2.
 
Re: etc.
Sep 12, 2016, 20:09
2.
Re: etc. Sep 12, 2016, 20:09
Sep 12, 2016, 20:09
 
While I too am surprised that Blizzard simply cancelled the game rather than trying to salvage it, I do agree that it wasn't ready for prime-time in its current state. Adventure games were a dying genre, and "Lord of the Clans" wasn't even a very good adventure.

While most of the animation and visuals are quite nice, the actual gameplay is pretty poor. There's very little real interaction with the game-world, and of the few things you /can/ click on, most of them result in some form or another of "I can't use that". The puzzles aren't very good, and the dialogue (and sound FX) is pretty awful. There are also a number of areas where the graphics look pretty poor.

I don't think their releasing the game would have been a disaster; Blizzard probably would have broken even just from sales to Warcraft fans alone. I doubt it would have seriously affected the marketability of the soon-to-be-released Warcraft 3 RTS. But I have no doubt that it would have quickly been relegated to the "old shame" closet, there to languish forgotten with "The Death of Superman", "Blackthorne" and "RPM Racing".

I think it speaks more about how comfortably situated Blizzard was /even before World of Warcraft/ that they could choose to swallow the development costs rather than even slightly sully their reputation with a mediocre - not bad - game.
Avatar 54666
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Sep 12, 2016Sep 12 2016
 2.
Sep 12, 2016Sep 12 2016
 Re: etc.
3.
Sep 12, 2016Sep 12 2016
4.
Sep 13, 2016Sep 13 2016