Blizzard says no Titan for you!

Bigbacon

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
19,420
so crazy that they could work on something for 7 years and then just kill it. Almost like a huge waste of time, money, and resources.

edit

guess on the flip side it is better than going the DNF route.
 

Amaroth

Gawd
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
673
I can't help but wonder if this is similar to them killing Blizzard North's Diablo 3. It was ahead of its time and they didn't have the vision back then. Either way I lost faith in Blizzard years ago.
 

FrEaKy

[H] Movie and TV Show Review Guy
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
13,843
I only lost faith in Blizzard when D3 was first released and I had dumped my $100 on the collectors edition.

Now I am happy I kept it and even got the expansion, having fun

Blizzard may release something questionable, but at least they try to fix it!
 

Bangorang

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
496
so crazy that they could work on something for 7 years and then just kill it. Almost like a huge waste of time, money, and resources.

.


if i had to guess, they know the mmo 'genre' is on its death bed...f2p is the only way to go now...world of warcrafft was a black swan event no one could predict

i'd like to see no new mmo's for the next 5 years then maybe, someone could create the 'next gen' title
 

Phlorge

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
507
if i had to guess, they know the mmo 'genre' is on its death bed...f2p is the only way to go now...world of warcrafft was a black swan event no one could predict

i'd like to see no new mmo's for the next 5 years then maybe, someone could create the 'next gen' title

yes please, they need to just stop making them in my opinion. none of them can recapture what WoW had at the beginning and first expansion.
 

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
18,434
Truthfully I stopped caring years ago. I always kind of knew they wouldn't finish it. Blizzard has a reputation for sitting on IP's and not finishing them.

*Cough* *Cough* Starcraft:Ghost
 

dgz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2010
Messages
5,838
so crazy that they could work on something for 7 years and then just kill it. Almost like a huge waste of time, money, and resources.

edit

guess on the flip side it is better than going the DNF route.

They're most likely going to repacke everything they can and sell it. Works like that in every industry. Yes, that sandwich you're eating is...
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,050
He said "guess." ;)

Sure, and guessing based on what? If he's read something specifically that they want to go "P2W" and "F2P" then I'd like to see it, because I haven't read anything to even hint at that.

You see people mindlessly pooping "P2W" and "F2P" into every comment thread about MP games are like weeds, and never have anything to back it up.
 

wonderfield

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
7,396
so crazy that they could work on something for 7 years and then just kill it. Almost like a huge waste of time, money, and resources.
It doesn't seem like it'd matter to them given their already copious buckets of money and steady revenue streams. They can afford to pay their employees to do pretty much anything they want.

Valve's in the same position. It's anyone's guess as to how many projects they've scrapped over the years.
 

FrEaKy

[H] Movie and TV Show Review Guy
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
13,843
Sure, and guessing based on what? If he's read something specifically that they want to go "P2W" and "F2P" then I'd like to see it, because I haven't read anything to even hint at that.

You see people mindlessly pooping "P2W" and "F2P" into every comment thread about MP games are like weeds, and never have anything to back it up.

Actually, yes

Hearthstone is F2P and can be P2W
Same with their Dota type game.....
 

infojunkie

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 11, 2012
Messages
333
Sure, and guessing based on what? If he's read something specifically that they want to go "P2W" and "F2P" then I'd like to see it, because I haven't read anything to even hint at that.

You see people mindlessly pooping "P2W" and "F2P" into every comment thread about MP games are like weeds, and never have anything to back it up.

based on them developing three of their new games in last 3~4 years around it? RMAH in D3 (until they had to remove it before it completely destroyed the franchise), hearthstone and another MOBA,

I'm sure now you are gonna make a better thoughtful and intelligent guess based around fact, or are you gonna be the mindless comment pooping one?
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
20,728
Actually, yes

Hearthstone is F2P and can be P2W
Same with their Dota type game.....

You can buy yourself a level 90 in WoW for a nice chunk of cash. One can debate why it was done all day and blame account sellers / gold buyers. But the end result is that I can just buy a level 90 direct from Blizzard and know jack sh*t about the game. Which in my book is the definition of P2W.
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,050
You can buy yourself a level 90 in WoW for a nice chunk of cash. One can debate why it was done all day and blame account sellers / gold buyers. But the end result is that I can just buy a level 90 direct from Blizzard and know jack sh*t about the game. Which in my book is the definition of P2W.

In your example, you're paying to save time to reach the some point that someone else invested time to reach. Like Planetside2, you can spend money, or you can spend time, but
paying doesn't give you an advantage over the guy that chose to spend time grinding to the same level or point. In Battlefield4, EA offers "shortcut bundles" that save time but don't give you an advantage over the people that spent time unlocking the same things.

I suppose everyone is free to have their own idea of what P2W means to them, but to me its pretty cut and dry: Paying to save time =/= P2W. However, paying to get an advantage over someone who doesn't pay and won't be able to achieve no matter how much time they spend = P2W.
 
Last edited:

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
20,728
I'm not sure you actually understand what P2W is, if that's your definition. P2W means paying to get an advantage over someone that didn't pay.

In your example, you're paying to save time to arrive at the same place that someone invested time to reach. Its like Planetside2's system -- you can spend money, or you can spend time, but paying doesn't give you an ADVANTAGE over the guy that spent time to reach the same place.

Well if I'm racing a buddy to level 90 and suddenly he buys level 90... That's stuff that my friends and I used to do in WoW to pass time between raids. They have just made everything so easy peasy now. Those are just a couple of reasons why I don't play.
 

Aix.

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
1,949
In your example, you're paying to save time to reach the some point that someone else invested time to reach. Like Planetside2, you can spend, or you can spend time, but paying doesn't give you an advantage over the guy that chose to spend time grinding to the same level or point. In Battlefield4, EA offers "shortcut bundles" that save time but don't give you an advantage over the people that spent time unlocking the same things.

I suppose everyone is free to have their own idea of what P2W means to them, but to me its pretty cut and dry: Paying to save time =/= P2W. However, paying to get an advantage over someone who doesn't pay and won't be able to achieve no matter how much time they spend = P2W.

So you and I buy BF4. I play the game "normally" and start with starter weapons. You decide to "save time" and purchase access to every weapon/loadout in the game. But because technically I can kill you with the base weapons what you did doesn't qualify as P2W. Sure.
 
D

Deleted member 174368

Guest
So you and I buy BF4. I play the game "normally" and start with starter weapons. You decide to "save time" and purchase access to every weapon/loadout in the game. But because technically I can kill you with the base weapons what you did doesn't qualify as P2W. Sure.

If they can be earned through normal play, then it's not P2W. The only difference between those two people is the time spent playing.

P2W is when items that give a player an advantage can ONLY be purchased with real money. That's literally the definition of it and anything else is usually "pay to not grind", which is a model many F2P games, including League of Legends, use.
 

Q-BZ

Fully [H]
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
19,388
I'm just trying to wrap my brain around shitcanning 7 years of effort... on anything, really.
 

SithSolo1

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 24, 2001
Messages
1,205
Titian has been dead since before they decided to change its direction, they just wanted to string everyone along until the next WoW expansion was ready.
 

DPI

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,050
So you and I buy BF4. I play the game "normally" and start with starter weapons. You decide to "save time" and purchase access to every weapon/loadout in the game. But because technically I can kill you with the base weapons what you did doesn't qualify as P2W. Sure.

This only tells me you don't own BF4, or you'd have a clue that the starter guns are some of the best guns, just as they were in BF3. If a "shortcut pack" for BF4 were to unlock something that wasn't available by playing the game regularly, yes that would most definitely be P2W. But if a shortcut pack is only saving 30-90 minutes of playing the game regularly, that's just spending money to indulge laziness. Either way you're barking up the wrong tree trying to make a P2W case from BF4, especially since leveling happens so fast.
 
D

Deleted member 174368

Guest
I'm just trying to wrap my brain around shitcanning 7 years of effort... on anything, really.

IIRC the game only had a skeleton crew of a dozen people or so working on it for the past few years.
 

Aix.

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
1,949
If they can be earned through normal play, then it's not P2W. The only difference between those two people is the time spent playing.

Actually, the difference between those two players is that one has all the items in the game to choose from and the other one only has the starter items. The fact that one player has paid extra to shortcut through the game and instantly acquire items gives the game a P2W factor, which undermines the integrity/fairness of the gameplay even if it is only until the legit players catch up.

It's less of an issue if the stock loadouts are generally pretty solid, with the unlocks being side-grades.
 

Aix.

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
1,949
This only tells me you don't own BF4, or you'd have a clue that the starter guns are some of the best guns, just as they were in BF3. If a "shortcut pack" for BF4 were to unlock something that wasn't available by playing the game regularly, yes that would most definitely be P2W. But if a shortcut pack is only saving 30-90 minutes of playing the game regularly, that's just spending money to indulge laziness. Either way you're barking up the wrong tree trying to make a P2W case from BF4, especially since leveling happens so fast.

That's correct, I was going off my experience with vanilla BF3. So it's 30-90 minutes for full unlocks in BF4? Why anyone would pay extra to skip that is beyond me.
 

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,704
Flavor of the month kids its all about f2p moba now.

Atso it is fair to be disappointed if you were looking forward to this game. But don't get mad just because they wasted 7 years. Would you be more happy if they said gee we cant lose all that money and slapped it together in a horrible state with no plane to continue development and sold a half finished product like EA does all the time?
 

SnowBeast

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Messages
1,312
World of Diablo

Same core game play as now only in the first person or 3rd like WoW, with top notch darker setting graphics, high resolution textures. Vast world to explore based on D1-D3 lore

I'd sub!
 

EviL-aLphA

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
356
Not gonna lie im pretty disappointed. After years of bland expansions and little to nothing new and exciting being released, I had hopes that Blizzard would pull something amazing off since this has been such a hush hush project for so long. Actually just thought about it the other day and now I see this :rolleyes:

Shame, it could of had potential to be something awesome knowing Blizzard. This was the game I was hoping would put Blizzard back on top like they used to be (wII/wIII/SC2/vanilla wow etc).

Oh well:(
 

Zorachus

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
9,825
Blizzard Cancels Titan Project
http://www.mmo-champion.com/content/4343-Blizzard-Cancels-Titan-Project

Noooooooo :(

I used to be a HUGE WoW player, but got burned out after so many blurry eyed late nights over 6 years playing that game. But I was hoping that Titan was the next gen MMO us PC Gamers have been waiting for all these years later.

I was hoping for a true next gen WoW sort of thing, with killer new graphics engine, and "smart" quest system, and an even bigger open ended world, and with tons of better ideas and ways to make a new MMO, that Blizzard themselves learned from their decade running WoW.
 

Zorachus

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 17, 2006
Messages
9,825
World of Diablo

Same core game play as now only in the first person or 3rd like WoW, with top notch darker setting graphics, high resolution textures. Vast world to explore based on D1-D3 lore

I'd sub!

Hell yeah :cool:
 

Seelenlos

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
1,157
Hope they let us in on what they wanted to try with it at some point. And no effort is wasted. Sure you may not get a game out of this but sitting down trying to figure out how to do something isn't a waste effort if you learn things you can and can not do on the next project...seven years is kinda long to figure things out tho.

Some of you people are too gloomy.
Go play some D3 the rainbows will cheer you up :)
 

Drakenfeng

Gawd
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
671
Makes no sense from a business perspective for them to make a new MMO. WoW still has 6 million subs even after not releasing any new content for over a year. Your 'average' gamer still has performance issues with WoW, and the engine updates they're doing in WoD are hoping to alleviate some of this.

Even if they made a new MMO I wouldn't expect it to look any better than D3 / SC2, or the newer zones in WoW. There's simply not enough playerbase to support high end graphics. You look at the most popular games these days and they aren't very graphically demanding at all, League, DOTA2, TF2, World of Tanks, etc.

That being said the tech improvements they've made in WoW will be useful regardless of what they end up doing. The cross server world phasing, zone phasing, match making / LFR, and streaming content will all be relevant. They also finally got the servers to instantly respond to healing as opposed to being on a 0.25 sec tick rate. I still see the game as being a huge testbed for ideas and tech, which keeps it surprisingly modern despite its age.
 

Comixbooks

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
17,550
Either the direction of the game wasn't going to work or the graphics are already dated I would give a WOW successor a shot if it had promise.
 

Dion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
3,769
I only lost faith in Blizzard when D3 was first released and I had dumped my $100 on the collectors edition.

Now I am happy I kept it and even got the expansion, having fun

Blizzard may release something questionable, but at least they try to fix it!

Then why do people rip EA and Ubisoft so much :O
 
Top