Massively

You demonstrate how much you know about warhammer when you call Order "alliance". Luckily Order isn't a fluffy band of banal boy scouts like alliance is.
Anyway, I've been testing the two classes fairly intensively (having wanted to play the KOTBS since it was announced long ago). While the KOTBS is relatively similar to the Chosen (which isn't a bad thing at all, given how much an aura tank, and human at that, is needed and wanted on the order side), the black guard has a definately different gameplay compared to the Iron Breaker. They both are definately enjoyable experiences to play and add a lot to the variety and choices that Warhammer Online offers in term of classes to both sides.

The fact that they have been added so fast simply demonstrate that Mythic is working hard and efficently to make a better game on all levels.

My confusion was only part to how closely these two games resemble one another, which is not a good place for WAR to be, when one is the run away leader of the pack, at least LOTRO stands alone in terms of it's appeal.

Mythic already had to cut content and classes to get this out of the door, and all you are getting now is the stuff you should have had 2 months ago, and players are supposed to be excited by this 'addition'?

However, what about the other capital cities, and more than 2 classes were cut from the game before launch? So for those still enthusiastic about this game, I think it's a great thing, but those numbers have definitely taken a nose dive in recent weeks.

Like I said I hope Mythic can pull this around, but on the server I've played on, it's a hell of a job even finding other folks at times. Sad, but true, as I really like the Warhammer IP.

I would like to see your souce on such "skyfalling" news. because you know, xfire isn't exactly the most reliable one around. Seen from inside, the warhammer community seems definately solid, and Mythic didn't even play the card of free trial accounts/buddy codes yet, while all their competition already did that. This, combined with the holidays and the first major content patch, makes for a lot of potential still to be expressed.

WAR and WOW resembling each other? That must be one of the most laughable statements i've seen lately. They have an absolutely opposite game style, one being prevalently PvE (with an absolutely insufficent PvP) and the other being prevalently PvP, and they cater to very different crowds. On the other end, LOTRO, being prevalently PvE as well, is much more similar to WoW than WAR is.

As of the cut content, it always makes me giggle, since in the end warhammer was launched with more and more varied content than basically every other MMO at launch (wow included), despite the cuts. So anything that gets added from now on is most definately an added bonus over an extremely solid content base.

Dude, you've totally got your blinders on. WAR launched with more content than WoW has now? What are you smoking with that insane nonsense? WAR had a cool IP in a grind-heavy game with piss poor writing, and even more lackluster PvE content. Now I undestand that it's a PvP focused game, but all that equates to is more grinding in instanced scenarios and keep sieges that consist of hanging out outside the walls before running in trying to out-zerg your opponents. You might want to think about just how "varied" the content truly is before you make such audacious claims.

Abriael, there is not one item in your response I can possibly agree 100% on really. I'd like to see your source for the number of players and current accounts too, because the last official information is over 3 months old, and Blizzard recently gave some figures as to the number of players returning to WoW. While Blizzard maybe can not be trusted, the same criticism can be leveled at Mythic also.

I completely understand you like this game, but let's not try and fool ourselves here, we are both intelligent people. Content doesn't have to be 'expressed' as you say, that's half the problem here, it needs to be proven reliably and regularly, Mythic has no history other than cutting content right now and the addition of a battleground or two.

Also looking at a community form the inside can be as short-sighted as looking at community from the outside. The numbers are down, it's hard as hell to do things in groups and people are cynical about the content 'additions'. My story is that my WAR sub ran out after the free period, and I didn't even really notice. Never had that happen before in an MMO, pretty sad that my enthusiasm dropped so quickly.

While I commend you for sticking up for 'your game' and I too really wish WAR was better, I can't agree that it offers anything new or exciting with the preferred ways to level in WoW style battlegrounds without the same depth of PvE or openness in the world that WoW has. WAR is like a bunch of maps cut and pasted together, and the linear direction of PvE gameplay has alienated people, PvP fan or not, they all pay subs.

I also agree WAR has more classes than WoW, but do I really need 20 odd ways of still being bored and alone? I don't know how you measure 'amounts of content' other than to say it's purely subjective unless supoorted by anacdotal evidense, so can't agree or disagree here.

In WAR now I have linear maps with 5-10 quests per hub, with every 30 mins to an hour, a new group grind quest, so kill quests, and if I'm lucky a battleground. If I'm really lucky there is a chance to defend a castle that no one really cares about, or to stand no chance to take a keep because no one else is online. The best thing is, I have to go through all of this on a conveyor belt!

I'm happy to entertain intelligent discussion on the subject, but from my experiences and the reaction to the community in general, I don't think my thoughts are too extreme.

@Tasogare: you might want to learn to read before criticizing other people. War had more content AT LAUNCH than WoW AT LAUNCH.
As of the writing, your statement is equally laughable. Warhammer's questlines benefit from excellent writing (that you probably didn't even read, but you can't resist from talking out of your rear it seems) and one of the best and most detailed fantasy backstories ever written. while wow's PvE is hindered by the fact that it sports one of the weakest and most lackluster backstories and backgrounds ever seen in a fantasy MMORPG (a warped version of a backstory which is a warped anf pre-teen-ized version of another).

@Mr Angry: I wonder how can you say that the last account data is 3 months old, since the game has just turned 2 months old 4 days ago. Also, Mark Jacobs commented on account retention (which was stated as higher than DAOC's 72%) after Mr. Goon Morhaime went out of his way to give us absolutely marginal data that he really has no grasp on (since many people leaving wow simply sell their accounts, and they get reactivated simply because others buy them).

I really wonder how can you even talk about Warhammer's community, since you haven't been in it lately.

The world is much less linear than many, due to the ability of moving from a pairing to the other, and the contents are most definately abundant and varied (Quests, Public quests, lairs, Open RvR, Scenarios, City sieges, keep sieges, and some of the best dungeons ever seen in a MMO, many other SH, blizzard included, would have a lot to learn, for instance, from the sheer scope of Gunbad, or from the beauty of Lost vale). This without even mentioning the rewards given to exploring which, due to the tome, are higher and more interesting than in basically every other game. Warhammer's world is linear only if you WANT to play it like that. Doesn't take much to walk out of bounds and discover a lot of things, which other worlds definately lack.

You seem to be very keen on talking for the "community in general", but I'm afraid that you lack the ability to do so. Expecially since it definately looks like your experience in the game has been superficial, at most.

So the big three has nothing to do with popularity, only entry price, production, and development costs? Why not include AoC and Tabula Rasa then? Is it because they're not popular enough? ;)

Honestly, this just strikes me as a little bit of the blinders-on mentality. There's a huge ecosystem of MMOs out there, and some of them dwarf all the AAA retail games in popularity aside from WoW.

--matt

Matt you make some interesting points and not something I've really though about before with regards the content on massively.com, it does seem singularly focused on the commercial sector.

I've been shocked to hear just how popular some of these free to play games are, really huge numbers and in some cases, it's pretty high quality stuff.

You can't compare the userbase of a free to play MMORPG with that of a pay to play one. Free to play ones have an usually bloated userbase because people don't feel the need to deactivate their accounts, even if they play once a months or don't play at all.

It's easy for free to play MMOs to "look" popular, but their real popularity isn't definately shown by the number of subscribers.

Abriael, I'm talking about the active players of Runescape, not dead accounts. Last I heard, they have 5.4 million active players (they've got well over 50 million accounts, but as you rightly point out, those are not relevant). That may even be slightly more active players than WoW has in the Western world.

Further, Runescape has over a million people paying a monthly subscription. That's more subscribers than either Warhammer or LOTR have (though Runescape's subscription costs less/month).



--matt

"Active" accounts in a F2P game are much different from those in a P2P game. One that just logs in once a month to say hello to his clan mates would still be considered active, while in a P2P game he would just cancel his sub. Also, a game whose (optional) sub costs 5 dollars (for most) can't really be compared to one that costs 15.