Blizzard's Second MMO [Archive]

rabb1t

01-24-2007, 08:54 PM

Confirmation that Bliz is planning a second MMO.

Empire Online (http://www.empireonline.com/interviews_and_events/interview.asp?IID=620)

How do you imagine you'll be able to top Warcraft in the future?
When we announce our next MMORPG it’s not going to be another WoW - we’re not a company that tends to tread the same ground. It’ll be something innovative and new that really brings entertainment to another level.

Considering Burning Crusade sold 2 mill copies in a day, and WoW has 8 mill subscribers total, and no other info seems to be around on the next MMO, I expect we are probably 2 or more years away from the next Bliz MMO. (The average seems to be 3 years of development to complete one.)

But, at least now we know for sure one is coming.

Will it be the Starcraft MMO everyone was hoping for originally? Guess we'll see eventually. My guess is that since WoW is a combination of aspects from Warcraft and the Diablo series, Starcraft would really be their only direction if they went with an existing intellectual property.

Dojo

01-25-2007, 12:09 AM

I smell a Starcraft MMO as well, though I don't think we should count all of our eggs just yet. Blizzard has been known to pull a fast one on us. Maybe they are planning on breaking the mold.

"It’ll be something innovative and new that really brings entertainment to another level."

So we'll have to wait and see.

rabb1t

01-25-2007, 12:58 AM

Meh, to me that means 3 factions mostly FPS, but hybrid RPG (in that you'd build skills). Say, something like primarily PvE focused, but with the option of RvR combat directly (via current style battlegrounds) or indirectly (via something like the indirect PvP style of Warhammer - maybe something like missions that involve multiple goals for multiple sides so they are indirectly competing).

So, I'd predict a combination of aspects from Tabula Rasa and Warhammer.

Just because it would be "innovative and new" doesn't mean it can't be something similar to things we've seen before, or a combination of things. I think they were just implying 'as compared to WoW'.

Compared to WoW, an FPS style hybrid would indeed qualify. ;)

Me ghost for the win! :D

Ominous

01-25-2007, 02:05 AM

They're going to have to do something "innovative and new" or they'll pull players away from World of Warcraft. Depending on how long they take to develope the game, WoW could still be cruising along with a large number of subscribers, especially now that they want to release a new expansion every year.

rabb1t

01-25-2007, 02:19 AM

I'll be really surprised if they can hold much over 5 mill over the next 3 years. Even with 1 expansion a year it's gonna get old pretty quick with peeps maxing to the expansion level in 1 day. :p

Not dissing on WoW or anything, played for quite a while myself there. I just don't see it having as many subscribers as it does for much more than 3 years. I think the bulk of the players are casual who aren't post 40 yet, but most certainly over the following years they will near that point, and at 40 it really starts to become a very different game. (Raid focused vs. single group focused.)

I think, a realistic expectation, is that any very popular MOG can only really hold on to its bulk of players for 3 years, 5 tops, before it really starts to dwindle down and they move on.

WoW launched in what? '04, so '09 would be a 5 year target? Sounds about right for them to target the new MOG. And again, that's probably too short of a time for the next MOG to release even if they started development now.

Loampounder

01-25-2007, 02:34 AM

How do you imagine you'll be able to top Warcraft in the future?
When we announce our next MMORPG it’s not going to be another WoW - we’re not a company that tends to tread the same ground. It’ll be something innovative and new that really brings entertainment to another level.

From the company that brought us Warcraft, Warcraft II, Warcraft III, and World of Warcraft.

I look at all talk of "innovative and new" as just marketing jargon. It's meaningless drivel, compounded by the fact that no one ever says they will make the same thing again to cash in. "Third generation" anyone?

Atoyota

01-25-2007, 08:02 AM

Considering Burning Crusade sold 2 mill copies in a day, and WoW has 8 mill subscribers total, and no other info seems to be around on the next MMO, I expect we are probably 2 or more years away from the next Bliz MMO. (The average seems to be 3 years of development to complete one.)

But, at least now we know for sure one is coming.

Will it be the Starcraft MMO everyone was hoping for originally? Guess we'll see eventually. My guess is that since WoW is a combination of aspects from Warcraft and the Diablo series, Starcraft would really be their only direction if they went with an existing intellectual property.

I'm thinking starcraft as well, possibly with an SWG flavor to it. I did'nt see any Diablo in Warcraft though. I mean they had necromancers and undead, but the overall theme was all warcraft converted from RTS to RPG.
Any commonalities I feel were more coincidental.

They're going to have to do something "innovative and new" or they'll pull players away from World of Warcraft. Depending on how long they take to develope the game, WoW could still be cruising along with a large number of subscribers, especially now that they want to release a new expansion every year.

Very true, and very labor intensive in their game design; compeled to provide new content each year to keep the ride going.

It could be of the same mold as Warcraft, only different costumes and races with interplanetary travel. Like an Eve, but no Avatar stuck in a ship.
There could be planets, moons and asteriods as well as space stations. Some could be permanent maps, but others randomly generated (either from scratch or a saved table) as you entered. Like an instance, but one that would accept other players also.

There's a lot they can do with it. But Empire reminds me of Starwars.

From the company that brought us Warcraft, Warcraft II, Warcraft III, and World of Warcraft.

I look at all talk of "innovative and new" as just marketing jargon. It's meaningless drivel, compounded by the fact that no one ever says they will make the same thing again to cash in. "Third generation" anyone?

hehehe... I swallowed that one hook line and sinker, but I'm a gullable guy... kinda stupid that way (call it mature innocence).

Still innovative and new can use old methods in new ways and still be innovative.

Blizz has a warchest now, then can afford to go out on a limb but I doubt they would very far... Still if they went for a design that did'nt require so much maintenance to manage player interest. Something more dynamic than WoW? That would be fine for them, to suck players off of the WoW expansion ride, and put them in a world that did'nt require so many year after year.

Just another way to look at it, but I doubt they know how to do it, or have the sence to even if they did.

Dillgaar

01-25-2007, 12:23 PM

If blizzard made dark age of camelot's first incarnation (pre-expansions) and kept the rvr aspects that mythic integrated it would by far be the best mmog ever

Dojo

01-25-2007, 01:00 PM

I'm thinking starcraft as well, possibly with an SWG flavor to it. I did'nt see any Diablo in Warcraft though. I mean they had necromancers and undead, but the overall theme was all warcraft converted from RTS to RPG.
Any commonalities I feel were more coincidental.

In the WoW's expansion, the Burning Crusade, they introduced something that was a leaf straight from their Diablo game... Socketed items.

(Which, in retrospect, I loved socketed items in Diablo. Made the choices on how to outfit you character almost endless.)

Atoyota

01-25-2007, 09:43 PM

In the WoW's expansion, the Burning Crusade, they introduced something that was a leaf straight from their Diablo game... Socketed items.

(Which, in retrospect, I loved socketed items in Diablo. Made the choices on how to outfit you character almost endless.)

Yeah i vaguely remember them. I only played D2 a few months. Maxed a Necro and got bored with it.

But I'm talking more theme than how they optionalized equipment or gear in the expansion.

The original theme from Diablo would make for an awesome MMO, and Warcraft was a good one also as we all know. But it looks like Starcraft will be next...

Dragon-RD

01-28-2007, 01:53 AM

The Diablo series for long has been my favorite game series ever, when Diablo I came out and I got my hands on it I was hooked totaly hooked. If it wasnt for the series I'd still be a first person gamer. As much as I'd love to see a Diablo MMORPG I dont think it'll happen. It makes alot more sence for them to bring out a MMO Starcraft due to Warcraft being Starcrafts past.

But to be honest, I'll stick with Vanguard. Blizz have stolen too many hours of my life so far. Time to let Sigil have some :).

Atoyota

01-28-2007, 04:04 AM

But to be honest, I'll stick with Vanguard. Blizz have stolen too many hours of my life so far. Time to let Sigil have some :).

To each his own... I'm waiting for something different. I've played enough of the level style MMO's, and find them too predictable and too restrictive for players to create unique characters. Not enough variation due to balance concerns.

I expect Starcraft (empire) to be more of the same formula, but should have a lot more depth. That may interest me, but the heart of an MMO is your character, and this standard level progression scheme is getting really old.

Seasiu Laitya

01-28-2007, 12:42 PM

To each his own... I'm waiting for something different. I've played enough of the level style MMO's, and find them too predictable and too restrictive for players to create unique characters. Not enough variation due to balance concerns.

I expect Starcraft (empire) to be more of the same formula, but should have a lot more depth. That may interest me, but the heart of an MMO is your character, and this standard level progression scheme is getting really old.
I expect a second Bliz MMO would share a lot of elements with WoW. You just have to look at their previous games. Diablo, Warcraft, Starcraft. All easily accessible, easy to pick up, easy to play.

I wouldn't expect Bliz to abandon either the player base that they have assembled, or the type of game that they make so well. To try something radically different would be a risky thing to do.

Atoyota

01-28-2007, 01:51 PM

unfortunately that's the primary philosophy that drives the industry :p

(we buy crap they make more crap) :mad:

Anyways, time for something new... maybe Darkfall (crosses fingers for the next year) :rolleyes:

Seasiu Laitya

01-28-2007, 02:07 PM

Atoyota

01-28-2007, 02:10 PM

At least 6 years, and still not in beta. But in the "It's alive" thread (this forum) I've indicated signs of life. It's not dead, but not a lot in the way of news...

Should know more this season, and hopefully beta in a year. At least i'l give it that much time.

It's not going to be your typical "easy mode" game. This ones for the hard core niche that's been starving for almost a decade now.

rabb1t

01-28-2007, 04:35 PM

unfortunately that's the primary philosophy that drives the industry :p
(we buy crap they make more crap) :mad:

The industry is moving more and more to the interaction level I'm looking for though. Games like Gears of War, Crysis, Mass Effect, are all greatly evolving the single player genera, and that will no doubt pass to the multiplayer area at some point. The footage out today of AoC promises to provide a deeper experience in a similar way to these.

Will the experience outside of environmental changes, physics, etc. evolve as well (such as challenging AI, non-scripted quests, etc.) only time will tell. However, it is a matter of time at this point. It is no longer a question of if, but only when.

Atoyota

01-28-2007, 04:48 PM

Rabb1t I dunno...

I see MMO's stuck now in this endless cycle, and can you blame me?

When I played UO it was real, you died and all your stuff was up for grabs even by the AI. You used a skill you got better at it (no levels). FFA PvP with consequences, but still FFA. It was more natural, more real, more immersive.

That's why I'm so hot on DF. I'm just frustrated that all I see is the same crap I've seen before. If i'm going to see something over again, at least make it good... DF has that potential.

I really like the look of Crysis, but have no idea how it plays. Assuming it's just another FPS with intence graphics. Similar to BF1942 which is fun, but just a pick up and play FPS. Entirely different from what I am talking about in MMO's. But you know that...

Yeah things will get better in some aspects, but will it be the ones that matter to me?

rabb1t

01-28-2007, 04:59 PM

I see MMO's stuck now in this endless cycle, and can you blame me?

I do too, but it's gotta change you know. You and I have both been around long enough to have seen the evolution of the Pen and Paper genre, and the PC games are just evolving in a similar fashion. The entire video game industry has only been around like 34 years, of which MOGs have only been around what 10?

While it's true (and I've said this before) that single player is evolving and adapting way faster, MOGs are still new. Peeps are still trying to figure out what the player wants. Right now, x seems to sell well, and people are very afraid to break that mold because the odds of having a successful game if you break the mold are not good in that market.

When I played UO it was real, you died and all your stuff was up for grabs even by the AI. You used a skill you got better at it (no levels). FFA PvP with consequences, but still FFA. It was more natural, more real, more immersive.

Several elements of UO are being carried forward into new games, and still you have to realize that it is being talked about today. People still look back and reference it as a source. As long as people do that, someone, somewhere, is considering using design elements from it.

That's why I'm so hot on DF. I'm just frustrated that all I see is the same crap I've seen before. If i'm going to see something over again, at least make it good... DF has that potential.

Just to remind you, consider how much of a fan of VG you were back in the day. I find it is best not to put too much hope into a game until it is very near release and you can experience it first hand.

Yeah things will get better in some aspects, but will it be the ones that matter to me?

Who can say.

I know for me, I look at Gears of War and I'm sad, because I spent all my $ on the PS3 and Gears looks like it is including a lot of elements I've basically been waiting my whole life to see.

A game will release with the things you want, just like one will release with the things I want. It's only a matter of time.

Atoyota

01-28-2007, 05:19 PM

Just to remind you, consider how much of a fan of VG you were back in the day. I find it is best not to put too much hope into a game until it is very near release and you can experience it first hand.

Oh yeah I was 100% fanboi, not ashamed though because they advertised a lot of what I was looking for, but compromised them out. I blame that a lot on financial backing and that pressure.

But I knew going in it was a "level game" and way back in my early days on the OVF posted some fears over this. Still some of what they said they would do allieviated part of my fear.

I still feel Diplomacy can pull this game out, and make it last for players longer than the ADV formula of quest/level, because diplomacy is a way to install developer controlled, but player generated content.

Meaning the developer will control what the player can generate in terms of content, but that the player can manage to create it in the first place is a step in the right direction.

Not enough for me though...

I'l keep my eyes glued on DF, it's shown some sign of life and maybe the silence is a good thing. I have no choice either way, I'm not making a game, I'm waiting for one :(

Shadospawn

01-31-2007, 07:22 AM

I expect a second Bliz MMO would share a lot of elements with WoW. You just have to look at their previous games. Diablo, Warcraft, Starcraft. All easily accessible, easy to pick up, easy to play.

I wouldn't expect Bliz to abandon either the player base that they have assembled, or the type of game that they make so well. To try something radically different would be a risky thing to do.

With the money they've made off WoW, they could make a dozen Vanguards without a single subscription and still have made a buttload of money.

Everyone will hope for something different. Some people will get tired of the fantasy-themed settings if they haven't already. (How can you honestly call your game next gen if you still have orcs, kobolds, and goblins in it?)
Some will want a sci-fi game. PvPers will expect some advanced off-the-hook pvp system.
But whatever it is, you can bet it will be something that the majority of WoW subscribers would want to play. You're right... I don't see them changing their target audience.

Bregalad

01-31-2007, 12:27 PM

The meaning of "Third Generation" for Vanguard has been explained from the start in no uncertain terms, and it applies 100%.

If Blizzard new MMO is a direct competitor of WoW, so? A player leaves WoW, subs for the new MMO, Blizzard still gets their money. Besides, if that is the case, there definitely will be an 'access' plan a la SOE.

What kind of a game will it be? Most will expect another mainstream, accessible game, but in a different setting, targeted at those who would play WoW but don't like 'that elf stuff'.

A more interesting thought is that, having captured the mainstream, Blizzard will set out to scoop the 'grognard', essentially aiming at the same audience as Vanguard. But if Vanguard is a success with its core group, it will be tough to beat - just like WoW is tough to beat at mainstream. Blizzard stigma will be a major detriment here, not an asset.

As a side note, an MMO setting I would love to see, and which (I think) is a VERY fertile MMO ground, is Battletech. I believe Microsoft holds keys to that license, however.

Atoyota

01-31-2007, 12:58 PM

The meaning of "Third Generation" for Vanguard has been explained from the start in no uncertain terms, and it applies 100%.

Actually I feel their definition evolved as the game was developed; But not debating the use of their buzzwords.

Blizz has tons of revenue and a guaranteed income for quite a few years with WoW, to prop up anything they desire.

I feel they will most likely follow the tried and true, but can't rule out something "different". They have the bankroll, and can afford the risk. Just depends on their willingness to gamble.

By risk i mean something "different".

Seasiu Laitya

01-31-2007, 02:44 PM

rabb1t

01-31-2007, 05:41 PM

As a side note, an MMO setting I would love to see, and which (I think) is a VERY fertile MMO ground, is Battletech. I believe Microsoft holds keys to that license, however.

They do, and they buried it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplayer_BattleTech_3025

I doubt we’ll ever see a Mechwarrior online game, q’neg?

rabb1t

01-31-2007, 05:43 PM

Just because I don't like their product doesn't mean I think any less of their talent.

Ah, but be aware that just about all of the creative force behind that "talent" left Blizzard and formed Flagship Studios. ;)

Not dissing on Blizzard, just saying that it was the 4 that left that really drove the vision and created these beautiful worlds and games. Will Blizzard be able to continue with those visions, and create new ones, without them remains to be seen.

Slide

02-01-2007, 11:30 AM

20 pence on it being an MMOFPS starcraft. And to whoever it was slagging Blizzard off for Warcraft being unoriginal pls try to rememember that WoW was fairly polished and not similar to the previous games Blizzard made, and there's no problem in setting a game in a fully fleshed out universe.

If MS made Flight Simulator Online would you whinge about Cessnas being an original class?

tennex

02-04-2007, 04:19 PM

I really have never been a fan of Warcraft (more of a red alert/starcraft), and would loved for it to have been Diablo 3: Online. I am still 64 in the expansion right now. Probably going to give VG a try again real soon. I just think that MMO's have lost their magical touch with me. I got a late start with WoW waiting on VG to release and made it to level 33 just barely, bored out of mind. Couldn't stand the graphics and the only thing that kept me going was how humorous some of the quest and flavor text were. Plus I had a friend playing it religiously right beside, so I pressed on. I discovered battlegrounds and fell in love with the game. Organized PvP that is challenging and actually has a goal, as opposed to world gankfest. The game makes alot of sense. Character specialization was an enhanced version of the Diablo 2 skill system, which I enjoyed having more control in my character. Now, the newness feel for all that is getting old and it doesn't help with the current state of the warrior (a scope beyond this post). Still debating whether to reroll WoW or start VG. I have pondered for the longest now, will we ever see a new genre for games?

Atoyota

02-04-2007, 05:07 PM

I agree, that's been my problem... they all (MMO's) seem so stale.

The "only" game that I can look back on (but can't go back to) and still feel it would give me what I need was again... UO.

Here (http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/113698/page/1) a recent MMOrpg artical on UO's facelift, and about 4 posts into the thread my reply (using my nickname Zitch). I have posts scattered throughout that thread, and see many that agree, some that don't "get it", and others that are happy with the way things are.

Anyways.... "Darkfall"

Bregalad

02-06-2007, 04:51 PM

They do, and they buried it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplayer_BattleTech_3025

I doubt we’ll ever see a Mechwarrior online game, q’neg?
neg. LotR online was started as Middle Earth online, and at some point was buried. The viability of the title aside, project has been resurrected, albeit under different name. (likely due to popularity surge brought by the movies).

The Battletech project may have been canned, but the license is not something you can just 'bury'. If someone comes to MS with a design document that looks promising, they might choose to take another spin at it.

About 'the stigma'. Blizzard was always known for games that were immediately accessible, with not too many options to choose from, so one could jump right in. Warcraft, Diablo, Starcraft - never took a peek at the manual, just installed and played. And in MMO area, Blizzard and WoW are synonyms. So yes, there is a stigma, a certain expectation from a product they make. You know, if McDonalds decided to serve gourmet French or Japanese cuisine, it would raise quite a few eyebrows.

rabb1t

02-06-2007, 08:55 PM

neg. LotR online was started as Middle Earth online, and at some point was buried. The viability of the title aside, project has been resurrected, albeit under different name. (likely due to popularity surge brought by the movies).

Kind of a side note, but yeah, the original Sierra design, circa 2000, was the version I was most interested in. For those who don't know it was going to have 100% PvP possibility, yet there was this ... I don't know what to call it ... NPCs could 'perceive' PKing and they would report you to city guards. Bounty system, that's it. So those who did PKing would be reported, their rep would go up, bounties would be put on them, and players could freely PK them back with no penalties. Death was also going to be perma-death, with long periods of travel between areas. So, it was entirely possible you could have been wounded and slowly bled to death, or run out of provisions along your travels and starve to death, etc. Also there was to be an inheritance system in place, so you always had a 'next' character ready. When your main died, the next char would become active and an item or two would automatically be bumped down from the main.

They had some really interesting ideas, and Wiki or somewhere else likely has info on it. But yeah, at the time I guess the early surveys showed such a game would not be well received by the public and it was dropped. Later on, as mentioned due to the ensuing hype of the movies, it was picked back up and given to Turbine.

Atoyota

02-07-2007, 11:44 AM

They had some really interesting ideas, and Wiki or somewhere else likely has info on it. But yeah, at the time I guess the early surveys showed such a game would not be well received by the public and it was dropped. Later on, as mentioned due to the ensuing hype of the movies, it was picked back up and given to Turbine.

yeah that does sound interesting.

Pity developers pay attention to surveys, and don't "take the gamble" on doing something revolutionary and or independant of trends.

Understood as there is a lot of time and cash on the line, but still gutless IMO.

rabb1t

02-07-2007, 03:39 PM

Unless they could have gotten the UO crowd in I agree that it would have been a mistake at the time. Back circa 2000 people didn't really want perma-death nor 8 real world hours travel time (part of the reason for dropping the project was the scope was just way too large). It probably wouldn't have done well at all back then.

However, now, with all games focusing on such short periods and no real death penalties, it probably would be welcomed by a small community with open arms for being different.

Atoyota

02-07-2007, 03:52 PM

However, now, with all games focusing on such short periods and no real death penalties, it probably would be welcomed by a small community with open arms for being different.

AKA Darkfall

Recent artical I may have posted about here on mmorpg.com about UO's facelift. My nick over there is Zitch, and I posted about how such a facelift would'nt help the current UO much (IMO). Some agreed, some did'nt get it, and some were happy with UO, and the possibility of newer nicer graphics (with mythic doing the work I think)

Here's (http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/113698) the thread

I doubt even then, "in UO's day", many would opt for perma death, but the feature you described is interesting... of hand me down or inherited belongings. That and UO was not known for difficult travel... in fact the recall spell was what helped make UO a fun "pick up and play" style game.

No travel time neccesary to get into some action, it was pretty quick. It's just when you got there, you could be into a bargain you had'nt planned on, which could lead to unexpected time spent, or cutting your losses as opposed to spending more time. It was'nt travel, and i always liked the recall or gate spells. It left content for me to explore when i had nothing better to do.

samblack

02-15-2007, 04:18 PM

I don't know what most of you think about Blizzard,but it's a very successfull company.I never played WoW but used to play the Diablo games and loved them.

Considering how much income they are making from WoW,Blizzard for the most part has unlimited fund's that they can invest for the developement of there next MMO.To put it short it will most likely kick but.

rabb1t

02-15-2007, 04:24 PM

Actually most of that money goes to Vivindi.

Slide

02-20-2007, 09:06 AM

Actually most of that money goes to Vivindi.

To clarify it further, all of the profits go to Vivendi which is massively in debt, they are like 0.5 billion in debt or so and most if not all of the profits from WoW go towards debt repayment. Sucks to be Blizzard imo.

Zahrim

02-20-2007, 03:32 PM

Well whatever it'll be, I bet I'll have to hit the Turbo button on my 486 to max the graphics!

/drool

Derf

02-21-2007, 05:50 PM

I'm enjoying VG, but would like something new in the MMO envrionment. DF holds no appeal to me, AoC looks all right but it's just another fantasy based MMO. I don't think I can expect what I want ever. I would really like to see a sci-fi based game based on the old Traveller RPG system, make it all skill based, hide all stats, give ship travel with chances of random encounters and give planets to explore. This wouldn't fly because these games are very expensive to produce, and without an adequate pay off no one will take many risks. Starcraft or any other existing IP just doesn't cut if for me. I won't be playing LOTR, I won't play STO and I can't think of any other license I want to play.

Atoyota

02-21-2007, 07:33 PM

Well whatever it'll be, I bet I'll have to hit the Turbo button on my 486 to max the graphics!

/drool
LOL yeah I remember that...

Thing about it was you hit it once and left it (forever) :)
Seriously, when I had my model 30 IBM (286) I thought that would be all anyone ever needed. At least in the "home".

Boy was I wrong!

Jinpo

03-01-2007, 12:40 PM

Why not a diablo mmo? Or diablo III already? sheesh.

rabb1t

12-13-2007, 07:58 AM

Blizzard's New MMO Not Related To WoW
The newly-merged company still plans to branch out with its next online game. (http://pc.ign.com/articles/841/841058p1.html)

December 12, 2007 - Blizzard has confirmed that it is working on a new massively multiplayer online game not connected to the World of Warcraft universe, according to a post on the official WoW message boards earlier this month.

Reported today by Wired's Game|Life blog, the assurance is music to the ears of MMO junkies jonesing for a new drug from the online gaming world's biggest brand.

In response to questions on the WoW boards about a recent job posting, Blizzard community rep Drysc confirmed that the company "an unannounced next-gen MMO." Anticipating the inevitable turn the thread would take, Drysc adds, "and that doesn't mean it's an expansion for World of Warcraft either."

In January, IGN reported that Blizzard (now part of the recently-formed Activision Blizzard) had plans for a new MMO and that it would not be based on WoW or anything too similar to the company's past projects.

Fears that the company's recent merger with Activision would lead to an endless churn of WoW clones would appear to be unfounded. A Blizzard rep was unavailable for immediate comment.

Hum... still say it could be World of Starcraft, but with Starcraft 2 on the way (and with it being so similar to 1) that may not be the case... I suppose World of Diablo wouldn't be impossible, but I'd think that would be too similar to WoW. I don't know. I'd think any fantasy game may be looked at as too similar to WoW unless they do something pretty different.

It would be nice if we had something more than just 'it's not WoW'. I mean seriously guys, what ya said here in this announcement isn't really new. Give us a concept art, a name, something.

akuthia

12-13-2007, 10:15 AM

acrobat

12-13-2007, 12:01 PM

From the company that brought us Warcraft, Warcraft II, Warcraft III, and World of Warcraft.lol yep. And soon to be starcraft 2 I think.

Why not a diablo mmo? Or diablo III already? sheesh.

I think that is Hellgate: London.

Kurron Nye

12-13-2007, 03:34 PM

Blizzard's New MMO Not Related To WoW
The newly-merged company still plans to branch out with its next online game. (http://pc.ign.com/articles/841/841058p1.html)

Hum... still say it could be World of Starcraft, but with Starcraft 2 on the way (and with it being so similar to 1) that may not be the case... I suppose World of Diablo wouldn't be impossible, but I'd think that would be too similar to WoW. I don't know. I'd think any fantasy game may be looked at as too similar to WoW unless they do something pretty different.

It would be nice if we had something more than just 'it's not WoW'. I mean seriously guys, what ya said here in this announcement isn't really new. Give us a concept art, a name, something.

You actually make a case for a Starcraft MMO because Blizzard/Activision could do concurrent marketing of both products (more bang for the buck).

The risk for Blizzard is they can wind up competing with themselves..that is a new MMO that has the same quality levels of WoW could be the only thing that could cause a serious decline in the WoW player base, and who better to pull players OUT of WoW than Blizzard? (especially if they go off an make another fantasy MMO)

Please God, dont let it be another fantasy MMO!!

How bout an Old West MMO..something we havent actually seen before? (I know orgininality in MMO design is passe these days)

AsheMan

12-13-2007, 04:13 PM

How bout an Old West MMO..something we havent actually seen before? (I know orgininality in MMO design is passe these days)

A Wild West MMO would be pretty cool but how would it fair with Blizzard's Asian market?

rhagz

12-13-2007, 05:30 PM

Kurron Nye

12-14-2007, 01:35 PM

99% chance it's Starcraft. Sci-fi MMOs are finally catching on after the failures of AO and SWG. Starcraft 2 will be out next year and will allow them to set the stage via the plotline to allow for an MMO.

You make a good point. With long time successes like Eve Online, and now Tabula Rasa doing quite well, it shows there is hope for the sci-fi MMO genre. (not to mention Stargate Worlds and Star Trek online in the works)

I agree totally about Starcraft, its yet another blockbuster franchise which could take over the sci-fi MMO genre similar to how the Warcraft franchise translated into a blockbuster MMO.

Now that would be unprecendented, the same company totally dominating both major MMO genres.

rhagz

12-14-2007, 02:21 PM

Well, I wouldn't call sci-fi a major mmo genre. But it would be with a SC MMOFPS.

rabb1t

12-14-2007, 02:55 PM

i donno rabb1t, it says its "not related to past projects" may very well be something entirely new.

Hum, true true, missed that bit. :)

I think that is Hellgate: London.

Mythos (http://mythos.com/) is a lot closer.

Though I could see Blizzard doing a Diablo III at some point. Considering they are focusing on SC2 right now, we probably realistically won’t see Diablo III until at least 2010, if not later.

Please God, dont let it be another fantasy MMO!!

Yeah, agreed there. We just have way too many ‘standard fantasy’ MMOs out there. Now, if they did something different, like how Dark Sun flipped D&D all around, sure, that would probably be ok. But something ‘mainstream fantasy’… plenty of those already.

A Wild West MMO would be pretty cool but how would it fair with Blizzard's Asian market?

There was one in the works once upon a time; "Priest". It originated from manga I believe.

http://pc.ign.com/objects/550/550044.html