Official WarCraft IV Discussion

[Shar Dundred]

@Tauer: It's sadly part of the human mind: The more you have, the more you want. It's not just companies, it's natural for our kind to want more and more.

2. The price. Hey, why dont you give us a fucking ton of money, and even more money monthly, and 45 euros for every expansion, so that you can play this goddamn game? Oh btw, you need to give us something ike, I dont know, 20 euros for faction change, appearance change, character teleportation, race change and name change. Oh btw, you need to give us another 13 euros for fucking GAME TIME! And another 60 euros for some pets. You know what blizzard? Not everybody is rich. Why am I even saying this? It is obvious that you dont have the brain cells to understand it.

Blizzard's answer would be: No one forces you to play it.

Anyway, while I don't care 'bout that since I have no interest in playing this particular MMO and will never have that and while I think this is pretty OT, I'll make the reason more understandable for you since I understand your feelings:
- Expansion cost: While it's cheaper to create a MMO expansion than a game, it affords time and money. They want to get that back while also gaining something from this whole effort.
- Running/Monthly costs: In order to play multiplayer games, you need servers and servers need what? Right, money! And, of course, here as well Blizz wants to get some money out of it over time instead of only once from each user. Also, support creates new costs. Running/monthly costs are the main income of MMOs.
To sum it up: A part of the money is used to cover Blizzard's fixed costs that come with WoW while the other part is to make the game viable. It's ordinary for a company to try and gain something from their products.

If I gave that money to charity, the world would be fucking rich right now.

Nope, because the world is unfair. No need to discuss such a thing.

This game is a freaking crime. It should be put down. It is so fucked up that it makes you look worse than EA.

Putting it down wouldn't help at all. It'd be replaced by another game. And if MMOs generally are put down? People find a new way to squeeze money out of each other.
Also: Nothing, absolutely nothing is worse or looks worse than EA.

 

[hiphop4eva]

Blizzard's answer would be: No one forces you to play it.

Anyway, while I don't care 'bout that since I have no interest in playing this particular MMO and will never have that and while I think this is pretty OT, I'll make the reason more understandable for you since I understand your feelings:
- Expansion cost: While it's cheaper to create a MMO expansion than a game, it affords time and money. They want to get that back while also gaining something from this whole effort.
- Running/Monthly costs: In order to play multiplayer games, you need servers and servers need what? Right, money! And, of course, here as well Blizz wants to get some money out of it over time instead of only once from each user. Also, support creates new costs. Running/monthly costs are the main income of MMOs.
To sum it up: A part of the money is used to cover Blizzard's fixed costs that come with WoW while the other part is to make the game viable. It's ordinary for a company to try and gain something from their products.

They should atleast want less money -_- I dont want to play it either, but its just unbearable to see how much it costs.

Nope, because the world is unfair. No need to discuss such a thing.

I wasnt serious while saying that.

Putting it down wouldn't help at all. It'd be replaced by another game. And if MMOs generally are put down? People find a new way to squeeze money out of each other.

I hope not.

Also: Nothing, absolutely nothing is worse or looks worse than EA.

They used to make good games like Sims 3

 

[OutsiderXE]

There was a time when EA was the best publisher for me. Within only a couple of years they released Sims X, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Dead Space, Mirror's Edge and Battlefield XXXX.

I am currently playing WoW Starter Edition. It's for free up to level 20

 

[Cherrymage]

I doubt that Warcraft 4 will be as good as the good ol' War 3 we have now..

For example, look at Starcraft 2, you need the fucking internet to play even an offline game. Warcraft 4 will also likely to be the same.

And I doubt we will get a World Editor. Even if we did, it will be as complicated and perplexed as SC2 Galaxy Editor.

About the MMORTS thing, we should ONLY add them as a side mode -- something like World Domination mode where you fight for a faction.

Off Topic:

Also: Nothing, absolutely nothing is worse or looks worse than EA.

Agreed.

They used to make good games like Sims 3

But the number of crappy shits they made are more than good games? Like C&C 4, Battlefield 4, tons of FIFA X compared to one Sims 3?

 

[Dr Super Good]

For example, look at Starcraft 2, you need the fucking internet to play even an offline game.

Well you need a "fucking internet" to play Warcraft III if you want to play anything other than campaigns, melee and 3-4 custom maps. If internet was such a problem then you would not be using this internet site now would you?

StarCraft II can be played offline as much as WC3 could after being initially connected. Arcade maps downloaded from being previously online can be played offline. The map editor also works offline after an initial activation. People need to stop trash talking StarCraft II with lies.

All achievements are online only for logical reasons so even brining them up is rubbish.

 

[Cherrymage]

Well you need a "fucking internet" to play Warcraft III if you want to play anything other than campaigns, melee and 3-4 custom maps. If internet was such a problem then you would not be using this internet site now would you?

However, occasionally the internet is down... I have internet, I mean, what if your internet is suddenly down? I don't understand why we need internet to play even an offline, singleplayer game.

It's just for convenience, homie. Calm down please.

 

[chobibo]

@Peas
Always-on DRM is the game's best friend, maybe you can suggest something better to replace that? You know, something that's both a win for them and for you?

 

[Zaramorus]

Im not so hyped for Warcraft IV anyway since sadly graphics>gameplay nowdays. I mean if it has the same graphics as Starcraft 2 Wings of Liberty i think that was the first expansion then its good since i can then run it at lowest graphics.

 

[OutsiderXE]

It's blizzard. Their latest game Overwatch looks like a 2008 game. if it has the Heroes of the Storm graphics it will be fine for me, but I would assume that they will create a new engine or modifythe SC2 engine heavily.

 

[Dr Super Good]

I don't understand why we need internet to play even an offline, singleplayer game.

You do not, which is why you can play SC2 in offline mode. I have no idea what idiot told you otherwise but as long as you log on every so often (every 30 days?) there is no problem playing it in offline mode. When in offline mode you can play the campaign, melee vs AI and even all arcade games you previously downloaded when online.

Their latest game Overwatch looks like a 2008 game

All games look like they are from 2008... Except with more pixels and more frames per second.

if it has the Heroes of the Storm graphics it will be fine for me, but I would assume that they will create a new engine or modifythe SC2 engine heavily.

Most likely Heroes of the Storm graphics since that is their cutting edge art style. Probably would run better as I guess they would try to migrate to DX12 for something as big as Warcraft IV.

 

[hiphop4eva]

You do not, which is why you can play SC2 in offline mode. I have no idea what idiot told you otherwise but as long as you log on every so often (every 30 days?) there is no problem playing it in offline mode. When in offline mode you can play the campaign, melee vs AI and even all arcade games you previously downloaded when online.

Maybe we are just overreacting. But its still annoying.

All games look like they are from 2008... Except with more pixels and more frames per second.

Lol Dr Super Good, the game philosoper. (Is it spelled like that?)

Most likely Heroes of the Storm graphics since that is their cutting edge art style. Probably would run better as I guess they would try to migrate to DX12 for something as big as Warcraft IV.

As long as it has an option to lower it. Even warcraft 3 graphics are fine to me. Damn, warcraft 3 was a legend, wasnt it.

 

[Dr Super Good]

As long as it has an option to lower it. Even warcraft 3 graphics are fine to me. Damn, warcraft 3 was a legend, wasnt it.

It would obviously come with fidelity similar to how SC2 has to allow it to target a greater number of devices. How low that fidelity can go (such as DX9 support) is another question.

 

[Chen]

For a game that could hold lots of units in one map I guess the graphics won't be that wonderful. Starcraft II could have 400+ units in a map and usually I don't lag except if it's a 4 vs 4 then I usually lag. Though I'm interested how they will transcend the story from an MMO to an RTS, but I hope they can do it since they have done RTS to MMO, and it changed lots of storylines but still fitting.

I think If they go back to two races, Alliance and Horde then it will be a big one. Or maybe they'll add Burning Legion and Old God Forces, and it will be a total of four. Or stay with Human, Orc, Night Elf and Undead but it will be extremely unlorewise.

And about the story, if they ignored the events happened in WoW it will be stupid and meh. Because why would they do that?

 

[Dr Super Good]

They would demote all the WoW players to units. Would be a pretty funny feature training a Paladin (normal unit) named "HumanSlayer" or something and sending it to its death. The WoW player who's name gets used could get a small reward of a couple of gold every time his unit is used in combat and dies/kill something.

The real heroes could then be named heroes, like in Heroes of the Storm. You lead your Forsaken army with Sylvanas and your army consists of Undead Warriors, Rangers, Thieves etc with names all lifted from real WoW players.

 

[Pingu]

i wonder, maybe they will make a warcraft 4 and then make a WoW add on pack...?

 

[Zwiebelchen]

That's why I think a reboot could work. The universe is great and has a ton of established lore. Why not use it? No need to reinvent the wheel every time.

Because fresh IPs make things interesting again. Just take overwatch. The trailers were a helluva success despite establishing a new franchise.
Blizzard could have played it save using the Starcraft franchise for a competitive shooter, yet they decided to go full Pixar-style and create something new.
Brilliant move imho. Blizzard had become way too static and focused on their franchises lately.

Taking a risk doesn't necessarily mean making a new IP. Just making Warcraft 4 (as a reboot or otherwise) would actually be a pretty big risk, since Blizzard tends to like to play it safe with subscriptions and microtransactions lately.
I want to see them take risks where it matter, which is mostly in game design and story. The universe it's set in makes little difference on that front.

That's bullshit. Taking a risk can both mean a new IP and new mechanics. Tbh, warcraft's game mechanics are pretty spot-on. I don't think they need any improvements (outside of the modding scene, obviously).
So why not use these established and tested game mechanics to kickstart a whole new franchise?

If I wanted to play historically accurate RTS games I'd play Age of Empires or Civilization. High fantasy is what Blizzard excels at and there is no reason they shouldn't use that in my opinion.

Yeah... because why get creative when you can rehash the same old boring shit over and over and over.
A stone-age RTS with fantasy elements could be pretty unique in the RTS market. I'd love to play that.

Please god no. MMO's are a blight upon the gaming industry. Just make singleplayer and multiplayer modes. Why force everybody to be online? It has nothing to do with good game design and everything to do with greed (monthly subscriptions/microtransactions)

An MMORTS hasn't been done before. How can it be "a blight upon the gaming industry" if it doesn't even exist yet?
No reason to go apeshit-crazy every time you hear the three big letters.

Blizzard seems to have completely abandoned the singleplayer market, which is absolute bullshit in my opinion. To anybody saying that there's no money in singleplayer games, say that to Bethesda. Now imagine how much money Bethesda would make if they made their game both singleplayer and multiplayer.

Yeah blizzard absolutely abandoned the singleplayer market with SC2 having a stellar singleplayer campaign with more and better designed singleplayer missions than any RTS ever before.
Like, seriously, from all the stuff people disliked about SC2, you picked the outstanding singleplayer campaign of all things?

 

[edo494]

the sc2 campaign being oustanding is debatable and I think very subjective, as with any single player campaign

 

[Tauer]

Because fresh IPs make things interesting again. Just take overwatch. The trailers were a helluva success despite establishing a new franchise.
Blizzard could have played it save using the Starcraft franchise for a competitive shooter, yet they decided to go full Pixar-style and create something new.
Brilliant move imho. Blizzard had become way too static and focused on their franchises lately.

Maybe it's just me, but Overwatch looks extremely dull to me. That's maybe because I mainly play games for the story and Overwatch just seems like another mindless TF2-like shooter where story gets thrown aside for gameplay.

That's bullshit. Taking a risk can both mean a new IP and new mechanics. Tbh, warcraft's game mechanics are pretty spot-on. I don't think they need any improvements (outside of the modding scene, obviously).
So why not use these established and tested game mechanics to kickstart a whole new franchise?

Sure, a new IP can be fresh. But it's not necessarily better either.
If they get a new kickass idea for another setting, then sure why not go for it. But going out of your way just to make something new, is kinda stupid in my opinion.
And Overwatch does not look like a kickass setting...

Yeah... because why get creative when you can rehash the same old boring shit over and over and over.
A stone-age RTS with fantasy elements could be pretty unique in the RTS market. I'd love to play that.

We've had 3 Warcraft RTS games. 3. It's not like we're talking Final Fantasy or Call of Duty here. Only boring old shit here is WoW. A new Warcraft RTS would feel plenty fresh to me, seeing as we haven't had one in 13 years.

An MMORTS hasn't been done before. How can it be "a blight upon the gaming industry" if it doesn't even exist yet?
No reason to go apeshit-crazy every time you hear the three big letters.

Not going "apeshit-crazy", where'd you get that idea? I was talking about MMO's in general. I just don't understand the need to turn every genre into exclusivly multiplayer games, when having single and multiplayer modes work just fine.
And there has been attempts at MMORTS games before, it's just that none of them succeeded.

Yeah blizzard absolutely abandoned the singleplayer market with SC2 having a stellar singleplayer campaign with more and better designed singleplayer missions than any RTS ever before.
Like, seriously, from all the stuff people disliked about SC2, you picked the outstanding singleplayer campaign of all things?

I don't think I ever mentioned SC2 in regards to this. I don't play SC2, so I have no idea about the quality of its singleplayer campaign. I'm referring to Blizzards development choices in the last decade largely catering to multiplayer gamers. WoW, Hearthstone, Heroes of the Storm, Diablo 3, Overwatch etc. Even the 'outstanding' singleplayer campaign (which is pretty much the only singleplayer content they've made for a long-ass time) for SC2 took them 5 friggin' years to finish. Not to mention their always-online bullshit DRM, even for singleplayer games.

 

[OutsiderXE]

The overwatch trailer was a success? I had never been as dissapointed by a blizzard trailer... but having played it at gamescom it the game felt really good and now I believe not basing it on an existing franchise can really help blizzard do away with some of the olf boundaries, or stuff that people just expect from the existing franchises. Looking forward to Overwatch.

Warcraft 4 would not be a risk. Too many WC and Blizzard fans.
I also see no problem in making WC4 and also making more WoW expansions, without rebooting or restarting or whatever. One would be a spinoff to the other.

SC2 campaign is a great reference for good mission design. So many ideas.

 

[Chen]

They said Starcraft story may continue but the story of Kerrigan, Raynor, Zeratul, Valerian, Artanis, Zagara etc. is already done. The same is done to Warcraft III. New characters appeared such as Arthas, Jaina, Thrall, Vol'jin, Furion, Tyrande, and many others. But Warcraft can't support space setting so they made sure that the time gap between WCII and WCIII won't be that long, thus keeping other characters like Varian, Alleria, Grom, and Drek'thar. Starcraft's story is about technology, space battles, aliens so I think it could be flashed forward to hundreds of years.

So if they are gonna do the same to Warcraft, they could use another time travel or another world. In this, the jump is shorter, around 200+ years so the change won't be so big. Maybe we'll see a time like pre-modern. Then the new world is just new and there are new races and new characters as well, then they may find Azeroth then do something with it.

Actually there are lots of story Blizz can think about if they are really planning for a sequel, but now let's just hope they would be announcing it sometime in our life.

 

[Tauer]

They said Starcraft story may continue but the story of Kerrigan, Raynor, Zeratul, Valerian, Artanis, Zagara etc. is already done. The same is done to Warcraft III. New characters appeared such as Arthas, Jaina, Thrall, Vol'jin, Furion, Tyrande, and many others. But Warcraft can't support space setting so they made sure that the time gap between WCII and WCIII won't be that long, thus keeping other characters like Varian, Alleria, Grom, and Drek'thar. Starcraft's story is about technology, space battles, aliens so I think it could be flashed forward to hundreds of years.

This is true. Although the major difference between now and WC2 - WC3 is that WC2 didn't really have many established characters. Sure there were some background lore for them, but we didn't see them ingame much, they had no dialogue, development etc.
Whereas in WC3 we had a lot of character development for these characters and with Frozen Throne ending on a cliffhanger it was just the perfect setup for WC4 continuing with these characters. But instead we got WoW, with no real development or closure for these characters.

But I guess a timejump could work. It's just a pity... I don't think I'll ever get over the dissatisfying end for my favorite fantasy characters.

I guess I'll have to put my faith in a custom campaign continuing the story if we ever get a WC4.

 

[OutsiderXE]

If there were only people creating custom campaigns based on backstories or events bridging games ...

 

[Chen]

If there were only people creating custom campaigns based on backstories or events bridging games ...

Actually you already done three XD

 

[Wietlol]

I suppose that Warcraft 4 will start where WoW ends when it is released.
Either that or continue the story with orc vs human

 

[Zwiebelchen]

The overwatch trailer was a success?

I think so. I recall the hive community to react pretty much generally positive to the trailer. Not neccesarily because of the gameplay (because let's face it... it's team fortress 2. Been there, done that), but because of the stylized new IP and the cool cinematic.

Maybe because it catches that "The incredibles" vibe. And The Incredibles was one of the best Pixar movies.

 

[Deolrin]

It looks like a mix of Team Fortress 2 and a MOBA such as LoL or Smite to me, which is very exciting. Plus the theme is original and awesome.

I'd still rather play a good Warcraft IV over that, but I just can't see Blizzard pulling off WC4 without screwing it up horribly. I kept hoping for good expansions for WoW and they just drove that game into the ground. I doubt the same designers who worked on WC3 will even be relevant or around for WC4.

 

[Edhel-dur]

Also, when will we ever see the first MMORTS ever? Let's fucking do this! People demand MMORTS (however that might work) games for almost a decade now!

There is Stronghold Kingomds.

 

[Zwiebelchen]

There is Stronghold Kingomds.

A mobile game? Are you kidding me? ._.

 

[Duke]

If WCIV ever comes I really hope it won't continue WoW story with its timelines bull****. I mean come on, you can do so much in fantasy setting so why go for such a cheap cop out ~~

 

[Chen]

If WCIV ever comes I really hope it won't continue WoW story with its timelines bull****. I mean come on, you can do so much in fantasy setting so why go for such a cheap cop out ~~

As I said they might continue it but they might jump into farther years with new sets of characters. Plus continuing where WCIII left off and ignoring WoW is massive rape and isn't really a great idea.

 

[Wietlol]

Plus continuing where WCIII left off and ignoring WoW is massive rape and isn't really a great idea.

Or on the other hand, it will be something like "How the story of World of Warcraft should have ended." kind of storyline.
In that case, they can just continue where WC3 ended and completely ignore WoW because this is an alternative story to the ones we know.

But I dont see Blizzard do it though

 

[Andrettin]

An MMORTS hasn't been done before.

It has (Age of Empires Online). That was reasonably fun IMO, and Blizzard could probably do even better.

 

[BlackEnvyX]

It has (Age of Empires Online). That was reasonably fun IMO, and Blizzard could probably do even better.

Please let's never speak of AOE Online ever again.
Game hurt me in ways no other game has.
But it seems as though with how WoW is progressing a Warcraft IV is becoming incredibly likely right now.

 

[Taybard]

I dont think Wow was a mistake. It's kind of the best thing they could did.

Turning Warcraft into a MMORPG was a logical thing, so that by this way, they could exploit every parts of the Azeroth World.

Sure, The strategy games are awesome, but somehow frustrating, because apart from the fact it has very good storylines, it only take place in a small part of the world.

Wow also got amazing storylines, only thing which change between the strategy games & the MMORPG is the fact that WoW's storyline make us move all across the world, fighting several legendary creatures of the universe (Ragnaros, C'thun, N'zoth).

Anyway, about a possible warcraft 4, a good thing that they could do is Making it in 3 different time lines :

First part => Sargeras' betrayal and creation of the Burning Legion
Second Part => War of the Ancients
Third Part => Corruptions of the orcs and war against the Draeneis.

It's 3 timelines that they didnt yet exploited in games, both of those sotires are very amazing & interesting. It can make a very great game.

 

[OrlokTheEternal]

^ Quick note, we don't actually fight N'zoth in WoW. Do you mean Yogg'Saron?

I do agree, we need to move timelines a bit. However I think that using pre-existing timelines makes things either too confusing for new players or redundant. The strategy games have always introduced new characters and new lore. And we have loved it! We should move away from Azeroth. Perhaps to a planet fighting the Legion? New races could be introduced. Perhaps a Legion race, Draenei race, and the sentient race(s) on the planet?

 

[WhiteFang]

Quick note, we don't actually fight N'zoth in WoW.

This.I think you are confused.We face Yogg-saron and C'thun in WoW

 

[Taybard]

Oh yeah, Yogg-saron, my bad.

 

[WhiteFang]

It's ok.I wish we can fight N'zoth tho.He is my favorite.

 

[Andrettin]

Please let's never speak of AOE Online ever again.
Game hurt me in ways no other game has.

The artstyle was suboptimal, but other than that what was wrong with it? Other than that Microsoft pulled the plug, running away with our money.

 

[WhiteFang]

Other than that Microsoft pulled the plug, running away with our money.

That sounds bad,what exactly happened?

 

[istvan921]

They a made horrible rushed game that's all, and ran away with everyone's money, just like C&C 4 and trust me these games are the lowest of low.

 

[WhiteFang]

They made horrible rushed game that's all, and ran away with everyone's money, just like C&C 4 and trust these games are the lowest of low.

Damn,that's messed up

 

[istvan921]

No that's the truth and you better swallow it,those games are rts evolution dead ends.

 

[Eagle XI]

C&C 4: Toyberium Twilight is the reason ill never forgive EA.
The bastards killed Command&Conquer.

 

[istvan921]

Yes and they made irrepairlable damage to the franchise as well.

 

[Eagle XI]

I really hope an potential wc4 wont be settled in the main wow time-line because things have unfolfed such that Stormwind, the kingdom alone and thats not even the alliance combined, has pretty much became the leading Azerothian superpower.
The Lich King defeated and replaced by an former champion of the light, the fel horde scattered, with an crippled horde and sentinels that are busy stinging each other in Kalimdor, apart of the Forsaken and the allied Dwarves that fortunately arent that interested in realms beyond their beloved Khaz Modan, there havent remain any serious contender to their might.
Add upon this the possibility that they are probably going to achieve yet another victory in the coming expansion, and this time over the burning legion, it could be safe to assume that they are "winning the game".
I belive this to be true, atleast viewen from an grand-scale strategy perspective. Try to imagine an Azeroth: Total war's or Europa Universalis grand map, you would see that Stormwind is in a serious advantage right now. The only thing they need to do is grow out of the middle ages tech, go full steampunk-renaissance tech completing modernization of the army and voila, world dominated!

Horde's current state does somewhat resemble the third reich in the closing days of ww2: with an great deal of their manpower and leadership gone, all hope they can have is bound to "wunderwaffen"-projects, be it that goblin-built giant cannon in Azshara or the very manabomb that had been used to wipe Theramore.
Even if the horde managed to replace their losses bringing in the warriors from alternate dimension, traditionalism would keep them from catching up the tech gap with the alliance, as majority of the horde doesnt even want to remember Garrosh and the weapons he brought.
Both Nightelves and Dwarves would rather like to keep to themselves and in the case of Nightelves lick their wounds, in the case of Dwarves the chances of an internal conflict to break out within the alliance is rather dim, as they are economically tied to the human kingdoms similar to how modern day China is dependant on the western world to keep up their economy, and its not like the Dwarves have other trade-partners remaining anyways. Nightelves arent interested in gunpowder and technology and Draenai have far advanced stuff than what they can offer.
Besides there is such an trust between Khaz Modan and Stormwind that an metro line runs directly between the two capitals.

Sylvanas, much wisely, didnt integrate the Forsaken into the horde completely, which not only spared her faction a lot of "unnecessary" losses, but allowed the Forsaken enough time to further strengthen themselves with progressing through their tech-tree, throughout the events of wow they managed to acquire unique techs and units otherwise unavailable.
Even when they appear to be losing, they ultimately gained something out of it, the largest factor in this is that they are undead and have built an entire culture revolving around undeath. Losing an conflict is as natural to them as winning one, they remain indifferent and focused on the hidden agenda of the banshee queen.

 

[BlackEnvyX]

Speaking of what Eagle just posted what would be the ideal timeline for Wc4 to be placed in?

 

[Eagle XI]

well, if you ask me it should continue right from where Tft ends, or only a few years after, such that it would begin before vanilla wow, and later would come in synchron with the timeline as the campaigns progress.

 

[Deleted member 212788]

Because fresh IPs make things interesting again. Just take overwatch. The trailers were a helluva success despite establishing a new franchise.
Blizzard could have played it save using the Starcraft franchise for a competitive shooter, yet they decided to go full Pixar-style and create something new.
Brilliant move imho. Blizzard had become way too static and focused on their franchises lately.


That's bullshit. Taking a risk can both mean a new IP and new mechanics. Tbh, warcraft's game mechanics are pretty spot-on. I don't think they need any improvements (outside of the modding scene, obviously).
So why not use these established and tested game mechanics to kickstart a whole new franchise?


Yeah... because why get creative when you can rehash the same old boring shit over and over and over.
A stone-age RTS with fantasy elements could be pretty unique in the RTS market. I'd love to play that.


An MMORTS hasn't been done before. How can it be "a blight upon the gaming industry" if it doesn't even exist yet?
No reason to go apeshit-crazy every time you hear the three big letters.


Yeah blizzard absolutely abandoned the singleplayer market with SC2 having a stellar singleplayer campaign with more and better designed singleplayer missions than any RTS ever before.
Like, seriously, from all the stuff people disliked about SC2, you picked the outstanding singleplayer campaign of all things?

An MMO RTS exists - it's called "Kingdom Wars" - it's free on steam currently.

 

[ZerGreenOne]

I haven't checked this list but: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massively_multiplayer_online_real-time_strategy_games - this is a list of massively multiplayer online real-time strategy games.

I'm sure that at least some of those fit the definition of a MMORTS. So there goes the theory that "Noone has ever done that before."

Typing "kingdom wars wikipedia wikipedia wikipedia" into google only gives this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawn_of_Fantasy - which is an MMORTS with a kingdom wars mode. But it does exist, with mixed reviews on steam. But apparently it isn't as notable as any of the other MMORTS games.

There is also kingdom wars 2, which has positive reviews, by the same developer. Doesn't have a Wikipedia page either.