Wrath of the Lich King: November 13th

i quit wow, had fun, but arena was end game for me and that got boring/annoying fast... 2s (druid(me)/lock) 2k rating early season on bg9 so we left on a good note.

im sure war is better, but i wont be playing it with sc2 and d3 around the corner and the fact that im a little worn out on mmos atm thanks to wow. grats to blizzard for keeping me away from the competition :p:
 
Falhawk said:
omg BG9??????????????????????
Click to expand...
BG9 is seriously the biggest crock of shit in WoW. I just find it hilarious that some people actually think players there know something that everyone else doesn't. Everyone's copying each others itemization and specs anyway, and WoW PvP is about as formulaic as it gets.

If you aren't a part of that upper echelon of PvPers that transferred to Bloodlust (I'm talking 2400+ top 10 teams) you didn't do anything harder than anyone else did in getting 2050 or 2200, so stop throwing BG9 around so much lmao.

Oh and Tony, so WAR (a pretty nicely polished and complete game) is now not only a WoW clone but an AoC (an unfinished piece of shit) sequel / clone, simply because it's being hyped on the same level? I fail to see how this can end up the same way simply because of that. You have to kind of look at the actual game.
 
Last edited:
no, it only mimics AOC's beta fan fare

they will sell a ton of copies of war just like AOC

nobody will be playing much of it in 6 months though, like AOC


and i agree about battle groups, Cyclone was much more competitive at lower tiers than Bloodlust has been
 
TonyElTigre said:
no, it only mimics AOC's beta fan fare

they will sell a ton of copies of war just like AOC

nobody will be playing much of it in 6 months though, like AOC


and i agree about battle groups, Cyclone was much more competitive at lower tiers than Bloodlust has been
Click to expand...
Yes I understood your point Tony, but my point stands.

Do you think, perhaps, the reason so many people ended up leaving AoC is because of the quality (or lack thereof) of the game / developers?

And do you also think, that maybe a game that is more stable/complete with a more promising DEV team has a chance of lasting a bit longer?

WAR is a different (and better) game, and to expect the same result based on nothing but the hype and not taking the actual gameplay into consideration is retarded. WAR has its share of issues but it's undeniable that it's in a far better state than AoC was at launch.
 
conan failed because it's built around a 2 movie franchise, one of which that sucked. Warhammer will probably do ok because it's got a pretty solid fanbase to begin with from what I've been told, but WoW will still massively dominate the MMORPG market.
 
Fool said:
conan failed because it's built around a 2 movie franchise, one of which that sucked. Warhammer will probably do ok because it's got a pretty solid fanbase to begin with from what I've been told, but WoW will still massively dominate the MMORPG market.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and I don't recall any TWer ever claiming WAR will be anything but a distant second in subscription numbers.

I like Mythic's analogy...WoW is the Beatles and WAR is Led Zeppelin. You are never going to reach the level of success that the Beatles have had, but you can still make a different kind of band and have a good following.
 
Last edited:
There's the whole world out there, and you spend your life playing WoW.

You should be ashamed of yourselves.
 
i'd be more inclined to play war if it had a sense of competition. if it werent for arena in wow i would have quit ages ago.

if they have some sort of a ladder for teams in scenarios im all there :p: although ill probably heavily focus on sc2 anyway. hopefully it wont require 400apm (80% of which was redundant micro) to be competitive like sc1 did... i still want enough energy to masterbate after :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top