can't do for many many levels, the aforementioned pet quest, and that's it.
> ...


----------



## Thanee (Nov 27, 2004)

Believe me, the mage has enough troubles in a fight. Vaporizing only works to a degree. 

And you're just 11th level, I think differences in the classes only barely start to show there, wait for another 10 levels and I think it should be more diversity thanks to the various talent trees. It's more of a guess tho, havn't played beyond 14th level yet myself. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Angcuru (Nov 29, 2004)

Everything has mostly been covered by the above posts, but to wholly simplify:

The whole thing turns every other MMORPG on its head.

'Nuff said.


----------



## Pielorinho (Nov 29, 2004)

*Felon*, if you've not finished the warlock quest yet, a word of advice:

_Take the Zeppelin to Undead Lands, and visit the warlock trainer in the Undercity._

That trainer will give you an alternate quest to do to gain your pet, and it's incredibly easy, compared to the one in Ogrimmar.  I had the same experience as you at tenth level with my beta warlock, and decided to explore undead lands for a bit, where I discovered the supereasy quest.

Other tenth-level quests for other classes are the same way:  I couldn't solo my druid 10th-level quest until I was 12-level.  I don't see this as a problem, though:  either you can choose to group and get your funky power early, or you can choose to solo and get it a little later.

As for your lack of quests, I don't know what to say.  Have you ever turned a quest down?  Have you visited the Crossroads?  I've had the opposite problem:  I'm constantly abandoning quests (knowing I can pick them up again later with no penalty) in order to take new ones.  Right now, as per normal, I've got 18 or 19 quests in my book, out of a maximum of 20.

If you've finished all the Razor Hill quests, go to Crossroads:  there's a buttload of new quests there that should be fine for your level.  Or go to Undead lands and go to Brill, the undead equivalent of Razor Hill, and do some undead quests.  (Brill is just northwest of the zeppelin tower).

And if you're by any chance on Argent Dawn, send me a whisper--I'm Goroshko--and I can help you out with some spare loot!

Daniel


----------



## Felon (Nov 30, 2004)

Angcuru said:
			
		

> Everything has mostly been covered by the above posts, but to wholly simplify:
> The whole thing turns every other MMORPG on its head.
> 'Nuff said.




Actually, the above posts don't really address most of my concerns, and yours is pretty representative of what I was talking about: gushing without elaboration. 

Of course, I'm playing it myself, so I can answer my own questions. The fuss is that people got all worked up about a game because of the license involved, rather than any actual innovations within the game itself. Now please folks, spare "Blizzard doesn't innovate, they perfect" line. As explanations go it just kind of rings empty. 

Sorry if I sound PO'ed, but I'm writing this as my toon is auto-running from the nearest graveyard (which is not very near) because the designers thought it would be cute to give all monsters the ability to stun players who are trying to run away from them, and to do extra damage from behind, and to let the beastie get in about 8 free licks. 

Dont get me wrong. I'm having fun at the moment, but it's nothing new. WoW has pretty much the same flaws as every other MMORPG before it. It's fresh now, but eventually--and I hope it's soon--people will get the rose-colored glasses off and just the game for what it is. Nice, but average.


----------



## Pielorinho (Nov 30, 2004)

Felon said:
			
		

> Now please folks, spare "Blizzard doesn't innovate, they perfect" line. As explanations go it just kind of rings empty.



For you, perhaps--not for me.  Rather than have the hippest grapefruit-garlic sorbet frittata, I'd much rather get a cone of really spectacular chocolate.  Blizzard's reputation for polishing, not innovating, goes back to the first Warcraft game in the early nineties (itself just an iterative approach to the earlier _Dune_ RTS).

At any rate, we'll see; my guess is that you'll find, once the reviews start to pour in, that WoW gets rated far higher than EQII.

Except for the lag issues, of course.

I'm sorry you're not as giddy about the game as I am, though--I'm having lots of fun with it!

Daniel


----------



## Pielorinho (Nov 30, 2004)

Heh--posted about ten minutes too soon.  Gamespot gives it a 9.5, one of the highest ratings I've seen them give out ever, higher than I recall them giving any previous Blizzard game, and far higher than Everquest's rating in the high 7's.  From the review:



> Though massively multiplayer online role-playing games have been around for years, it has taken this long for the genre's breakthrough hit to finally emerge. Here is the online role-playing game you should play, no matter who you are. This is because World of Warcraft brings out all the best aspects of this style of gaming, if not many of the best aspects of gaming in general. It also features many of the specific characteristics that have made Blizzard Entertainment's previous games so entertaining, memorable, long-lasting, and successful. Of course, the company's past track record did not guarantee that World of Warcraft could have turned out this well. Such high quality simply cannot be expected, nor should it be missed.



Daniel


----------



## Ranger REG (Nov 30, 2004)

I still don't see how this is better than _Neverwinter Night._


----------



## Thanee (Nov 30, 2004)

It's just more _massive_. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Thanee (Nov 30, 2004)

Felon said:
			
		

> Sorry if I sound PO'ed, but I'm writing this as my toon is auto-running from the nearest graveyard (which is not very near) because the designers thought it would be cute to give all monsters the ability to stun players who are trying to run away from them, and to do extra damage from behind, and to let the beastie get in about 8 free licks.




If it weren't a bit dangerous, then it was boring, no? 



> Dont get me wrong. I'm having fun at the moment, but it's nothing new. WoW has pretty much the same flaws as every other MMORPG before it.




What flaws do you mean specifically?

I think they have removed many of the typical flaws, while - of course - some genre-defining traits remain.



> It's fresh now, but eventually--and I hope it's soon--people will get the rose-colored glasses off and just the game for what it is. Nice, but average.




Well, _average_ isn't a term I would use and I don't really think I'm looking through rose-colored glasses there. 

Both WoW and EQ2 are certainly far above the average.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Felon (Nov 30, 2004)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> Heh--posted about ten minutes too soon.  Gamespot gives it a 9.5, one of the highest ratings I've seen them give out ever, higher than I recall them giving any previous Blizzard game, and far higher than Everquest's rating in the high 7's.




GameSpot is pretty notorious for the shameless populism of their reviews. For instance, they gave Master of Orion III a sterling nine-point-something-or-other the first week it came out when it sold big, then after gamers everywhere experienced buyer's remorse and called it a turd sandwich, they recalled the original review and posted a negative one, dropping the rating to 6.7. 

Of course, you can just say that the first one was an "early review" or a "first impression", but all that does is indicate that reviewing a game after only brief gameplay is pretty uninsightful. 

And just so, the WoW review is indeed vague and uninsightful in its relentless fawning. It heaps praise without going into depth to any level of detail, offering opinion without supporting it with reasons. 



> The worst thing about World of Warcraft is that you can't just play it all the time. After all, chances are if you start, you'll never want to stop.




Over-the-top gushing. Really disappointing--I was actually expecting to concede a few points. Like I said, WoW is fun enough, just nothing special.

I am particularly amused to see them say that there is no room for class envy. 

Personally, I'm going to wait and see what TechTV's review is like. They have a very unhealthy honesty in their reviews. They declared SWG a tedious, frustrating dud even when it was selling like hotcakes and GameSpot and PC Gamer were calling it a great evolutionary step.



> I'm sorry you're not as giddy about the game as I am, though--I'm having lots of fun with it!




You're still in the honeymoon phase. I've been like that about MMORPG's myself. At any rate, thanks for the advice on the warlock pet quest. I hope others read it and benefit.


----------



## Pielorinho (Nov 30, 2004)

Perhaps I'm in the honeymoon phase, true--but I had no such honeymoon phase with FFXI, which I put down after three hours of playing, and I've been in the honeymoon phase all through the stress test and the two weeks of the open beta and now through the retail release.

I've never noticed Gamespot to be especially fawning; indeed, look at their review for Everquest II, which says it's good but nothing exceptional, by way of comparison.  But obviously your experience with them is different from mine.

It seems more likely that this game is exactly to my tastes, and it's not to your tastes. Which is fine.

Daniel


----------



## Felon (Dec 1, 2004)

Thanee said:
			
		

> If it weren't a bit dangerous, then it was boring, no?




Thanee, c'mon. Are you saying it would be boring if characters had a decent chance of getting away from fights they didn't want to be in in the first place?    It's bad enough they do extra damag from rear attacks, but having those attacks actually stun the fleeing character is going out of their way to make there are lots of trips to the graveyard. We're not talking about a challenge, we're talking a tremendous source of frustration.



> What flaws do you mean specifically?




The stuff I've mentioned already covers a lot of it. 

Grinding? Yes, lots of grinding.

Forced grouping? Well, yes, if you wait long enough to do a quest you should *eventually* be high enough to fight off multiple mobs, when they're green or gray to you (and so is the quest). When I was 14th I'd still get killed fighting Burning Blade warlocks on my voidwalker pet quest. There seems to be few classes that can handle multiple attackers. That's a big deal in a game where spawns walk right into you--or even respawn in groups right on top of you. Soloability is pretty much all about the ability to fend off groups, and not just desperately hoping you can successfully pick away at the bad guys one at a time. 

Forced hunting? Well, hunting for animal pieces has easily constituted the majority of my quests. I've been into one or two caves, and one fort.

Instanced content? Haven't seen any. 

Hell runs? There are hell runs aplenty, and there's apparently not a convenient keystroke to let you cycle through monsters within your radius. Combine that with with monsters that stun you when attacking from behind, and you have yourself a problem. Heck, even getting to a trainer in a major city is a 5 or 10 minute trek...one way.

Class distinction? There's a lot of fun and cool powers to distinguish one class from another, but players do lack distinction and uniqueness from other characters of the same class. Sadly, I am really no different from any other warlock of my level. 

Another issue not addressed is what happens when there's a lot of disparity between character levels? I'm already losing ground to my friends who play more than I do. 



> I think they have removed many of the typical flaws, while - of course - some genre-defining traits remain.




Folks will have a lot of fun with WoW for many months. Some folks will stay with it forever (just like there have been folks still playing EQ and Ultima Online and Gemstone for years and years after more advanced games emerged). But really, now I want to ask you guys: what is so polished about WoW? What do you think makes it turn other MMORPG's on there heads? If you opt to respond, please be detailed.


----------



## Felon (Dec 1, 2004)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> I've never noticed Gamespot to be especially fawning; indeed, look at their review for Everquest II, which says it's good but nothing exceptional, by way of comparison.




But see, that's what I mean. They gave a lukewarm review to a game that received a lukewarm reception. And yet, after reading both reviews, I have no idea how the feel WoW is superior EQII. Do you?



> It seems more likely that this game is exactly to my tastes, and it's not to your tastes. Which is fine.
> Daniel




Fair enough. 

In addition to the license, I also think the character classes really sell the game. A class bestows many more interesting abilities as it progresses than it does in other MMORPG's I've played. But if another one of my friends was playing a warlock, I know my enjoyment would be diminished heavily by realizing that we're basically clones.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Dec 1, 2004)

Felon, if you have to wait until a quest is green or gray to solo it, you're missing something about your class. Even playing a hunter, allegedly one of the classes least able to handle adds, I take out two enemies at a time routinely, and solo yellow and orange quests constantly.

And no, I'm not in my "honeymoon phase" -- I've been playing the game a year now.

You honestly don't sound like you wanted to buy the game to begin with, and you seem studied in your desire to declare it "nothing new." I'm sorry, but the questing system -- or more specifically, its dominance over all other aspects of the game -- absolutely IS new. If you're simply grinding to level, again, that's something you're doing, and not the game. I'm actually finding a number of my skills slipping behind maximum because I'm getting so much quest-based experience, rather than simply grinding it out. My new character is now level 18, and getting this much quest experience isn't anything new -- I had the same problem, if you can call it that, with characters in their 30s and 40s in beta.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 1, 2004)

Felon said:
			
		

> Thanee, c'mon. Are you saying it would be boring if characters had a decent chance of getting away from fights they didn't want to be in in the first place?  It's bad enough they do extra damag from rear attacks, but having those attacks actually stun the fleeing character is going out of their way to make there are lots of trips to the graveyard. We're not talking about a challenge, we're talking a tremendous source of frustration.



 Can't say I had the same experiences. Sure, that happened to me to, maybe once or twice total, but usually I had no problems to break from a fight and flee. 



> what is so polished about WoW? What do you think makes it turn other MMORPG's on there heads? If you opt to respond, please be detailed.



 It's the combination of low downtime, lots of quests, which add into an interesting story, a cool world to explore (ok, most MMORPGs have this), tons of things to do and all of this presented in a way, which makes it fun from the beginning. It doesn't have the same repetitive feeling to me, that other such games have.

 Bye
 Thanee


----------



## Pielorinho (Dec 1, 2004)

Felon said:
			
		

> Thanee, c'mon. Are you saying it would be boring if characters had a decent chance of getting away from fights they didn't want to be in in the first place?  It's bad enough they do extra damag from rear attacks, but having those attacks actually stun the fleeing character is going out of their way to make there are lots of trips to the graveyard. We're not talking about a challenge, we're talking a tremendous source of frustration.



I'm sorry you've experienced it that way.  On the few occasions this has happened to me, I've chalked it up to carelessness on my part:  I wasn't paying attention to my surroundings, I hadn't chosen an escape path, and I let myself get into a fight too close to another creature that could join in.

I don't really mind the rear-stun attacks:  it gives a sense of tension to the idea of going into enemy territory.  If I could reliably escape from battles that were too dangerous, that tension wouldn't be there.

That said, if they went away, I wouldn't mind too much either.  It's not a big deal for me.



> Forced grouping? Well, yes, if you wait long enough to do a quest you should *eventually* be high enough to fight off multiple mobs, when they're green or gray to you (and so is the quest). When I was 14th I'd still get killed fighting Burning Blade warlocks on my voidwalker pet quest. There seems to be few classes that can handle multiple attackers. That's a big deal in a game where spawns walk right into you--or even respawn in groups right on top of you. Soloability is pretty much all about the ability to fend off groups, and not just desperately hoping you can successfully pick away at the bad guys one at a time.



This is a place where your experience is very different from mine.  Right now I'm clearing out my questbook, which is mostly full of green and yellow quests (due to the amount of time I've spent in instances, which give crazy XP).  Except when I'm _really_ careless and let four or five bad guys whale on me at once, I have very little trouble.  Two or three bad guys is no problem.

If you don't have your voidwalker yet, you need to get it, either by going very cautiously through Skull Rock, travelling to the Undercity, or finding another warlock to group with.  The voidwalker is key to the early warlock's soloing experience:  you can't stand mano a mano with the attackers, but need the voidwalker to taunt them off you.



> Forced hunting? Well, hunting for animal pieces has easily constituted the majority of my quests. I've been into one or two caves, and one fort.



For the early game, that's true, especially in the Barrens.  If you're bored with it, try travelling to Ratchet, where you can get "slay the pirates" quests, or to Silverpine, where you'll be investigating a wizard who's turning people into his werewolf slaves.



> Instanced content? Haven't seen any.



It really starts becoming important around sixteenth level, where you can go to Ragefire Chasm or Pyrewood Village (depending on your location); if you're brave and get a good group together, you can try out Wailing Caverns (although you'll probably want to wait to a higher level).



> Hell runs? There are hell runs aplenty, and there's apparently not a convenient keystroke to let you cycle through monsters within your radius.



Again, different experiences.  I find the "tab" key to be very convenient.



> Class distinction? There's a lot of fun and cool powers to distinguish one class from another, but players do lack distinction and uniqueness from other characters of the same class. Sadly, I am really no different from any other warlock of my level.



This is true, with the caveat that you're not any different from any other warlock of your level _and race_.  Racial abilities can be key if you use them well.  But I wish there were more customization of characters.



> Another issue not addressed is what happens when there's a lot of disparity between character levels? I'm already losing ground to my friends who play more than I do.



How is this a problem?



> But really, now I want to ask you guys: what is so polished about WoW? What do you think makes it turn other MMORPG's on there heads? If you opt to respond, please be detailed.



The polish:
-I find the graphics to be absolutely beautiful.  I know you don't like them, but many people, both among my friends and among online reviewers, agree.
-Combat is fast-paced and intricate without being a twitchfest.
-The quests vary from mediocre to fantastic, with the very good ones being most common.  Even though, stripped to their bones, they revolve around three central principles (kill/collect/visit), they're dressed up in sufficient ornamentation and permutations that they really involve me in the storyline.
-No class feels completely better than any other class to me, and many classes can adopt different roles in a group.  For example, my brother playing the hunter can choose to be the damage-dealer or the tank; I, playing the druid, can choose to be the tank, damage dealer, or healer.  And grouping is lots of fun:  the powers of the classes complement each other very well.
-The very rare occasions when you get a loading screen.
-The cool little locations.  In your travels, you might come across the abandoned airfield covered with gnomish aeroplanes, or an island populated by members of all races, or a huge sea-monster off in the distance, or a mountainpeak covered in mist the color of dried blood, or the bones of an immense animal; and you just know that this location is going to have a quest at it at some point.  Exploring is just tremendous fun.
-The Auction House and Mail System, great improvements to the marketplace.



> But see, that's what I mean. They gave a lukewarm review to a game that received a lukewarm reception. And yet, after reading both reviews, I have no idea how the feel WoW is superior EQII. Do you?



I think there's a very good chance that they gave a lukewarm review to a game that received a lukewarm reception _because the game wasn't anything special._  Rather thank look for a cause-and-effect relationship between their review and the reception, it seems far likelier that the review and the reception have the same cause.

When I decide which reviews to trust, whether for movies or for games or for anything else, I try to find a reviewer whose tastes jibe with mine.  Gamespot's tastes consistently do:  I've never loved a game that they reviewed poorly, and I've never hated a game that they reviewed well (except for games in genres that I dislike).  It sounds like they're not a very useful reviewer for you, inasmuch as your tastes don't jibe with theirs.  That is not, however, sufficient reason to call their integrity into question, by suggesting that they review games well because they just want to fit in with popular opinion.

Do I understand why they reviewed the game well?  Absolutely, and I have trouble understanding how, after reading the four page review, you do not.  They were very specific about what they liked.

Again, it seems not to be to your tastes; I hope you're able to find a game you like more.  I find this game very satisfying, and expect (no starry-eyed glasses here) to continue enjoying it for many months to come.

Daniel


----------



## Kanegrundar (Dec 3, 2004)

Felon said:
			
		

> But see, that's what I mean. They gave a lukewarm review to a game that received a lukewarm reception. And yet, after reading both reviews, I have no idea how the feel WoW is superior EQII. Do you?




I feel the need to speak up here.  Even though I don't read Gamespot, I have played both games.  WoW beats EQ in nearly every way.  First off, my comp (which is upper-middle of the road with a P4 2.8 GhZ processor, 512 Dual Channel DDR Ram, and a GeForce FX 5200 128 MB video card) runs and runs and runs just to load up zones in EQ2.  This is really frustrating when trying to run through a city zone.  This is even with the graphics turned down to their lowest, so the game looks like crap.  (I can run it just fine with the highest graphic settings, but I end up lagging in highly populated areas.)  I have no trouble running WoW on the highest graphic settings.  There may be the occasional stutter as I walk into a highly populated area (like the Undercity), but it's brief and minimal at best.  


EQ2's opening quests feel like a lot of linnear hand-holding.  It made me feel like Sony didn't have enough faith in me to figure out the game without their help.  At least WoW's opening quests can be declined.  

WoW, IMO, has a better feel to it.  EQ2 really doesn't have it's own personality yet.  It's a hodge-podge of EQ1 and something else.  I understand that this is purely subjective, but EQ2's flavor doesn't taste as good as WoW.

I love the fact that in WoW I don't hae to spend hours trying to find a recipe for some item or another.  Trade skills shouldn't be a huge production and almost a game in and of itself.  I'm not entirely certain that this is the case in EQ2, since I didn't play it long enough to get itno tradeskills, but in EQ1 I would spend almost as much time on the net after I got finished playing researching new recipes on the various fansites.  It felt like homework for a blasted game.  I can simply play in WoW.

Levelling in WoW doesn't feel like such a hassle as it does in EQ (1 or 2).  In WoW, I have a ton of quests to do that get me through the levelling process without focusing on just running out and killing mobs purely for the sake of getting XP and loot.  I'd say that a good 75 to 80% of every mob I'm battled in WoW had a direct link to some quest.  That's a great design idea.  Sure, you're still doing the same thing of "Kill, XP, Loot, Level, Repeat", but it doens't _feel_ like I'm just grinding through my levels.  

All in all, there is no question in my mind that WoW is superior to EQ2.  Others may have a different POV, but I've found the game that's for me.  WoW may not be innovative, but Blizzard has put together a great online gaming experience for me.  What it comes down to in MMORPG's (as with all RPG's both tabletop, PBP, or video) is to find something that you really enjoy.  It doesn't sound like WoW is for you, Felon.

Adios,
Kane


----------



## Mystery Man (Dec 3, 2004)

Gamespot sucks. 

 WoW rules.


----------



## Ranger REG (Dec 3, 2004)

Thanee said:
			
		

> It's just more _massive_.



Sorry, I'm still not convinced. I can't see myself spending $40-$50 on the software for 30 days worth of playing, then spend $10 per month more for continued playiing.

Why can't the MMORPG developers be satisfied I bought their software?


----------



## Kanegrundar (Dec 3, 2004)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Sorry, I'm still not convinced. I can't see myself spending $40-$50 on the software for 30 days worth of playing, then spend $10 per month more for continued playiing.
> 
> Why can't the MMORPG developers be satisfied I bought their software?



 Do you think that $50 is going to keep paying for server upkeep, paying GM's, and allow for new free content and the payment of the programmers?  Not hardly.  Running a successful MMORPG takes money.  I don't mind paying $15 a month to play a game that I enjoy.  Before MMORPG's I would probably spend $100 a month EASY on new games that I would play, beat, and put away after only 20-50 hours.  I played EQ for years, only buying the occasional game that I just really had to have (Knights of the Old Republic, Doom 3, and so on).  It has actually saved me money.  I sold my PS2 and Xbox after I got into EQ, and spent very little on games (barring my D20 purchases) since then.

In order to ensure that the game stays actively monitored, that there are in game events ran by the parent company, and that the game continues to evolve over time there has to be a fee.  Sure, the money initially made on the release will run the game for a short while, but the real bread and butter that takes to keep the game running comes from the monthly fees.  You may not like the idea (I'd prefer to get the game for free and then pay the monthly fee), but that's they way it works and will continue to work into the forseeable future.  

Kane


----------



## Pielorinho (Dec 3, 2004)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Sorry, I'm still not convinced. I can't see myself spending $40-$50 on the software for 30 days worth of playing, then spend $10 per month more for continued playiing.
> 
> Why can't the MMORPG developers be satisfied I bought their software?



Well, let's say that your average SP roleplaying game--Baldur's Gate, for example--provides you with 200 hours of gameplay over its lifetime.  That suggests you play it through at least twice, exploring every nook and cranny every time you play it.  I suspect there are few single-player games who get a third of that gameplay out of them, but let's go with that.

I expect to get a lot more playtime out of WoW:  in the first year alone, I expect to get around 800 or so hours of playtime, figuring I'll play an average of 2-3 hours a day (some days I'll play lots more, other days I won't play at all).  

Over the course of the year, I'll be paying $193 to play the game ($50 initial investment, plus $13x11--by paying in six-month chunks, I only pay thirteen a month).  If I'd instead bought single-player games and played them each for 200 hours (again, a high number for most SP games), I'd be paying $200 for the games.

Does that make sense?  WoW has huge amounts of content, and I'm paying for them to create new content, to maintain the servers, as well as paying them for the several years they've already spent creating the game.  It all works out to a reasonable amount for me.

Other folks may not like this:  they want more variety in game experience than they'll get from WoW, and that's fine.  But I don't have any real philosophical objections to their profit model.

Daniel


----------



## Thanee (Dec 3, 2004)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Why can't the MMORPG developers be satisfied I bought their software?




Well, a few of them are, apparantly. Just check out Guild Wars, if you want to try a MMORPG without any monthly fees. It's also kinda from Blizzard, since the programmers are the ones who left Blizzard, and they leave out no opportunity to tell about it... go figure, everyone needs some advertisement, I guess. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## driver8 (Dec 3, 2004)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Well, a few of them are, apparantly. Just check out Guild Wars, if you want to try a MMORPG without any monthly fees. It's also kinda from Blizzard, since the programmers are the ones who left Blizzard, and they leave out no opportunity to tell about it... go figure, everyone needs some advertisement, I guess.
> 
> Bye
> Thanee





Ahh you beat me to it. The money investment in MMOs is something I got tired of. I have high hopes for Guild Wars. It looks to me  more of a MMO lite, more Diablo like game. Its geared more toward competitve gameplay, but I love the game concepts the devs are coming up with.

Ok end of advertisment


----------



## mmu1 (Dec 4, 2004)

I got WoW last Wednesday, and played the hell out of it over the long weekend.

I think it does certain things extremely well - it's very polished, many typical sources of frustration have been done away with or toned down, it's pretty generous with new abilities and items without making them worthless, the crafting system as such doesn't make you want to tear your hair out, etc.

On the other hand, I've hit 19th level as a Warrior, and I think I'm done with this game. I might try again with a different class, but haven't done it yet. As I get higher in level, like in any MMORPG, progress slows to a crawl, and frustrations (despite a good game design) start to mount. 
I can't effectively solo, unless I want to skip quests and just grind away mindlessly. There are some _Gray_ non-Elite quests I haven't been able to do without a group - never mind yellow or orange ones. 
Mining and Blacksmithing - my trades of choice - have hit a brick wall.  I can't find the higher-level resources I need to advance my abilities without going into areas I have no chance of surviving in, and the gear I can craft right now is generally worse than what I can get from quests or drops. 

Yeah, it's more polished, but under all that it _is_ exactly like every other MMORPG out there, despite all the hype - which makes me a little angry (at myself, and at the various reviewers and previewers) for getting sucked into one of these things again, when I should have known better...


----------



## Ranger REG (Dec 5, 2004)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Well, a few of them are, apparantly. Just check out Guild Wars, if you want to try a MMORPG without any monthly fees. It's also kinda from Blizzard, since the programmers are the ones who left Blizzard, and they leave out no opportunity to tell about it... go figure, everyone needs some advertisement, I guess.



Kewl!   

Just a coinky-dink, I am spoiled by Blizzard and their _Diablo_ online games, that is, until they decided to charge playing fee for their Battle.net servers.

Gonna get me _Guild Wars,_ if it's good.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 5, 2004)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Just a coinky-dink, I am spoiled by Blizzard and their _Diablo_ online games, that is, until they decided to charge playing fee for their Battle.net servers.




I don't know of any charges for the battle.net servers, really.



> Gonna get me _Guild Wars,_ if it's good.




It should be possible to get some trial version, they often do trial events over the weekends (first each month or something, don't quote me on that, tho) AFAIK (played on one myself to check out the game, it's definitely not bad, tho I like WoW much better).

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Pielorinho (Dec 6, 2004)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> On the other hand, I've hit 19th level as a Warrior, and I think I'm done with this game. I might try again with a different class, but haven't done it yet. As I get higher in level, like in any MMORPG, progress slows to a crawl, and frustrations (despite a good game design) start to mount.
> I can't effectively solo, unless I want to skip quests and just grind away mindlessly. There are some _Gray_ non-Elite quests I haven't been able to do without a group - never mind yellow or orange ones.



Really?  That might explain why our guild has so few warriors in it, then.  At level 26 as a druid I'm able to complete yellow quests regularly, and can solo the occasional orange quest (mostly when these quests are "kill this one unguarded creature").  It's pretty alarming if warriors are so weak in comparison.



> Mining and Blacksmithing - my trades of choice - have hit a brick wall. I can't find the higher-level resources I need to advance my abilities without going into areas I have no chance of surviving in, and the gear I can craft right now is generally worse than what I can get from quests or drops.



Yeah, my experience is that mining is really good for making money (you can sell that copper at the auction house for googabs of money), but it seems that blacksmithing doesn't really do much good until higher levels.  OTOH, I worked with a leatherworker recently to make some fantastic gloves:  I'm an alchemist/herbalist, and I spent a long time tracking down the right herbs to make a high-level elixir that he used in making the gloves.  He made a pair for each of us, and it was extremely satisfying to get them .



> Yeah, it's more polished, but under all that it _is_ exactly like every other MMORPG out there, despite all the hype - which makes me a little angry (at myself, and at the various reviewers and previewers) for getting sucked into one of these things again, when I should have known better...



Well, again, it may not be for everyone.  Don't get mad at us reviewers that ARE enjoying it .

On the subject of Guild Wars:  I played in their weekend trial period several weeks ago (over Hallowe'en, I think), and thought the game had quite a ways to go before it was done.  My biggest problems with it were that quests took way too long (and once you started one, you couldn't drop it to pick it up later--if you logged off, you had to start all over), and the monsters all looked like Giger rejects, not an aesthetic I like in my fantasy games.  So I'm a little leery of it.  But I know that the designers used to work for Blizzard, and so I definitely hold out hope that they'll improve it to the point that it's a fantastic game.

Daniel


----------



## Kanegrundar (Dec 6, 2004)

mmu1 said:
			
		

> On the other hand, I've hit 19th level as a Warrior, and I think I'm done with this game. I might try again with a different class, but haven't done it yet. As I get higher in level, like in any MMORPG, progress slows to a crawl, and frustrations (despite a good game design) start to mount.
> I can't effectively solo, unless I want to skip quests and just grind away mindlessly. There are some _Gray_ non-Elite quests I haven't been able to do without a group - never mind yellow or orange ones.
> Mining and Blacksmithing - my trades of choice - have hit a brick wall.  I can't find the higher-level resources I need to advance my abilities without going into areas I have no chance of surviving in, and the gear I can craft right now is generally worse than what I can get from quests or drops.
> 
> ...


----------



## Enforcer (Dec 6, 2004)

I did hit a bit of a problem with my Dwarf Paladin in between levels 18 and 19, in that I had very few Dwarf-related quests to complete (and my OCD demanded that the dwarves came first). Once I hit 20 though, a lot of people with grey !s opened up. Still can't complete my level 20 Paladin quest thanks to a known bug though...grr...

As for mining and blacksmithing, I've run into a bit of a wall with mining, but my blacksmithing is fine. With mining it only really improves by actual mining of tin and silver--smelting either won't raise my skill, only the real, from-the-ground mining will.  My mining's at 111 (I think...). It'll be nice to get to 125 so I can mine and smelt iron.

As for blacksmithing...just keep creating yellow and orange items and your skill will improve. Mine's at 122 right now...just need some more bronze so I can get Expert rating at 125. Buy a recipe that requires the fewest resources, even if you won't use it for yourself. Then just bang out as many bracers or gloves or whatever that you can. Sell the products at the Auction House or even to a vendor and make some cash off of improving your smithing skills.


----------



## Pielorinho (Dec 6, 2004)

Also, if you're making green items, that means they're magical and can be disenchanted by someone with the Enchanting skill for dusts that they use in their profession.  Our guild has an enchanter and a tailor with an arrangement:  the tailor regularly sends tons of low-level magic stuff to the enchanter, and the enchanter sends tons of found cloth and stuff to the tailor.  It works out well.

Daniel


----------



## driver8 (Dec 6, 2004)

Well I broke down and got WoW. I blame you here at ENWOrld and your incessant peer pressure .

Actually I decided for the first time to wait and not jump at launch. So, if you run into a Tauren druid on Llane name Shawati feel free to say hi.


----------



## Aristotle (Dec 7, 2004)

Felon, I'm not sure what I can say that hasn't been said already. You said your having some fun with it, so at least its not a total loss for you. Your just frustrated with the hype the game got?

I'd like to say that I don't think I'm wearing rose colored glasses. I've got previous MMO experience, and I've put several of them down now before my free trial as even over. I'm not prone to like a game just because its new or just because its popular. And I have to tell you that WoW (my very first Blizzard or Warcraft product) outpaces all of the games I've played before. I wish I could quantify or detail for you why that is, but I think a lot of it comes down to personal preferences. This game hits them all for me, and I have trouble finding any aspect of it that I don't like.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> ...but having those attacks actually stun the fleeing character is going out of their way to make there are lots of trips to the graveyard. We're not talking about a challenge, we're talking a tremendous source of frustration.



I've made more than my share of runs from the graveyard (can those thistle bears be packed into Darkshore any tighter?), and it can be frustrating... but the penalty (aside from the time it takes to get to your body) is slight, and once I started to develop some basic tactical sense with my character I found that I'm making the trip a good bit less.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Grinding? Yes, lots of grinding.



I suppose you could call the "go kill X number of Y's" quests grinding in disguise, but as I progress in level I'm finding those broken up enough (or coming with interesting enough storylines) that I don't mind them much. I never *grind* (kill things repeatedly just for the experience gain). Everything I kill is either a part of a quest or an obstacle to or from a quest location. I did farm some linen cloth once off some low level mobs. I didn't get any XP for it that I saw, and they were quick kills to get me the cloth I wanted.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Forced grouping? Well, yes, if you wait long enough to do a quest you should *eventually* be high enough to fight off multiple mobs, when they're green or gray to you...



I've taken orange quests (although I died a few times) solo. I regularly solo yello quests. So far I've only found a few quests that were obviously too dificult for the level at which they were given out (The lock boxes guarded by the murlocs off the coast of Darkshore would be a biggie).

I'm playing a Hunter. And I regularly see walocks of a similar level soloing the same quests as me, so I know it can be done. I also see a lot of solo druids. Most of the other classes can solo, but aren't as good as those three. Priests and mages seem to have a rough time, and warriors are just underpowered (I hope they bring them up to speed instead of nerfing all of the other amazing classes down to their level).

You do need to group Elite quests and Instances. I personally love this. There is plenty of combat to solo through this game, but their is also content to bring people together and promote group play. You can play the game either way from what I've seen. I've found other players at almost every elite quest who were more than willing to group up with me and let me in on their action. We complete the quest, disband, and go about our business. I like that! I get a group for a specific encounter without having to follow them around all night or come off like a jerk when I say I have other things to do and I gotta go.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Forced hunting? Well, hunting for animal pieces has easily constituted the majority of my quests. I've been into one or two caves, and one fort.



I'd be interested to know what you would do differently? I mean, in the end, this is an MMO and killing people/creatures and taking their stuff is pretty much the standard. At later levels (late teens) I started to get other missions (escort this person from point A to point B and stuff like that) but it ultimately comes down to combat. I wouldn't mind seeing some 'brain teaser' type quests. It might be neat to have to solve a puzzle or something.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Instanced content? Haven't seen any.



I think this will be something you will have to group for, and it will almost definately be something you don't see until you're a tad higher in level.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Heck, even getting to a trainer in a major city is a 5 or 10 minute trek...one way.



Well, it is a big world. Sometimes you have to run. You'll get access to mounts later, ships and trains are free, and for a fee you can ride the skies.



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Sadly, I am really no different from any other warlock of my level.



And you shouldn't be at that level. Class distinction builds gradually, and is admittedly subtle for the most part, but it is there and will increase as you take Talents. We won't even get into Heroic Classes, which sound sort of like prestige classes to me, which have been slated for an update in the near future.



> Another issue not addressed is what happens when there's a lot of disparity between character levels? I'm already losing ground to my friends who play more than I do.



 I regularly quest with people a few levels below or above me, and things work out fine. Casual players can take advantage of rested states which allow them to gain double XP from kills for up to 1.5 character levels (30 bubbles).



			
				Felon said:
			
		

> Folks will have a lot of fun with WoW for many months. Some folks will stay with it forever...



Not forever. But I didn't expect to like the game much at all. I was pleasantly surprised. It is far better (IMHO) than SWG, FFXI, or Matrix. It should do what I need it to do... give me something to keep me busy while I wait for D&D Online.


----------



## mmu1 (Dec 7, 2004)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> Really?  That might explain why our guild has so few warriors in it, then.  At level 26 as a druid I'm able to complete yellow quests regularly, and can solo the occasional orange quest (mostly when these quests are "kill this one unguarded creature").  It's pretty alarming if warriors are so weak in comparison.




Well, I gave it a few more hours over the weekend.

I _think_ I have pretty good gear (most my stuff is green, with a couple of whites (minor stuff like cloak and bracers) including items I made myself that are better than what I could buy at my level or get from quests, got about +15 total to both Str and Sta at 21st level, and a 12.4 DPS one-handed weapon).

However, I still generally do less damage (judging by who gets aggro) than the goddamn _pets_ of hunters a level or two lower than me.

I am able to do _some_ yellow quests solo, but the only orange ones I've ever been able to do are fetch quests involving no combat - but there are many, many quests I can't solo even when they're green. (not effectively, anyway - spending a couple of hours killing stragglers and running the moment two enemies attack me at the same time, sometimes dying in the process - is not my idea of viable)

My talent points are spent, my abilities are all up to date... This isn't the first time I've played a MMORPG, so I seriously doubt that I'm doing anything "wrong" - since this is, after all, being touted as the most accessible game of its kind, ever.

The Warrior boards on the official site are full of complaints over how pathetic the class is - obviously, you can never tell for sure, since players love to bitch, but right now, I'm inclined to agree with them, and rather pissed... I do NOT have the free time to waste building up another damn character.


----------



## Pielorinho (Dec 7, 2004)

That is a shame.  Like I said, I'm not seeing many warriors around, and this may be why.

In the original stress test I played a warrior up to 18, and had no problem with it; but I think they've changed the class since then.

Daniel


----------



## Kanegrundar (Dec 7, 2004)

I'm playing a warrior right now.  I've been in a couple groups, in which I get out damaged by a *combination* of pets and spells.  I haven't seen that I'm getting outslcassed by merely the pets.  However, I still think the warrior damage potential could be increased to bring them more in line with the other classes.  I'm not pissed about it.  I'm still able to get into groups and hold my own, it just takes a little more work out of me to hold aggro.

Kane


----------



## WayneLigon (Dec 7, 2004)

Having possibly been spoiled by City of Heroes (the only MMORPG I've ever played, aside from a time in the first Asheron's Call beta) and Sims2, how is the character customization feature of the game? Are there a lot of choices in differentiating your avatar from everyone else? Hair/beard/stubble?


----------



## Kanegrundar (Dec 7, 2004)

There are quite a few choices for distinguishing your avatar from everyone else.  Not as many as City of Heroes (their system was simply amazing), but you really shouldn't run into anyone that looks exactly like you.  I haven't notced any other balding, jawless undead running around!

Kane


----------



## Pielorinho (Dec 7, 2004)

See, I've heard character customization be called one of the game's big weaknesses, and I'm inclined to agree:  the differences in characters aren't very noticeable at all to me.  There are only 16 basic models--male and female for each of 8 races.  You can put different skins on top of these, but the different skins aren't so different that they're immediately obvious.  I actually have trouble distinguishing trolls from night elves at even a moderate distance.

Blizzard has said that they did this in order to make equipment "fit" right without increasing polygon count, and I can see this.  But I still wish there were more distinction between different characters in their appearance.

That said, WoW has equipment where CoH doesn't, and you can really distinguish your character through equipment.  On the third hand, you can't dye equipment once you get it, so it's not unusual to be running around as Clashy McClashalot, with purple boots and green shirt and yellow gloves and brown shoulderpads etc.

Daniel


----------



## Enforcer (Dec 7, 2004)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> Having possibly been spoiled by City of Heroes (the only MMORPG I've ever played, aside from a time in the first Asheron's Call beta) and Sims2, how is the character customization feature of the game? Are there a lot of choices in differentiating your avatar from everyone else? Hair/beard/stubble?




For example, on a male dwarf you can select hair color, hair style, skin color, facial hair style, and face. I've run into another dwarf with the same settings, but our equipment was completely different, so it was fine. I played City of Heroes, which has millions of possibilities versus dozens, but in World of Warcraft your appearance changes regularly from equipment as opposed to only at certain levels/visiting the tailor.

I think WoW is more fun than CoH, though. Professions (mining, smithing, tailoring, etc.) are a rewarding gameplay experience that CoH simply doesn't have. Equiping your character is very rewarding as well--I just crafted a bronze greatsword for my Dwarf Paladin...and even though it wasn't much better than the bronze warhammer he was using before, it's still nice to know that your own work has paid off. And finding random magical equipment that's better than the stuff you're wearing is much more fun than finding enhancements.

Oh, and on the RP servers, people actually roleplay...and that's awesome!


----------



## Ibram (Dec 7, 2004)

I've gotten a warrior to level 14, and though yellow quests are hard I've never found them to be impossible.

a bit o' tactical advice: get the gun skill for your character then buy a cheep gun.  You can use it to lure 1-2 creatures from a mob.  thats how I did the first two peoples millita quests in Westfall.


----------



## Pielorinho (Dec 7, 2004)

Yes!  I forgot to mention the gun idea:  it's pretty vital to have a way to pull individual monsters without getting mobbed, warriors are spectacularly ill-equipped to do this unless they've got a ranged weapon.  Great advice, Ibram!

Meanwhile, I've started a thread on the Warcraft forum about a philosophical take on the game:



> Although I'm enjoying this game a great deal, I do wonder how many folks are appreciating the philosophical horror, the Kafkaesque Hell, that forms the game's central conceit.
> Mankrik (http://www.thottbot.com/?q=212), an NPC in the Barrens, provides a good example.
> This poor fellow's wife has died in battle, but he doesn't know that. Alone in a cruel world, he desperately asks you to find out, to attain closure for him.
> And you do. You explore, and discover his wife's badly beaten body. And, sadly, you return to tell him, and he accepts the news with a heavy heart.
> ...



Daniel


----------



## El Ravager (Dec 8, 2004)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> Yes!  I forgot to mention the gun idea:  it's pretty vital to have a way to pull individual monsters without getting mobbed, warriors are spectacularly ill-equipped to do this unless they've got a ranged weapon.  Great advice, Ibram!
> 
> Daniel




Any suggestions for pulling with a paladin?  I play a paladin character and I've been having trouble with this.  I have no way of pulling enemies.  As far as I can tell, paladins are not able to train in any ranged weapons. 

Any suggestions?


----------



## Enforcer (Dec 9, 2004)

El Ravager said:
			
		

> Any suggestions for pulling with a paladin?  I play a paladin character and I've been having trouble with this.  I have no way of pulling enemies.  As far as I can tell, paladins are not able to train in any ranged weapons.
> 
> Any suggestions?




There's one talent in the Holy tree that's almost all the way down the line that gives you a ranged attack. Otherwise, no. (Well, Exorcism works on undead).


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Dec 9, 2004)

I got a question for those playing.  why be a human?  

From what I understand your reputation increases faster.  Um so.  Does that actually stack up in any way to benefits that I don't know keep you alive in a fight or make you better at crafting or other more concrete seeming benefits.  

Do they have other benefits?


----------



## Thanee (Dec 9, 2004)

Yes, they can detect stealthy rogues, get bonuses on swords and maces, and so on.

Also, they look better than the other races, which is of course a matter of personal preferance. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Pielorinho (Dec 9, 2004)

The reputation thing helps with vendor prices, I'm pretty sure. A member of our guild did bunches of quests in the Undercity, getting herself a fantastic reputation there; she can now buy tabards at 90 silver instead of 1 gold.  I suspect, although I'm not sure, that all prices are at 10% off for her; it's just the tabard is the easiest place to see that.

Pulling with a paladin?  Hmm...I've not played one, but looking over their descriptions, that does seem to be a problem.  Maybe you have to saunter up to the monsters, wave at the nearest one, and run away as they chase you .

Daniel


----------



## Enforcer (Dec 9, 2004)

Reputation lowers the prices of merchants who think you're "honorable" and raises the prices of items you sell to said merchants. The prices are raised/lowered by 10% for "honorable" and probably even more for the upper reputation levels. So yes, that's good. Sword and mace bonuses shouldn't be ignored either.


----------



## Kanegrundar (Dec 9, 2004)

I don't know, Thanee.  I agree the human models are pretty good looking, but there's something to be said for being a rotting corpse swinging a big sword!!!

Adios,
Kane


----------



## driver8 (Dec 10, 2004)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> That is a shame.  Like I said, I'm not seeing many warriors around, and this may be why.
> 
> In the original stress test I played a warrior up to 18, and had no problem with it; but I think they've changed the class since then.
> 
> Daniel




Im playing a dwarf paladin; on my server in dwarf lands I see quite a few warriors mostly dwarf but other Alliance races too. By far Hunters and warlocks seem to be most popular. I actually love my pally and the whole seal/aura thing. 

Im currently 12 and still soloin; in most games thats when I have to stop. Ive been trying to keep my equip updated, but mostly been concerned with my AC.

Anyway enough rambling Im definately addicted. The game isnt anything new but it is well done.


----------



## Sparky (Dec 10, 2004)

driver8 said:
			
		

> ...snip... By far Hunters and warlocks seem to be most popular. ...snip...




I think people like having pets AND pets mechanically distance you from danger AND it's an opportunity (with Hunter's at least) to further customize your character in a game that doesn't offer enough opportunities for that in my opinion. So it's a game mechanic that serves three psychological purposes... pretty attractive.


----------



## Shard O'Glase (Dec 10, 2004)

I don't like pets in general but summoner style pet users rule, necromancers also are cool.  So yeah i'll probably be a warlock.  If hoarde undead, if alliance human.  My next will be a mage or maybe another warlock just on the oppsite side again either human or undead(probably that way for all classes I just like humans in all games and well undead are cool)


----------

