WOW sucks.> Anyone else with me?

[Eron]

Well. Played WOW for about a month.. And although I think there are some great ideas in the game, it turns out to be simply another MMORPG..

First of all, whats with the enemy fishing you have to do.. The AI goes aggressive when you are within a certain distance, so it feels like your fishing out monsters all the time..

No player housing? What a crock . This is a persistant world?!? NOT..

I could go on about what I like or dislike.. But I guess overall I just hate MMORPGS.. I am just wondering what everyone else thinks..

 

[Nicolai]

I'll join your club if I get paid for it.

 

[suibhne]

I don't require money, exactly, but you could gain my membership by setting me up with a nice girl.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Yep I agree with you. The game held a lot of promise during beta but Tigole (the lead designer) decided to put things way out of whack (so to speak) by implementing an entirely new stat/monster system and getting rid of all the skills. It's like a glorified EQ clone with better features than EQ, now, instead of being the game it had so much promise to be: an MMORPG that was different from the rest.

Sure, it doesn't take long to level up, but gone are the days of being able to attack a group of monsters (possible in beta), and have a furious, memorable battle with little medding time afterwards. Hell, you used to be able to regenerate both your mana and health during combat so the game was never boring, and it was always very well paced. I would have paid for a game like that, but now I just don't know. Warriors and Mages are worse off than they've ever been and Blizzard certainly doesn't have the excuse of calling the blatant imbalances a part of the beta-testing process anymore.

 

[Andyman Messiah]

I'm with you, but only because I dislike MMORPG's in general and think WoW is just more of the same. It might outsmart EQ2, but that's not saying much.

 

[Elwro]

I've never played any MMORPG and the last Warcraft game I tried was Warcraft 2, so I can declare that I agree with you.

 

[mr. lamat]

i am enjoying eq2 at the moment and i don't see that changing.

 

[Flink]

I've enjoyed WarCraft since the first game back in 94. WC2 was my favorite game for a long, long time. I also agree, the game is just more of the same. No innovation, nothing creative, it's a clone of all the other boing treadmill MMO's out there.

I mean how many 'kill X number of Y critter" 'quests' can a man take!?

 

[almondblight]

I'm not paying monthly for an updated version of Diablo II with crappier quests and skill systems.

 

[Sovy Kurosei]

The quests you'll find while playing World of WarCraft.

- Defense of the Kings Lands, 4 quests in total. The first three quests requires you to kill 20 troggs of one difficulty level, the next another 20 troggs of a slightly more difficulty, and then 20 more troggs that are even more difficult (at least 60 in total). The fourth quest asks you to kill off 3 'unique' troggs.

- The Defias Brotherhood quests in Westfall mimics the previous quest I listed out in having you to go out and kill so many Defias thieves, then going out and killing slightly more difficult defias thieves, and so on and so forth.

- Most quests can be summed up into two categories, either kill so many of monster A, or collect so many items that are dropped from monster B. Escort quests are at least interesting in the respect they break up the monotony of grinding through your "bread and butter" quests. Assassination quests (killing a "unique" monster) usually signifies the end of a quest with a good decent reward.

I feel like I have to push myself now while playing it, and would have likely dropped it altogether if I didn't happen to be in a guild, which is probably the only thing that is making this game fun.

 

[xemous]

After playing 3 weeks of world of warcraft I went back to diablo2 online.

 

[Sol Invictus]

The facial hair on the human males is just their to make up for their hare-lip.

 

[Eron]

After playing 3 weeks of world of gaycraft I went back to diablo2 online. damn fine free mmo. I quit around mid 30ies, the horsemen warrior.

The charactors look ugly, especialy the humans, jeaz, who came up with the facial hair on those.

But the enviroment is awsome, to get those types of effects in such a graphicly worthless engine. Those guys have some great artistic talent there. Aside from the medicore - downright stupid charactor models.

I agree 100%.. I am playing d2 online too!! Hardcore bnet..

Gaycraft is pretty much d2 wrapped in glitter..

 

[CrusaderTemplar]

im with u all. i hate mmorpgs period. too poor to afford the monthy fees. gameplay suxxors. and about D2. Too Boring. give me some turn based games :D

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

I don't think I need to comment. :D

 

[DrattedTin]

Sure, it doesn't take long to level up, but gone are the days of being able to attack a group of monsters (possible in beta), and have a furious, memorable battle with little medding time afterwards. Hell, you used to be able to regenerate both your mana and health during combat so the game was never boring, and it was always very well paced.

What sort of monsters are you talking about? It's actually quite possible to take out groups of greenies, and often the camps can be broken up into two aggro groups of just two or three. Duo parties can pretty much rely on raping camps. There is only two things I would change: relegate elite mobs entirely to instances, and make gray-con mobs cower and refuse to auto-attack (as in EQ2). Otherwise, WoW is a gorgeous game that improves on all MMORPGs that came before in almost every area.

Ohh yeah, and I've seen paladins soloing three mobs of higher levels than them. Paladins are an extreme example, though, and definitely the most unbalanced class.

However, on the subject of innumerable "kill mob" quests, how is any other action RPG different? Diablo? I think what people dislike here is abbreviated quests where they are told nothing other than "go here and kill". I agree that some of the quests suck in that aspect, but as you go up in levels they get a lot more interesting. One example I can think of offhand is The Legend of Stalvan.

 

[Sol Invictus]

The Legend of Stalvan is a 5-tiered fetch quest, that thankfully comes with a good storyline.

 

[DrattedTin]

Precisely my point. Pretty much all quests in CRPGs (with a few exceptions in games like Arcanum or BGII) are Kill Mob, Fetch, or Escort (arguably, Escort could be defined as a combination of Fetch and Kill). What elevates them from tediusness is most often the writing.

 

[Sovy Kurosei]

Ohh yeah, and I've seen paladins soloing three mobs of higher levels than them. Paladins are an extreme example, though, and definitely the most unbalanced class.

Paladins aren't ridiculously unbalanced. Their class feature is survivability, but the DPS they put out isn't too good, they can't pull any mobs except by creeping closer to them to get their attention and they can't hold aggro up at the upper levels. All the bitching you are hearing now is from people in their 20s and 30s and they see how well a Paladin shines when soloing.

I agree that some of the quests suck in that aspect, but as you go up in levels they get a lot more interesting.

I have hit level 42 on my main character, a mage, and the quests follow the same pattern of being either a FedEx quest or Kill X mobs quest that you would find at level 23. No, really, it follows the same pattern, only with a bit more advanced "storyline" which went missing as soon as I left Durotar and the Wailing Caverns.

There is no excuse to have shitty quests at early levels either, just because they are the early levels.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Honestly, Paladins and Shamans are fine classes, and arguably the most balanced at this point. Priests and Rogues are decent, as well. I can't say much about Rangers and Warlocks because I don't know how they are, but it's the Mages and Warrior who are currently completely imbalanced, in a way that makes them suck. Warriors cant tank well, taunt is near worthless and their damage output is atrocious unless they use certain equipment. Most of their talents are useless. Mages use too much mana for spells that don't do enough damage, and can't regenerate it fast enough.

I wish they'd just fix those two instead of making them worse with every patch.

 

[Sovy Kurosei]

You forgot about druids and hunters, Rex. Although the druids got some loving to their feral forms last patch, so now they can tank one second and heal the next, so to speak. Warlocks have trouble in the upper levels with soul shards. They can't get soul shards from killing other players, plus the fact that you can go through a soul shard every 30 seconds in heavy combat situations (Think Battlegrounds, whenever it gets implemented), add in the fact that 1 soul shard takes up one inventory slot... Well, that is a pretty explicit recipe for problems when you ding to 60.

Mages have bad downtime. I'd much prefer having 3 minutes of near-continous battle than 2 two minutes of fighting and 1 minute of downtime for the same reward in experience and items. Not so problematic until you start grouping, when you have to tell your group to wait up so that you can quaff another water or two to fill up your mana bar. I always felt like I was the factor keeping our group behind in instances.

Hunters can't group worth shit, at least at upper levels. Everybody knows that short of a complete idiot that pet will cause a 50 mob train that will ass rape everyone and everything in a 10 mile radius.

 

[Sol Invictus]

What are Hunters like, solo-wise? I haven't played the game since beta and don't know how much they've changed it.

I'd also like to know if Hunter pets have skills other than 'Growl'.

 

[DrattedTin]

Paladins aren't ridiculously unbalanced. Their class feature is survivability, but the DPS they put out isn't too good, they can't pull any mobs except by creeping closer to them to get their attention and they can't hold aggro up at the upper levels. All the bitching you are hearing now is from people in their 20s and 30s and they see how well a Paladin shines when soloing.

Let's look at this in a linear fashion.

Paladins get:

+tanking
+healing
+ressurection
+buffs
-pulls

Clerics get:
+healing
+ressurection
+buffs
-fragility

Warriors get:
+tanking
-everythingelse

The paladin has the features of many other classes, with no real disadvantages beyond the inability to pull easily.

I play a druid. It is true that we can tank like a paladin and heal like a cleric. However, we can't do both at the same time. This makes our survivability really hard to ensure. For example, sure, you can buff yourself up crazily, pop rejuv and regrowth (for two +regen temp buffs) and switch to bearform... and you will be invulnerable for 10 secs. However, if you're tanking as many mobs as a paladin will regularly, your HP is going down fast. So you get to half, where a paladin might start to think about healing, but wait... if you shapeshift back to normal form to heal, you're going to be back to shitty damage reduction. Not only that, if you don't grab the Shapeshifting talent to its max to reduce the casting delay after shifting, you're fucked. It's very unlikely you'll be able to recover if you shift back.

If the bear form could even do something as small as cast rejuv, the druid's effectiveness would be increased twofold. Add regrowth or healing touch, and it becomes exponential.

As for hunters, there's no reason for what you just mentioned. Set the pet to passive and simply use the attack command, and you have no problem. However, it is true that hunters generally add nothing to a party's dynamic; no real buffs, nothing but damage, which rogues or mages or whatnot can offer better.

Warlocks are great soloers in that they are almost as invincible as the paladin, with a lot more tactical options and pulling ability thrown in; the voidwalker gets an insane amount of HP and soak relative to its level. The only thing warlocks have to watch out for is the tendency of the voidwalker's taunt to fail reliably on anything more than +1 levels above it.

Rogues... rogues are just BADASS if they're well-equipped. I play a pair of duo rogues with a friend, and we rape anything short of elites. There's even a pretty hilarious route you can go if you want to have two rogues who can take out elites (Preparation + Improved Ambush should tell you all you need to know).

 

[almondblight]

Precisely my point. Pretty much all quests in CRPGs (with a few exceptions in games like Arcanum or BGII) are Kill Mob, Fetch, or Escort (arguably, Escort could be defined as a combination of Fetch and Kill). What elevates them from tediusness is most often the writing.

Well, the whole point of a MMORPG should be that player creativity will cut the tedium. I've heard A Tale in the Desert does some good stuff with this. Unfortunately, most companies make MMORPG's like a crappy but pretty version of Rogue with an IRC channel. Blizzard certainly has a highly polished version of this poor design, but it doesn't change the fact that it is a poor design.

 

[Sovy Kurosei]

What are Hunters like, solo-wise? I haven't played the game since beta and don't know how much they've changed it.

I've only played on to level 8 in open beta, so I can only give my observations. Solo wise, they are pretty good. The pet tanks, the hunter fires his gun. I have a warlock in his 20s, so I can imagine how similar the play styles would be. Nobody likes to have a hunter in their group, not since their pet usually screws up with path finding and ends up attracting a train of mobs to you.

DrattedTin:

The paladins are alright. If they are so damn good, then you can play as one.

It is true that we can tank like a paladin and heal like a cleric. However, we can't do both at the same time.

That is right, you are either tanked up or you are a healer. Paladins can only give half-assed healing and at upper levels can't tank since they have no way of keeping aggro.

Set the pet to passive and simply use the attack command, and you have no problem.

The issue is with pathfinding. It screws up occasionally and the pet wanders, attracting mobs. It doesn't matter if the pet is in defensive or passive mode.