| The MMO forums and blogs are hosting plenty of heated discussions focusing on the swirling vortex of big name fantasy MMOs that dominate the scene today and in the immediate future. Right now the big 4 in the spotlight are Lord of the Rings Online, Vanguard, EverQuest II, and World of Warcraft. Eve Online, Guild Wars and Tabula Rasa are key titles on scene that have buzz around them as well, but those first 4 go head to head in the traditional fantasy MMO market while the other 3 fill other gaming needs. Let's take a look at the state of these core 4 and how they stack up against one another. First, we should get WoW out of the way. Is no news good news for Blizzard? Since the release of the Burning Crusade the attention being paid to World of Warcraft has been limited to Outland guides, the new arena system and a few minor fix and balance patches. In fact, the small amount of editorial content written to date points to a decline in interest among many hardcore players. This is due to the 'more of the same' approach that Blizzard has taken with its long overdue expansion. The graphics are nicer and it is as polished as ever, but everyone seems very "ho-hum" about the whole thing. Even the most devoted diary blogs and podcasters seem to be casting about for something to keep the WoW fires burning. Unfortunately, Blizzard left a little kindling in the expansion but very little bonfire material. Meanwhile, EverQuest II, which has maintained good subscriber-ship without becoming a mainstream success, has reached a level of polish equal to World of Warcraft, and people are starting to take notice. Fans of EQ2 are trumpeting its merits, and rightfully so. It has great depth of content and nice balance between the fast leveling curve of WoW and the grind of its predecessor. Like WoW, its established lore is one of its strong suits, but prior to the most recent expansion SOE hadn't leveraged it properly. The people at SOE have finally figured out just how important that familiar lore is, and they're putting it to good use. Still, the combat system leaves something to be desired. EQ2 has struck a perfect balance between the combat pacing and tactics of EQ1 and the hack and slash festivals that are the hallmark of the Korean MMOs (like Lineage), but somewhere along the way they missed the mark. World of Warcraft strove to hit that same sweet spot, and they nailed it perfectly. Where did EQ2 go wrong? What it is that Blizzard did right? Concrete differences between the battle mechanics in each are hard to pinpoint but the fun quotient clearly favors WoW in this case. Then there is the new kid on the block. Vanguard, a monstrous and profound undertaking that is any but "another fantasy MMO". Or is it? The first thing that has to be said about Sigil is that the tendency to release an unpolished product has persisted through their transition from the EverQuest team at SOE. Much like EQ it has issues both small and moderately annoying. These issues are numerous enough that it adds up to a collection of flaws contributing to the widely held belief that Vanguard needed another 6 months of development. Despite these concerns Vanguard has a magic that cannot be ignored. This magic is not unlike the magic that its spiritual predecessor (EverQuest) captured. Much of this magic formula seems to be directly related to the lack of instancing in favor of an entirely persistent world. Oddly enough, some of Vanguard's strengths are related directly to modern MMO 'features' that Sigil left out. These include unlocked combat states, unbalanced class capabilities, and hazard-free penalty systems. It is counter-intuitive to imagine that making a game harder adds to the enjoyment - strike that, it is more intuitive than one might think because making a game more unpredictable and diverse is a positive thing. In WoW and EQ2 the possible scenarios and outcomes vary little. Open ended systems such as Ultima Online, Eve Online, EverQuest and Vanguard have received praise from dedicated gamers year after year. Maybe the magic doesn't have to be new game features, polish, or cool art. Perhaps players ultimately want freedom, conflict, and unprecedented random events that are memorable. Later this summer Lord of the Rings Online will open the gates to Middle Earth. Based on the three titles already described, there seems to be little room left for another fantasy MMO, even one backed by the lore of Bilbo and Frodo. Out of these four fantasy MMOs LotRO is the only one with the luxury of a well known intellectual property behind it, and yet, Blizzard and Sony Online Entertainment have already proved that you don't need a familiar storyline to become a celebrated MMO. Further supporting that theory are past IP-heavy flops such as Matrix Online, Star Wars Galaxies and Dungeons and Dragons Online. The biggest problem with early play testing is the lack of any fresh ideas within the game play. The combat captures none of the strategical and tactical elements of WoW, nor does it have the freedoms of Vanguard. The character classes feel a bit wrong and clash entirely with the 'concentrated cool' found in WoW classes. Will the Tolkien lore be enough to push this one past its adversaries or will Turbine, a company in dire need of a win, bomb despite the licensing wizardry of its CEO? And there you have it. More orcs, rats, and elves than any one gamer should try to swallow in a single year. Add on Age of Conan, Gods and Heroes and Warhammer Online and you have a recipe for a veritable clash of titans like we've never seen in the gaming world before. The First Person Shoot, Real Time Strategy and Adventure genres have never had so many cards in play at one single time, but this year we're going to see a lot of action in the MMO space and it will be exciting to see how it plays out. |
RSS - Blog/Articles