Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Graven]

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2012/03/30/warhammer-40k-mmo-cancelled/1

Direct quote -> "we believe the right direction for us is to shift the title from an MMO to a premium experience with single and multiplayer gameplay, robust digital content and community features.'".

Pay-to-play MMOs are indeed looking like they'll shortly follow the Dodo, but I'm not sure THQ will be able to find the best model for the game. I'm reasonably sure the next big thing will be Guild Wars 2, and AFAIK that is going completely free to play, with only the base game and any further expansions paid, so with the switch from genuine MMO THQ might find themselves in a bit of a pickle.

I guess what they're saying is "it's cheaper for us to release a disappointing single-player game and tons of skins as dlc for the multiplayer", and it's true, only that doesn't really make it a good thing. I'm really not sure I like the sound of "premium experience" and "robust digital content", but buzzwords nowaday just confuse me.

Why can't anyone else follow Riot's model of free game, paid skins? Apply that to Warhammer, slap on some cooperative mode and player designed maps and be rich? Especially with the ton of customization the tabletop game offers, this could be a literal gold mine.

I'm still looking forward to seeing what happens with the game, only not really to actually playing the drat thing.

Also a ton of their staff have been fired, which further undermines my fragile optimism.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Thats a shame this is the first MMO ive been hoping for in a while

[Digital Hellhound]

This does honestly seem like a good move, but the whole firing a shitton of people worries me. Ah well, I would give my soul for a proper 40k RPG, hopefully this is a step towards something like that.

[Graven]

Honestly I just want Planetside with Warhammer. Simply and only that. Maybe add some maps where you get to help civilians evacuate while a gigantic wave of Tyranids smashes upon the city, and other PvE scenarios, but I just want to shoot rokkits at Spess Mahrenes

[jester]

THQ have been a dying studio for a while now, I had a housemate who worked for one of their little demi companies (sorry, tis late) and he said a combination of management who know and care nothing about games and the great fuckup that was homefront are the things that have sunk that ship.

  It is a pity though

[Cthulhu]

It's just gonna be a single-player game with multiplayer.  "premium experience with robust digital content" has about as much meaning as "argh blurgh we fire guys no mony make game simble player"

[nenjin]

On the one hand, I've never thought a 40k MMO can live up to 40k. Systemizing everything 40k into an MMO RPG would pretty much kill the world for me.

So in that sense I think this is a good move.

The "premium experience with robust digital content" does make it sound like it will suck balls though. I foresee an even higher degree of monetization than we saw in 40k: Space Marine. You'll probably have to buy your chainsword as DLC.

I kind of shudder to think what kind of a hack job it might turn out to be though, if they're reusing a ton of stuff designed from an MMO game and just slapping it into a SP game. The game was pretty far along in terms of development years ago. So I wonder if it's gonna feel MMO-y in handling and stuff despite being a SP game with MP pew-pew.

[jocan2003]

The "premium experience with robust digital content" does make it sound like it will suck balls though. I foresee an even higher degree of monetization than we saw in 40k: Space Marine. You'll probably have to buy your chainsword as DLC.

Getting closer to the downfall of gaming as we knew it...

I remember playing content RICH game, not that pretty but with lot of depth and interesting mecanic now, its pretty lot of pew pew but nothing in the belly...

[ZebioLizard2]

I kind of shudder to think what kind of a hack job it might turn out to be though, if they're reusing a ton of stuff designed from an MMO game and just slapping it into a SP game. The game was pretty far along in terms of development years ago. So I wonder if it's gonna feel MMO-y in handling and stuff despite being a SP game with MP pew-pew.

Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning was the same way, a single player game that was originally designed to be an mmo, but at the last bit became single player, lets see if Dark Millennium goes to the same standard.

[Sirus]

Ah what? I was looking forward to Dark Millennium D:

A WH40k MMO would be one of the coolest things ever if done properly, and some of the footage I've seen looked amazing.

[DJ]

The "premium experience with robust digital content" does make it sound like it will suck balls though. I foresee an even higher degree of monetization than we saw in 40k: Space Marine. You'll probably have to buy your chainsword as DLC.

But that just adds to the experience, because then it will be closer to tabletop WH40K

[Graven]

With the way THQ've been haemorrhaging monies (see THQ tablet and no, I didn't know that was A Thing either), I'm sure they'd sacrifice half their staff to the chaos gods if they could reach the levels of monetarization Games Workshop enjoys.

On the other hand I would really enjoy a coop-oriented Warhammer 40K action rpg, though I'm afraid this has nothing to do with anything since that's probably not what they have in mind. Oh well.

[ZebioLizard2]

With the way THQ've been haemorrhaging monies (see THQ tablet and no, I didn't know that was A Thing either), I'm sure they'd sacrifice half their staff to the chaos gods if they could reach the levels of monetarization Games Workshop enjoys.

On the other hand I would really enjoy a coop-oriented Warhammer 40K action rpg, though I'm afraid this has nothing to do with anything since that's probably not what they have in mind. Oh well.

monetarization? GW just broke even due to all its subsidiaries and not on it's own product, it's own business practices aren't exactly to great either.

[Graven]

monetarization? GW just broke even due to all its subsidiaries and not on it's own product, it's own business practices aren't exactly to great either.

Because GW is generally composed of lots of old men shaking their canes at those gosh darn newfangled computer thingies, but for a tabletop company in comparison to others, they're still doing great. It's not my fault GW can't understand what a profitable business model is nowadays x]

Browsing their annual report, yeah, they're a bit worse off 2011 than 2010, but I'm not sure who to compare them to. I've never been into tabletop gaming, so I tried Wizards of the coast, but it turns out they've been acquired by Hasbro, and comparing Hasbro to GW does not seem fair, considering the size and number of subsidiaries Hasbro seems to have, not to mention  their range of products and intended customer base.

Going through THQ's annual report, however, does reveal a dire picture : gross profit dropping, operating expenses staying the same, a drop in stockholder's equity...  I'm not going to calculate comparative indicators like ROE and such because fuck that, I do that enough at university, but yeah, I think I've written too much about this on a Dwarf Fortress Forum.

[fenrif]

If you're looking for someone to compare GW to try Privateer Press. I'd be interested to know how they stack up against each other as PP seems to be much less price-gougey than GW, who seem willing to sacrifice the "game" part of their company for short term profits.