overly exaggerated features (large hands, heads, feet, weapons)
non-human characters
dwarfs, elves, hobgoblins
D&D theme'ish
The actual "mechanics" of the gameplay don't come to mind quite as much as the art style does to me.
I don't think that's how most people define "wow clone", maybe someone should start a new poll, cause I always assumed it meant how the game played not superficial comparisons.
Possibly not. It may simply be that I have a bias against the "theme" as I'm an avid scifi fanatic and never really enjoyed the whole sword and sorcery thing. Dragon Age and Oblivion have both lightened my distaste for it, but that may be why I classify it as the "WoW" theme.
You know 79% of people voted NO, so you could actually be of the majority opinion. But I think the majority are all wrong, a sci-fi game could play exactly like a WOW/everquest clone.
When I play WOW I grind mobs, and wack on mineral nodes, and do some questing in instances. There are MMORGP space games where you grind mobs, and wack on mineral nodes, and do some questing in instances (I read that's exactly how STO plays but I never played it because of player descriptions of it in this forum)
Ehh, personally when I think of WoW clone I envision a dull-looking game with a hotbar on the bottom of the screen, a mini-map in the top right, and a character portrait in the top left... That sort of thing. But it's just my own envisioning when I think of the term.
Thats how I look at it. Just take a look at Allods and Runes of Magic. That to me screams clone.
"WoW clone" is subjective, it's just a quick term to describe similar experiences to WoW. If people look at a game and immediately draw comparisons to WoW, in their eyes it's probably a WoW clone - but that doesn't mean everyone else will see it the same way. If you're trying to give a definition to "WoW clone" all I can say to you is good luck, because you're not going to get anywhere.
Just as a quick thought, where is everyone getting the idea that a "WoW clone" infers that WoW was the first to implement the features? I don't think it should be taken that way... I always see the argument that WoW copied someone else, and while it could be a legitimate argument, it wouldn't add anything to the discussion. "WoW clone" is convenient because there are a lot of gamers who immediately have their own idea of what WoW is spring to mind. You could call something a LOTRO clone or Tabula Rasa clone, but there will be people out there who don't have a clue what you're talking about because the games weren't as popular.
That said, the term should never be used anyway since no one will ever agree on what it is.
What about games like DAoC that change their control layouts and when they add maps even though they never had them before and then when they add new tutorial zones that are nothing but quests where they earn gear (with the classic icon over head indicating a quest is available) even though they never really had quests? I'd consider that a game cloning the mechanice and trying to survive off of the success of WoW. Or turning into a WoW clone.
Comments
You know 79% of people voted NO, so you could actually be of the majority opinion. But I think the majority are all wrong, a sci-fi game could play exactly like a WOW/everquest clone.
When I play WOW I grind mobs, and wack on mineral nodes, and do some questing in instances. There are MMORGP space games where you grind mobs, and wack on mineral nodes, and do some questing in instances (I read that's exactly how STO plays but I never played it because of player descriptions of it in this forum)
Thats how I look at it. Just take a look at Allods and Runes of Magic. That to me screams clone.
"WoW clone" is subjective, it's just a quick term to describe similar experiences to WoW. If people look at a game and immediately draw comparisons to WoW, in their eyes it's probably a WoW clone - but that doesn't mean everyone else will see it the same way. If you're trying to give a definition to "WoW clone" all I can say to you is good luck, because you're not going to get anywhere.
Just as a quick thought, where is everyone getting the idea that a "WoW clone" infers that WoW was the first to implement the features? I don't think it should be taken that way... I always see the argument that WoW copied someone else, and while it could be a legitimate argument, it wouldn't add anything to the discussion. "WoW clone" is convenient because there are a lot of gamers who immediately have their own idea of what WoW is spring to mind. You could call something a LOTRO clone or Tabula Rasa clone, but there will be people out there who don't have a clue what you're talking about because the games weren't as popular.
That said, the term should never be used anyway since no one will ever agree on what it is.
What about games like DAoC that change their control layouts and when they add maps even though they never had them before and then when they add new tutorial zones that are nothing but quests where they earn gear (with the classic icon over head indicating a quest is available) even though they never really had quests? I'd consider that a game cloning the mechanice and trying to survive off of the success of WoW. Or turning into a WoW clone.
To me WoW clone is more like Allods. Same look, same feel, very similar classes, etc.
I only consider a game a wow clone if it is similar in look AND feel, and only if it is VERY similar.
So, I'd have to vote no for your desc, as it is too broad, and several games fit your desc, but I do not consider them even close to wow clones.
My god has horns.... nah, I don't think he is real either.