The game hasn't even been shown yet and already some complain ? I love intelligent posts like these!
Because you can already tell the direction the game is going in? Just read the website and look at the screenshots. They are cartoony and stylized. The FAQs say it will be mostly soloable and heavy story driven.
IE, a billion instances and playing by yourself most of the time. Anyone who expected anything different from a company that makes single player games should question their ability to think. It is THIS reason that I have always said KotoR and Elderscrolls would NOT make good MMOs.
So, give me ONE game where you can't do many things, if not most things solo? One game, please.
EverQuest
Dark Age of Camelot
I never played EQ very much to be honest, so maybe you are right there, but DAoC?
What are you talking about? You could level alone (granted, it wasn't as fast as in dedicated groups, but you could do it). You could be a kickass Stealther in PvP if you knew how to go about it. And that covers about half of the game. There were loads of people who soloed in DAoC. Sure, loads more played in groups, but that is beside the point.
The point I made was that you could do many if not most things solo. And that is still true for DAoC.
DAoC works two ways.
You COULD solo in DAoC, it just took FOREVER. You could solo as a stealther if you were good enough, but more often than not you'd get killed, but it was possible if you really really wanted to.
That is how more MMOs should be. Give you the option, but make grouping much more appealing.
Then some changes hit DAoC that made it much much easier to solo. And you know what happened? The game died. Mythic has gone back and said that was one of their biggest mistakes with DAoC. It destroyed grouping, no new players came into the game, because there was no one there to help them get into it. And what players DAoC did have were killed off slowly as frustration with the ToA expansion grew. It was the one two punch. No new players + angry current subscribers = dead game.
Grouping should not be penalized like it is in current MMOs.
And so...what tells you that it won't be the same way in TOR?
Personally, I think the biggest problem with modern MMO's are the communities. It#s the players that WANT to solo. If a game FORCED you to group all the time, no one would like that very much either because it would not let you get anywhere if you didn't always have someone on to be with.
Seek the blame for all the soloing in games in the players, not the games. I play WoW...and I have not soloed at any point except like once or twice in my entire time there. So...?
The game hasn't even been shown yet and already some complain ? I love intelligent posts like these!
Because you can already tell the direction the game is going in? Just read the website and look at the screenshots. They are cartoony and stylized. The FAQs say it will be mostly soloable and heavy story driven.
IE, a billion instances and playing by yourself most of the time. Anyone who expected anything different from a company that makes single player games should question their ability to think. It is THIS reason that I have always said KotoR and Elderscrolls would NOT make good MMOs.
So, give me ONE game where you can't do many things, if not most things solo? One game, please.
EverQuest
Dark Age of Camelot
I never played EQ very much to be honest, so maybe you are right there, but DAoC?
What are you talking about? You could level alone (granted, it wasn't as fast as in dedicated groups, but you could do it). You could be a kickass Stealther in PvP if you knew how to go about it. And that covers about half of the game. There were loads of people who soloed in DAoC. Sure, loads more played in groups, but that is beside the point.
The point I made was that you could do many if not most things solo. And that is still true for DAoC.
DAoC works two ways.
You COULD solo in DAoC, it just took FOREVER. You could solo as a stealther if you were good enough, but more often than not you'd get killed, but it was possible if you really really wanted to.
That is how more MMOs should be. Give you the option, but make grouping much more appealing.
Then some changes hit DAoC that made it much much easier to solo. And you know what happened? The game died. Mythic has gone back and said that was one of their biggest mistakes with DAoC. It destroyed grouping, no new players came into the game, because there was no one there to help them get into it. And what players DAoC did have were killed off slowly as frustration with the ToA expansion grew. It was the one two punch. No new players + angry current subscribers = dead game.
Grouping should not be penalized like it is in current MMOs.
And so...what tells you that it won't be the same way in TOR?
Personally, I think the biggest problem with modern MMO's are the communities. It#s the players that WANT to solo. If a game FORCED you to group all the time, no one would like that very much either because it would not let you get anywhere if you didn't always have someone on to be with.
Seek the blame for all the soloing in games in the players, not the games. I play WoW...and I have not soloed at any point except like once or twice in my entire time there. So...?
It's the WoW generation. They were contained for a while, but it seems a lot of them have finally become aware that there's an entire MMO industry outside of WoW, and unless its noob friendly like WoW, they won't touch it.
But the reason I believe SW will be mostly singleplayer is because they SAID IT THEMSELVES. :P
That, and its coming from a singleplayer game company.
The game hasn't even been shown yet and already some complain ? I love intelligent posts like these!
Because you can already tell the direction the game is going in? Just read the website and look at the screenshots. They are cartoony and stylized. The FAQs say it will be mostly soloable and heavy story driven.
IE, a billion instances and playing by yourself most of the time. Anyone who expected anything different from a company that makes single player games should question their ability to think. It is THIS reason that I have always said KotoR and Elderscrolls would NOT make good MMOs.
So, give me ONE game where you can't do many things, if not most things solo? One game, please.
EverQuest
Dark Age of Camelot
I never played EQ very much to be honest, so maybe you are right there, but DAoC?
What are you talking about? You could level alone (granted, it wasn't as fast as in dedicated groups, but you could do it). You could be a kickass Stealther in PvP if you knew how to go about it. And that covers about half of the game. There were loads of people who soloed in DAoC. Sure, loads more played in groups, but that is beside the point.
The point I made was that you could do many if not most things solo. And that is still true for DAoC.
DAoC works two ways.
You COULD solo in DAoC, it just took FOREVER. You could solo as a stealther if you were good enough, but more often than not you'd get killed, but it was possible if you really really wanted to.
That is how more MMOs should be. Give you the option, but make grouping much more appealing.
Then some changes hit DAoC that made it much much easier to solo. And you know what happened? The game died. Mythic has gone back and said that was one of their biggest mistakes with DAoC. It destroyed grouping, no new players came into the game, because there was no one there to help them get into it. And what players DAoC did have were killed off slowly as frustration with the ToA expansion grew. It was the one two punch. No new players + angry current subscribers = dead game.
Grouping should not be penalized like it is in current MMOs.
And so...what tells you that it won't be the same way in TOR?
Personally, I think the biggest problem with modern MMO's are the communities. It#s the players that WANT to solo. If a game FORCED you to group all the time, no one would like that very much either because it would not let you get anywhere if you didn't always have someone on to be with.
Seek the blame for all the soloing in games in the players, not the games. I play WoW...and I have not soloed at any point except like once or twice in my entire time there. So...?
It's the WoW generation. They were contained for a while, but it seems a lot of them have finally become aware that there's an entire MMO industry outside of WoW, and unless its noob friendly like WoW, they won't touch it.
But the reason I believe SW will be mostly singleplayer is because they SAID IT THEMSELVES. :P
That, and its coming from a singleplayer game company.
Where do they say it will be mostly single-player? Please quote me that.
They say that most of it will be solo-able. Not that you HAVE to do it solo. Read correctly and understand what they are saying.
We do not know if that will lead to a "singleplayer" game or to a game such as DAoC where you COULD solo, but didn't need to and probably didn't want to. That is a prediction that can't be verified. Fullstop.
The game hasn't even been shown yet and already some complain ? I love intelligent posts like these!
Because you can already tell the direction the game is going in? Just read the website and look at the screenshots. They are cartoony and stylized. The FAQs say it will be mostly soloable and heavy story driven.
IE, a billion instances and playing by yourself most of the time. Anyone who expected anything different from a company that makes single player games should question their ability to think. It is THIS reason that I have always said KotoR and Elderscrolls would NOT make good MMOs.
So, give me ONE game where you can't do many things, if not most things solo? One game, please.
EverQuest
Dark Age of Camelot
I never played EQ very much to be honest, so maybe you are right there, but DAoC?
What are you talking about? You could level alone (granted, it wasn't as fast as in dedicated groups, but you could do it). You could be a kickass Stealther in PvP if you knew how to go about it. And that covers about half of the game. There were loads of people who soloed in DAoC. Sure, loads more played in groups, but that is beside the point.
The point I made was that you could do many if not most things solo. And that is still true for DAoC.
DAoC works two ways.
You COULD solo in DAoC, it just took FOREVER. You could solo as a stealther if you were good enough, but more often than not you'd get killed, but it was possible if you really really wanted to.
That is how more MMOs should be. Give you the option, but make grouping much more appealing.
Then some changes hit DAoC that made it much much easier to solo. And you know what happened? The game died. Mythic has gone back and said that was one of their biggest mistakes with DAoC. It destroyed grouping, no new players came into the game, because there was no one there to help them get into it. And what players DAoC did have were killed off slowly as frustration with the ToA expansion grew. It was the one two punch. No new players + angry current subscribers = dead game.
Grouping should not be penalized like it is in current MMOs.
And so...what tells you that it won't be the same way in TOR?
Personally, I think the biggest problem with modern MMO's are the communities. It#s the players that WANT to solo. If a game FORCED you to group all the time, no one would like that very much either because it would not let you get anywhere if you didn't always have someone on to be with.
Seek the blame for all the soloing in games in the players, not the games. I play WoW...and I have not soloed at any point except like once or twice in my entire time there. So...?
It's the WoW generation. They were contained for a while, but it seems a lot of them have finally become aware that there's an entire MMO industry outside of WoW, and unless its noob friendly like WoW, they won't touch it.
But the reason I believe SW will be mostly singleplayer is because they SAID IT THEMSELVES. :P
That, and its coming from a singleplayer game company.
You haven't read shit have you? See that thread stickied at the top of the main page? Read every article there or GTFO. The developers building this title have more MMO experience than most devs for other AAA titles. They have what could be considered a "Dream Team" of developers in charge of building it. It's not a single player game.
I seem to remember them saying groups would be necessary for many aspects of game play. I swear people either bitch about having to "raid" or having to solo. I'm almost positive this game will have a little something for everyone. In case you missed it they basically said you will have your own personal story arcs that will be tied to you, some of your story fits in with some of the epic group encounters, which themselves will elements built in that will allow you to break away from your group and complete a part of the quest on your own depending on your role/profession. That sounds pretty damned balanced to me. Sure some of the stuff you can't do alone, and some you have to do by yourself, though I'm sure you could get support if you need it.
Bioware are looking to make money, not to innovate the genre..this game will be similar to lotro and the story will be a cheaper version of a bioware single player game, because with mmo's you can get away with screwing your players.
It is a while after a posted this thread - I had forgotten about it for a while. I can see it is still going on.
It is interesting to see the hate it can spew when you say your opinion about something on these forums.
Most of the haters in this thread has not addressed my points, only whether or not I have a right to say what I say. I find that interesting.
Let me address some common points and in some cases misconceptions:
1. Game isn't finished so why do you have the crystal ball or how can you comment on the state of the game?
If a developer releases info and share it with the public, make a big spectacle and show of it - with lots of hype incl. launching a joint website with Lucasarts and announce their "ground breaking entertainment product" - surely we - the public - and potential customers have the right to comment.
2. Bioware makes great games, are great at story based games, are a great developer or whatever - so you should give them the benefit of the doubt?
Bioware is now owned by EA. Whether or not that is a good thing can be discussed. But I can't see why Bioware should be exempt from scrutiny. Why even have mmorpg.com if we can not discuss games? If players at all have a chance to change things, it is now - not when beta hits. Only early in development can we even have a chance to affect things. Bioware may for some have made great games - personally I didn't like KOTOR but Baldur's Gate was great for a while. However (!) - I can't see that this mean I should put on the blindfolds for what is going on here.
3. You are just some disgruntled, angry ex-SWG player.
Why there may be some truth to that, it is not like what some here thinks. Yes I am very dissappointed in that Bioware is not making a more sandbox approach. And yes I am sad that no game company try to go this way. But it is also about common sense and principles. Why pay 15-20 $ a month for something that is essentially a multiplayer online and not massive? Or pay that amount for something that has the longevitiy of a singleplayer game - meaning there is nothing in it after 1-3 months? TOR chooses to go all storyline, singleplayer focused and don't care about the little man in the star wars world - these are their own words. There is only room for (lightsaber swinging and the like) heroes. How can this appeal as a ROLEPLAYING game OR as a MASSIVE game? Why pay to just do combat, when other games like SWG offered you combat PLUS a whole range of other things. Easy to design and spit out on the gaming market? Yes! Interesting more than a few weeks? I dare say, no. Not as a mmorpg.
4. Many people mention WoW - let me straigthen that out.
WoW is succesful not because it is cookie cutter or easy. Not because it is raid(infested) or level-based. Not because it is linear or childish in graphics. It is succesful because of three things: A. It was in the right place at the right time - B. it got stuck in the snowball effect to the extent it became a household name and something even parents with no clue about mmos or online gaming has heard about and news media talking about and C. it could all happen in the first place because it just had the basics right. Despite the early server problems the game feels complete, has a lot to do, runs smoothly and it adheres to the basic principle of "Don't Make Me Think" (read the book by Steve Krug). Don't make me think - (the principle, not the book) is not about making games cookie-cutter or simple in the sense something has to be linear hold - my - hand - but it is all about making things smooth and not bugging down users with unneccesary problems. What I suggest here is that even a sandbox can be smooth and run in an intelligent way where the user feels he knows what to do.
Look at the combat of WoW vs. WAR. WAR just lack that feeling of smoothness. WoW actually WORKS. WAR is just giving that feeling of chunkiness and something is missing. WoW's great genius is that these things just work without the need to make you THINK. And it is so subtle yet missed by recent alledgedly AAA mmos like AoC and WAR. And Tabula Rasa. And by all accounts seems to be missing from TCoS and SG:W.
5. Sandbox doesn't work - just look at existing games.
Well look at WAR - it is not the big blockbuster Mythic hoped. AoC is a melting pile of rubbish with no endgame, a combat system they never completely made work or tested properly or thought to the end about (look at combos, cool on the paper, but they forgot that people were stuck in animation). Look at where TCoS and SG:W is heading. What happened with Tabula Rasa (this one is a little sore for me as I liked some parts of what they were doing). Does this mean non-sandbox is a failure? I think so.
Sandbox or not sandbox - every one has their preference. But what you or he or she prefers is not the question. The question is this: What has longevity beyond 3 months? Sure WoW has raids. But what has raids really to do with a massive online game? These raid heavy guilds mostly are composed so people with a job can't really be a part of it. And the game world is empty save for newbies, some people gathering materials or other farmers. The real interaction and prize is in those raids for those people. There is no point to play an mmo then.
Sandbox is about having an open world with possibilties for people to make their own allegiances, make their own choices, creating their own content. Talking of which where is mmo 2.0 - where gamers can add and share content. A sandbox is 2.0. But WoW and WAR and AoC and most likely SW:TOR are like Web 1.0 where there is less social interaction, no social media, no facebook, no twitter, no comments or blogs, just participation by flipping existing content.
6. Sandbox is just imitation of real life and there is no purpose to it - just quit games!
Wrong! Sandbox offer a chance not to re-create life, but to create a sustainable online world where it is meaningful to pay a monthly fee and return time and time again, because you are not just sifting through the same quests, raids or content, but engaging meaningfully with other people in a gameworld, where the are more lax boundaries, where you can develop your own story. A sandbox is not just about logging in and killing X number of critters and get X number of XP and X number of cool items - no a sandbox offer other choices like farming, cultivating things, building a cool gathering place for a guild, moving your player house closer to friends or ressources - meeting up and trading (player vendors instead of an AH) with other players. You would (in SWG for example) go harvest running with friends, make friends with crafters who are more powerful than many warriors because they can make the latest armours. And ressources would be (SHOULD be) shifting around unpredictable, so there is a hunt for the greatest ressources. There could be camping out (camping skills incl.) or meetings at the hospital to get fixed off. How many times haven't I been pissed at waiting for that next shuttle or to have that Doctor pop up and fix me up - but Oh how I miss that.
7. If SWG was so great why did it fail? / Or: SWG was already losing subs before the NGE/CU!
Yes. SWG was NOT a perfect game. But it had the ideas right and proved all those things could happen. It is NOT too expensive to make such a game. But they fucked up their own concept. The whole jedi-debacle and how it was implemented was wrong from start to finish, holo-grind etc. There were some game-breaking bugs that weren't prioritised, like bountyhunter missions that were fucked up and couldn't be completed (and wasn't fixed until like more than a year later). They had a horrible balance with Creature Handlers that created too much lag and wasn't balanced with the game or Tera Kasi artists that were super powerful and then got nerfed to oblivion. And also can you imagine how powerful the game would have been if simple things like speeders and less simple things like SPACE would have been included from day one?
But SWG had the concepts down and showed that MMORPGS are indeed MASSIVE and indeed ROLEPLAYING GAMES. There WERE a point to give them a monthly fee.
I can not for sure know everything SW:TOR is or is not. But I can listen to developers and read what they write about their game. From the CEO's love of WoW, to the launch of the website, and the latest bits of news, there is nothing to indicate that they are creating a MASSIVE game with focus on ROLEPLAYING. The focus on story could be great in a sandbox style game if the storylines were ultra flexible. But I don't pay 15-20$ a month to see a prolonged version of the same movie over and over. I don't care how captivating it is - it is not what I (ME) seek in an mmo. I want to be free to add my content to the game world, I want meaningful interaction with other players (like harvest runs), I want there to be other pursuits but combat to fill my time (and not stupid minigames). There must be good crafting. There must be advanced economics and ressources.
If SW:TOR offered anything of that wouldn't it have been stated by now. Everything the creators say so far has worked contrary to what I believe in.
So yes I am very sceptical now. And SW: TOR was one of the last hopes. After this another great IP is dead to me the way WAR, CONAN and LoTRo (due to no pvp) has died.
These are my thoughts. If this pisses some people off enough to use name-calling - this is their choice. But I think a lot of the hateful posts so far from a little group of posters like Singshiswhatever(ex aoc fanboy poster who defended FC in everything) shows a complete lack of maturity.
It is a while after a posted this thread - I had forgotten about it for a while. I can see it is still going on. It is interesting to see the hate it can spew when you say your opinion about something on these forums. Most of the haters in this thread has not addressed my points, only whether or not I have a right to say what I say. I find that interesting.
Let me address some common points and in some cases misconceptions:
1. Game isn't finished so why do you have the crystal ball or how can you comment on the state of the game? If a developer releases info and share it with the public, make a big spectacle and show of it - with lots of hype incl. launching a joint website with Lucasarts and announce their "ground breaking entertainment product" - surely we - the public - and potential customers have the right to comment. 2. Bioware makes great games, are great at story based games, are a great developer or whatever - so you should give them the benefit of the doubt? Bioware is now owned by EA. Whether or not that is a good thing can be discussed. But I can't see why Bioware should be exempt from scrutiny. Why even have mmorpg.com if we can not discuss games? If players at all have a chance to change things, it is now - not when beta hits. Only early in development can we even have a chance to effect things. Bioware may for some have made great games - personally I didn't like KOTOR but Baldur's Gate was great for a while. However (!) - I can't see that this mean I should put on the blindfolds for what is going on here. 3. You are just some disgruntled, angry ex-SWG player. Why there may be some truth to that, it is not like what some here thinks. Yes I am very dissappointed in that Bioware is not making a more sandbox approach. And yes I am sad that no game company try to go this way. But it is also about common sense and principles. Why pay 15-20 $ a month for something that is essentially a multiplayer online and not massive? Or pay that amount for something that has the longevitiy of a singleplayer game - meaning there is nothing in it after 1-3 months? TOR chooses to go all storyline, singleplayer focused and don't care about the little man in the star wars world - these are their own words. There is only room for (lightsaber swinging and the like) heroes. How can this appeal as a ROLEPLAYING game OR as a MASSIVE game? Why pay to just do combat, when other games like SWG offered you combat PLUS a whole range of other things. Easy to design and spit out on the gaming market? Yes! Interesting more than a few weeks? I dare say, no. Not as a mmorpg. 4. Many people mention WoW - let me straigthen that out. WoW is succesful not because it is cookie cutter or easy. Not because it is raid(infested) or level-based. Not because it is linear or childish in graphics. It is succesful because of three things: A. It was in the right place at the right time - B. it got stuck in the snowball effect to the extent it became a household name and something even parents with no clue about mmos or online gaming has heard about and news media talking about and C. it could all happen in the first place because it just had the basics right. Despite the early server problems the game feels complete, has a lot to do, runs smoothly and it adheres to the basic principle of "Don't Make Me Think" (read the book by Steve Krug). Don't make me think - (the principle, not the book) is not about making games cookie-cutter or simple in the sense something has to be linear hold - my - hand - but it is all about making things smooth and not bugging down users with unneccesary problems. What I suggest here is that even a sandbox can be smooth and run in an intelligent way where the user feels he knows what to do.
Look at the combat of WoW vs. WAR. WAR just lack that feeling of smoothness. WoW actually WORKS. WAR is just giving that feeling of chunkiness and something is missing. WoW's great genius is that these things just work without the need to make you THINK. And it is so subtle yet missed by recent alledgedly AAA mmos like AoC and WAR. And Tabula Rasa. And by all accounts seems to be missing from TCoS and SG:W. 5. Sandbox doesn't work - just look at existing games. Well look at WAR - it is not the big blockbuster Mythic hoped. AoC is a melting pile of rubbish with no endgame, a combat system they never completely made work or tested properly or thought to the end about (look at combos, cool on the paper, but they forgot that people were stuck in animation). Look at where TCoS and SG:W is heading. What happened with Tabula Rasa (this one is a little sore for me as I liked some parts of what they were doing). Does this mean non-sandbox is a failure? I think so.
Sandbox or not sandbox - every one has their preference. But what you or he or she prefers is not the question. The question is this: What has longevity beyond 3 months? Sure WoW has raids. But what has raids really to do with a massive online game? These raid heavy guilds mostly are composed so people with a job can't really be a part of it. And the game world is empty save for newbies, some people gathering materials or other farmers. The real interaction and prize is in those raids for those people. There is no point to play an mmo then.
Sandbox is about having an open world with possibilties for people to make their own allegiances, make their own choices, creating their own content. Talking of which where is mmo 2.0 - where gamers can add and share content. A sandbox is 2.0. But WoW and WAR and AoC and most like SW:TOR are like Web 1.0 where there is less social interaction, no social media, no facebook, no twitter, no comments or blogs, just participation by flipping existing content. 6. Sandbox is just imitation of real life and there is no purpose to it - just quit games! Wrong! Sandbox offer a chance not to re-create life, but to create a sustainable online world where it is meaningful to pay a monthly fee and return time and time again, because you are not just sifting through the same quests, raids or content, but engaging meaningfully with other people in a gameworld, where the are more lax boundaries, where you can develop your own story. A sandbox is not just about logging in and killing X number of critters and get X number of XP and X number of cool items - no a sandbox offer other choices like farming, cultivating things, building a cool gathering place for a guild, moving your player house closer to friends or ressources - meeting up and trading (player vendors instead of an AH) with other players. You would (in SWG for example) go harvest running with friends, make friends with crafters who are more powerful than many warriors because they can make the latest armours. And ressources would be (SHOULD be) shifting around unpredictable, so there is a hunt for the greatest ressources. There could be camping out (camping skills incl.) or meetings at the hospital to get fixed off. How many times haven't I been pissed at waiting for that next shuttle or to have that Doctor pop up and fix me up - but Oh how I miss that. 7. If SWG was so great why did it fail? / Or: SWG was already losing subs before the NGE/CU! Yes. SWG was NOT a perfect game. But it had the ideas right and proved all those things could happen. It is NOT too expensive to make such a game. But they fucked up their own concept. The whole jedi-debacle and how it was implemented was wrong from start to finish, holo-grind etc. There were some game-breaking bugs that weren't prioritised, like bountyhunter missions that were fucked up and couldn't be completed (and wasn't fixed until like more than a year later). They had a horrible balance with Creature Handlers that created too much lag and wasn't balanced with the game or Tera Kasi artists that were super powerful and then got nerfed to oblivion. And also can you imagine how powerful the game would have been if simple things like speeders and less simple things like SPACE would have been included from day one?
But SWG had the concepts down and showed that MMORPGS are indeed MASSIVE and indeed ROLEPLAYING GAMES. There WERE a point to give them a monthly fee. I can not for sure know everything SW:TOR is or is not. But I can listen to developers and read what they write about their game. From the CEO's love of WoW, to the launch of the website, and the latest bits of news, there is nothing to indicate that they are creating a MASSIVE game with focus on ROLEPLAYING. The focus on story could be great in a sandbox style game if the storylines were ultra flexible. But I don't pay 15-20$ a month to see a prolonged version of the same movie over and over. I don't care how captivating it is - it is not what I (ME) seek in an mmo. I want to be free to add my content to the game world, I want meaningful interaction with other players (like harvest runs), I want there to be other pursuits but combat to fill my time (and not stupid minigames). There must be good crafting. There must be advanced economics and ressources. If SW:TOR offered anything of that wouldn't it have been stated by now. Everything the creators say so far has worked contrary to what I believe in. So yes I am very sceptical now. And SW: TOR was one of the last hopes. After this another great IP is dead to me the way WAR, CONAN and LoTRo (due to no pvp) has died. These are my thoughts. If this pisses some people off enough to use name-calling - this is their choice. But I think a lot of the hateful posts so far from a little group of posters like Singshiswhatever(ex aoc fanboy poster who defended FC in everything) shows a complete lack of maturity. Have a nice day
This is the single greatest post I have ever read concering MMO's, their current state, and the future. I love your points on sandbox games, linear MMO's, the monthly fee's, and everything else before, between and after. I wish I could send you a cookie. My praise will have to do:
It is a while after a posted this thread - I had forgotten about it for a while. I can see it is still going on. It is interesting to see the hate it can spew when you say your opinion about something on these forums. Most of the haters in this thread has not addressed my points, only whether or not I have a right to say what I say. I find that interesting.
Let me address some common points and in some cases misconceptions:
1. Game isn't finished so why do you have the crystal ball or how can you comment on the state of the game? If a developer releases info and share it with the public, make a big spectacle and show of it - with lots of hype incl. launching a joint website with Lucasarts and announce their "ground breaking entertainment product" - surely we - the public - and potential customers have the right to comment. 2. Bioware makes great games, are great at story based games, are a great developer or whatever - so you should give them the benefit of the doubt? Bioware is now owned by EA. Whether or not that is a good thing can be discussed. But I can't see why Bioware should be exempt from scrutiny. Why even have mmorpg.com if we can not discuss games? If players at all have a chance to change things, it is now - not when beta hits. Only early in development can we even have a chance to effect things. Bioware may for some have made great games - personally I didn't like KOTOR but Baldur's Gate was great for a while. However (!) - I can't see that this mean I should put on the blindfolds for what is going on here. 3. You are just some disgruntled, angry ex-SWG player. Why there may be some truth to that, it is not like what some here thinks. Yes I am very dissappointed in that Bioware is not making a more sandbox approach. And yes I am sad that no game company try to go this way. But it is also about common sense and principles. Why pay 15-20 $ a month for something that is essentially a multiplayer online and not massive? Or pay that amount for something that has the longevitiy of a singleplayer game - meaning there is nothing in it after 1-3 months? TOR chooses to go all storyline, singleplayer focused and don't care about the little man in the star wars world - these are their own words. There is only room for (lightsaber swinging and the like) heroes. How can this appeal as a ROLEPLAYING game OR as a MASSIVE game? Why pay to just do combat, when other games like SWG offered you combat PLUS a whole range of other things. Easy to design and spit out on the gaming market? Yes! Interesting more than a few weeks? I dare say, no. Not as a mmorpg. 4. Many people mention WoW - let me straigthen that out. WoW is succesful not because it is cookie cutter or easy. Not because it is raid(infested) or level-based. Not because it is linear or childish in graphics. It is succesful because of three things: A. It was in the right place at the right time - B. it got stuck in the snowball effect to the extent it became a household name and something even parents with no clue about mmos or online gaming has heard about and news media talking about and C. it could all happen in the first place because it just had the basics right. Despite the early server problems the game feels complete, has a lot to do, runs smoothly and it adheres to the basic principle of "Don't Make Me Think" (read the book by Steve Krug). Don't make me think - (the principle, not the book) is not about making games cookie-cutter or simple in the sense something has to be linear hold - my - hand - but it is all about making things smooth and not bugging down users with unneccesary problems. What I suggest here is that even a sandbox can be smooth and run in an intelligent way where the user feels he knows what to do.
Look at the combat of WoW vs. WAR. WAR just lack that feeling of smoothness. WoW actually WORKS. WAR is just giving that feeling of chunkiness and something is missing. WoW's great genius is that these things just work without the need to make you THINK. And it is so subtle yet missed by recent alledgedly AAA mmos like AoC and WAR. And Tabula Rasa. And by all accounts seems to be missing from TCoS and SG:W. 5. Sandbox doesn't work - just look at existing games. Well look at WAR - it is not the big blockbuster Mythic hoped. AoC is a melting pile of rubbish with no endgame, a combat system they never completely made work or tested properly or thought to the end about (look at combos, cool on the paper, but they forgot that people were stuck in animation). Look at where TCoS and SG:W is heading. What happened with Tabula Rasa (this one is a little sore for me as I liked some parts of what they were doing). Does this mean non-sandbox is a failure? I think so.
Sandbox or not sandbox - every one has their preference. But what you or he or she prefers is not the question. The question is this: What has longevity beyond 3 months? Sure WoW has raids. But what has raids really to do with a massive online game? These raid heavy guilds mostly are composed so people with a job can't really be a part of it. And the game world is empty save for newbies, some people gathering materials or other farmers. The real interaction and prize is in those raids for those people. There is no point to play an mmo then.
Sandbox is about having an open world with possibilties for people to make their own allegiances, make their own choices, creating their own content. Talking of which where is mmo 2.0 - where gamers can add and share content. A sandbox is 2.0. But WoW and WAR and AoC and most like SW:TOR are like Web 1.0 where there is less social interaction, no social media, no facebook, no twitter, no comments or blogs, just participation by flipping existing content. 6. Sandbox is just imitation of real life and there is no purpose to it - just quit games! Wrong! Sandbox offer a chance not to re-create life, but to create a sustainable online world where it is meaningful to pay a monthly fee and return time and time again, because you are not just sifting through the same quests, raids or content, but engaging meaningfully with other people in a gameworld, where the are more lax boundaries, where you can develop your own story. A sandbox is not just about logging in and killing X number of critters and get X number of XP and X number of cool items - no a sandbox offer other choices like farming, cultivating things, building a cool gathering place for a guild, moving your player house closer to friends or ressources - meeting up and trading (player vendors instead of an AH) with other players. You would (in SWG for example) go harvest running with friends, make friends with crafters who are more powerful than many warriors because they can make the latest armours. And ressources would be (SHOULD be) shifting around unpredictable, so there is a hunt for the greatest ressources. There could be camping out (camping skills incl.) or meetings at the hospital to get fixed off. How many times haven't I been pissed at waiting for that next shuttle or to have that Doctor pop up and fix me up - but Oh how I miss that. 7. If SWG was so great why did it fail? / Or: SWG was already losing subs before the NGE/CU! Yes. SWG was NOT a perfect game. But it had the ideas right and proved all those things could happen. It is NOT too expensive to make such a game. But they fucked up their own concept. The whole jedi-debacle and how it was implemented was wrong from start to finish, holo-grind etc. There were some game-breaking bugs that weren't prioritised, like bountyhunter missions that were fucked up and couldn't be completed (and wasn't fixed until like more than a year later). They had a horrible balance with Creature Handlers that created too much lag and wasn't balanced with the game or Tera Kasi artists that were super powerful and then got nerfed to oblivion. And also can you imagine how powerful the game would have been if simple things like speeders and less simple things like SPACE would have been included from day one?
But SWG had the concepts down and showed that MMORPGS are indeed MASSIVE and indeed ROLEPLAYING GAMES. There WERE a point to give them a monthly fee. I can not for sure know everything SW:TOR is or is not. But I can listen to developers and read what they write about their game. From the CEO's love of WoW, to the launch of the website, and the latest bits of news, there is nothing to indicate that they are creating a MASSIVE game with focus on ROLEPLAYING. The focus on story could be great in a sandbox style game if the storylines were ultra flexible. But I don't pay 15-20$ a month to see a prolonged version of the same movie over and over. I don't care how captivating it is - it is not what I (ME) seek in an mmo. I want to be free to add my content to the game world, I want meaningful interaction with other players (like harvest runs), I want there to be other pursuits but combat to fill my time (and not stupid minigames). There must be good crafting. There must be advanced economics and ressources. If SW:TOR offered anything of that wouldn't it have been stated by now. Everything the creators say so far has worked contrary to what I believe in. So yes I am very sceptical now. And SW: TOR was one of the last hopes. After this another great IP is dead to me the way WAR, CONAN and LoTRo (due to no pvp) has died. These are my thoughts. If this pisses some people off enough to use name-calling - this is their choice. But I think a lot of the hateful posts so far from a little group of posters like Singshiswhatever(ex aoc fanboy poster who defended FC in everything) shows a complete lack of maturity. Have a nice day
I'll ignore all your little jibes towards me for now, since you seem to take great pleasure in the fact that my previously placed faith in a company was unjustified in the end. Dunno why you seem to love to do that. *shrug* Hints at your maturity, don#t you think?
In any case, I've laid out my reasons for what I am saying. I am also trying to keep a sort of balance betwen hopes and fears right now as you may notice if you read any of the other posts I put into topics that praise TOR to the high heavens.
If you had posted this post first, I might not actually have felt the need to refute your claims, because this is by far more thought out and mature than your OP. Anyway, as you so correctly stated, you cannot know how the game turns out. In your first post, you seemed to claim that you knew just that. If this game is not for you, all well and good, but you have no idea how the game in the end will play, except for the educated guesses that you make (in THIS post, not your first one).
Yes, it will be level-based. It will also not reinvent the wheel. It will add some of the strengths of BioWare to the genre, or at least that's what they tell us. That's what i am looking forward to. Will it be great? How the heck should I know? Will it flop? Again, how the heck should I know?
All I know is, you ranted like an angry little kid in your original post, and that was what ticked me off.
That, plus your apparent joy in pointing out previous mistakes of people who have since already said that their previous trust was misplaced. Grow up, will you?
Hater: OMG THIS GAME IS GONNA FAIL SO HARD! Me: Tell me one aspect of the game which you don't like, since they haven't unveiled any information about it Hater: ..............
Well, first, I'm not a "hater". I'm just not quick to drink the Jonestown kool-aid as so many others are. I know (at least I think, I'm not in your mind so there's no way to tell 100%) that you weren't directing that specifically at me so please don't think I am responding to some perceived personal attack, lol.
There, that said, one aspect of this game that I do not like is the decision to go with a level based system as opposed to a skill based. I know that I enjoyed UO's skill based system more than any other I have played and from reading Mortal Online's skill based plan I think it is a really interesting way to go about progression. In my opinion more games should start expanding on this method of progression as there are many attempts at level based progression already in the market.
The next aspect that I don't like is their decision to state "Choose to be a Jedi, a Sith or from a variety of other classic roles, and make decisions which define your personal story and determine your path down the light or dark side of the Force." Reading that it says to me that the Jedi and Sith are the important classes and all the others are ancillary. It also says to me that no matter what your path will be heavily entwined with the light or dark side of the Force, even if you prefer to not get caught up in that element of the game. I would have liked to have seen 2 or 3 more professions thrown out to give, in my opinion, a presentation of breadth of play options that you don't have to get involved in the light side/dark side back and forth. Mind you, I'm not saying that the light side/dark side element shouldn't be there. It should for those who want it. I just think equal consideration/representation should have been shown as well for those who enjoy the Star Wars universe for its other aspects.
I'm also not sold on the Companion aspect of the game at this time as I see it in part taking away from some of potential opportunities for player to player interaction with regard to completing content. The opportunities these days in my view are getting less and less with respect of giving meritable cause for players to work together with respect to PvE content and not including raid content. Admittedly I don't hate the idea. At first mention of it, however, I'm not in favor of it either. After more information is released I can form a final opinion.
So, those are 3 aspects of this title I am not too keen on.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Hater: OMG THIS GAME IS GONNA FAIL SO HARD! Me: Tell me one aspect of the game which you don't like, since they haven't unveiled any information about it Hater: ..............
Well, first, I'm not a "hater". I'm just not quick to drink the Jonestown kool-aid as so many others are. I know (at least I think, I'm not in your mind so there's no way to tell 100%) that you weren't directing that specifically at me so please don't think I am responding to some perceived personal attack, lol.
There, that said, one aspect of this game that I do not like is the decision to go with a level based system as opposed to a skill based. I know that I enjoyed UO's skill based system more than any other I have played and from reading Mortal Online's skill based plan I think it is a really interesting way to go about progression. In my opinion more games should start expanding on this method of progression as there are many attempts at level based progression already in the market.
The next aspect that I don't like is their decision to state "Choose to be a Jedi, a Sith or from a variety of other classic roles, and make decisions which define your personal story and determine your path down the light or dark side of the Force." Reading that it says to me that the Jedi and Sith are the important classes and all the others are ancillary. It also says to me that no matter what your path will be heavily entwined with the light or dark side of the Force, even if you prefer to not get caught up in that element of the game. I would have liked to have seen 2 or 3 more professions thrown out to give, in my opinion, a presentation of breadth of play options that you don't have to get involved in the light side/dark side back and forth. Mind you, I'm not saying that the light side/dark side element shouldn't be there. It should for those who want it. I just think equal consideration/representation should have been shown as well for those who enjoy the Star Wars universe for its other aspects.
I'm also not sold on the Companion aspect of the game at this time as I see it in part taking away from some of potential opportunities for player to player interaction with regard to completing content. The opportunities these days in my view are getting less and less with respect of giving meritable cause for players to work together with respect to PvE content and not including raid content. Admittedly I don't hate the idea. At first mention of it, however, I'm not in favor of it either. After more information is released I can form a final opinion.
So, those are 3 aspects of this title I am not too keen on.
About this. This is something that worries me, too. Since they have released just about -nothing- on how Companion Characters will be, what they will be capable of etc, it is difficult to say, but I can see the same problem as you do, namely, another incentive for players to stick by themselves. While I like the general idea behind Companions I can influence, I do not want to see everyone in this game ignoring grouping with other players and just using companions.
As I've said in another thread, what they really NEED, is an incentive for people to play with other people. Grouping should be encouraged (albeit not forced). I seriously hope they remember that. I do think they will not let you do more difficult things with just your companions and I seriously hope the companions will just be a sort of...fluff and a little help on the way instead of a full fledged party-member that can theoretically replace a Player.
Sadly, as people keep pointing out, gaming companies these days want to make money...so they shoot for mass-market appeal.
This is their self destruction. These companies want a piece of the great WoW pie...what they don't understand is that the people who want to play a game like that....are already playing it.
Look at the WoW-clone, linear failures lately. One after another, they get hyped up, are released, and after a month or two, are struggling.
These companies dump millions into these games, and then don't make their money back. Soon, no company is going to finance MMO development anymore, because it is a poor risk.
ALL because they FAIL to understand that we don't fucking need more WoW clones.
WoW has poisoned the entire MMO industry.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"
SWTOR will be a fun game but so far hardly a MMO, at least a conventional MMO but for the monthly fees.
Now about SWG, let me put my hands on a Pre-CU environment and I will be millionaire in less than a year... and venerated through the whole MMO community
Sandbox is about having an open world with possibilties for people to make their own allegiances, make their own choices, creating their own content. Talking of which where is mmo 2.0 - where gamers can add and share content. A sandbox is 2.0. But WoW and WAR and AoC and most like SW:TOR are like Web 1.0 where there is less social interaction, no social media, no facebook, no twitter, no comments or blogs, just participation by flipping existing content.
I think what you are looking for is 2nd life in a Star Wars skin.
I also think what pissed people off was your arrogant know it all attitude in your original post with gems like these
Too bad BIOWARE blew it. They had a chance at a large IP - they had a chance at making the perfect mmo - they had a chance to set the industry straight on how to make online roleplaying games.
Instead they produce ... THIS?
You can agree or disagree but it is plain for all those who dare open their eyes, that this game will cater to the "ohh wow jedis with lightsabers kiddy crowd" - and not to mature players.
So you insulted everyone who disagrees with you. If you had made your later post first there would have been a much better dialogue instead of the responses you got to your original rant post.
As a mature - casual player - I will wait for the game to hit open beta so I can try it before I decide to buy it. As far as value for entertainment goes - I currently pay $20 for a Star Wars book (yes prices are obscene in Australia), that lasts me 4 or 5 hours.
So I would be happy to pay $20 a month for a story based game that has more content than their last 8 games combined. That amount of content should last me a year or more.
I think with this game Bioware is catering to the I want to be the Hero crowd which is the usual audience for single player games, as most mmo's you arent the hero - everyone else is doing the same quest and it resets 30 seconds after you kill the boss dude.
Sandbox is about having an open world with possibilties for people to make their own allegiances, make their own choices, creating their own content. Talking of which where is mmo 2.0 - where gamers can add and share content. A sandbox is 2.0. But WoW and WAR and AoC and most like SW:TOR are like Web 1.0 where there is less social interaction, no social media, no facebook, no twitter, no comments or blogs, just participation by flipping existing content.
I think what you are looking for is 2nd life in a Star Wars skin.
I also think what pissed people off was your arrogant know it all attitude in your original post with gems like these
Too bad BIOWARE blew it. They had a chance at a large IP - they had a chance at making the perfect mmo - they had a chance to set the industry straight on how to make online roleplaying games.
Instead they produce ... THIS?
You can agree or disagree but it is plain for all those who dare open their eyes, that this game will cater to the "ohh wow jedis with lightsabers kiddy crowd" - and not to mature players.
So you insulted everyone who disagrees with you. If you had made your later post first there would have been a much better dialogue instead of the responses you got to your original rant post.
As a mature - casual player - I will wait for the game to hit open beta so I can try it before I decide to buy it. As far as value for entertainment goes - I currently pay $20 for a Star Wars book (yes prices are obscene in Australia), that lasts me 4 or 5 hours.
So I would be happy to pay $20 a month for a story based game that has more content than their last 8 games combined. That amount of content should last me a year or more.
I think with this game Bioware is catering to the I want to be the Hero crowd which is the usual audience for single player games, as most mmo's you arent the hero - everyone else is doing the same quest and it resets 30 seconds after you kill the boss dude.
That's pretty much the adverage Star Wars fan. I playing just some guy in a SW world, I think I would also be down with playinga hero. FFS it's Star Wars. I'm down for whateva
Too bad BIOWARE blew it. They had a chance at a large IP - they had a chance at making the perfect mmo - they had a chance to set the industry straight on how to make online roleplaying games. Instead they produce ... THIS? Even the website is poorly constructed. The images don't look particular and the little info they did give is all wrong.
They talk about story as if it is more important than gameplay. Sad thing is that this will probably be just another mmo that people play 1-3 months and get tired of.
What Lucasarts have decided to do is to make their little wow dream once again - re-establish the NGE/CU with a new game. New company, Bioware, so why should Lucasarts owe anything to anyone? Maybe - they ARE right. But what happens now is that all the many MANY people tired of a greedy industry creating cheap little themeparks with linear gameplay - will be even more tired. SW:TOR offers nothing new. No innovative way to deal with the genre.
People can attack sandbox all they want, but only games with lots of variety, depth, endgame etc. is worth my time. The Internet, our powerful PCs, the technology of today BEG for a game that is truly EPIC and LARGE with CHOICES. People talk about simulation as if it was a bad thing, I don't. Why should I pay 20$ a month to play something which is essentially counterstrike online. I mean - sure I don't mind playing a single or multi-player online game - but greedy companies demanding 20$ a month on top of 50-100$ for a game and who even have the audacity to be surprised when players leave after a month or two due to bugs, lack of gameplay, simply don't have my respect. I mean - take SWG - despite it DID have MANY flaws, bugs and problems - launched too early and could have included a lot of features from day one (and I am still sore about this) - it actually had depth, scope, a vision. It was far from perfect, but it showed the PATH. SWG had what most mmos forget - a reason to stay online after a month of running through X levels. SWG had community, reasons to communicate. It gave players a break (or even a complete career) away from fighting. You could farm ressources, advanced crafting system - there were classes specializing in other stuff but fighting. I think it attracted some really cool people I never EVER meet in games like AOC, WoW, COH etc. How I miss hanging out with crafters, discussing prices and tech with people - running around to look at vendors or seeing friends and helping them with harvest missions, placing new harvesters etc. Or how much fun it was to design a guild with player houses spreaded out over your own plot of land. Or all those moments where you were waiting for a shuttle or sitting at the doctors getting a nice chat with people. There are 1000s of things SWG should and must have done better, but it showed us the light. What SW:TOR is showing us is simply greed. If they want 20$ a month they should do something to deserve it. You can agree or disagree but it is plain for all those who dare open their eyes, that this game will cater to the "ohh wow jedis with lightsabers kiddy crowd" - and not to mature players. Bioware stresses their love of story only as an excuse to not make a real full mmo. This saves them money and they hope they get that SW kiddy crowd. Fine. It is a design choice maybe - just don't charge a monthly fee if you just plan on holding a player's hand through X levels through a so-called story..
Make a good game - with awesome gameplay, classes with SKILLs rather than levels - or even classless - make depth, endgame, player housing, a real player economy, make player vendors meaningful and not just an AH - give us a REAL deep crafting system and a hunt and fight for ressources - drop those damn instances that removes the players from the game world - engage us in a large open world -- and don't even THINK on making a Star Wars game where space is a frigging expansion - give us all that, and then ......... and then ................ then... I WILL MAKE MY OWN FRIGGIN STORY _ THANK YOU EVER SO MUCH !!
Draccan
P.S. November 26th: May I direct your attention to this post I made much further down with elaborations on what I think!?
wait until beta's come out and more gameplay footage before you make an official opinion, until then.......
Originally posted by -aLpHa- I really like how Bioware is progressing with the game and hears the players critics out (look at the sword size they redone them ^^)
This is exactly WHY we can't "wait until beta" before we start giving feedback and voicing our opinions. NOW is the time to let them know what they are doing right / wrong, so that they can take our feedback into account before too much work would have to be changed.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"
wait until beta's come out and more gameplay footage before you make an official opinion, until then....... OPINION DENIED!!!!!
Doh!
If we are not to comment they shouldn't release info at all (especially not hype it like they do) before beta.
At beta gamers are just sheep-herded through the game to find obvious bugs, test the framework etc. By then all design decisions are set in stone more or less.
Too bad BIOWARE blew it. They had a chance at a large IP - they had a chance at making the perfect mmo - they had a chance to set the industry straight on how to make online roleplaying games. Instead they produce ... THIS? Even the website is poorly constructed. The images don't look particular and the little info they did give is all wrong.
They talk about story as if it is more important than gameplay. Sad thing is that this will probably be just another mmo that people play 1-3 months and get tired of.
What Lucasarts have decided to do is to make their little wow dream once again - re-establish the NGE/CU with a new game. New company, Bioware, so why should Lucasarts owe anything to anyone? Maybe - they ARE right. But what happens now is that all the many MANY people tired of a greedy industry creating cheap little themeparks with linear gameplay - will be even more tired. SW:TOR offers nothing new. No innovative way to deal with the genre.
People can attack sandbox all they want, but only games with lots of variety, depth, endgame etc. is worth my time. The Internet, our powerful PCs, the technology of today BEG for a game that is truly EPIC and LARGE with CHOICES. People talk about simulation as if it was a bad thing, I don't. Why should I pay 20$ a month to play something which is essentially counterstrike online. I mean - sure I don't mind playing a single or multi-player online game - but greedy companies demanding 20$ a month on top of 50-100$ for a game and who even have the audacity to be surprised when players leave after a month or two due to bugs, lack of gameplay, simply don't have my respect. I mean - take SWG - despite it DID have MANY flaws, bugs and problems - launched too early and could have included a lot of features from day one (and I am still sore about this) - it actually had depth, scope, a vision. It was far from perfect, but it showed the PATH. SWG had what most mmos forget - a reason to stay online after a month of running through X levels. SWG had community, reasons to communicate. It gave players a break (or even a complete career) away from fighting. You could farm ressources, advanced crafting system - there were classes specializing in other stuff but fighting. I think it attracted some really cool people I never EVER meet in games like AOC, WoW, COH etc. How I miss hanging out with crafters, discussing prices and tech with people - running around to look at vendors or seeing friends and helping them with harvest missions, placing new harvesters etc. Or how much fun it was to design a guild with player houses spreaded out over your own plot of land. Or all those moments where you were waiting for a shuttle or sitting at the doctors getting a nice chat with people. There are 1000s of things SWG should and must have done better, but it showed us the light. What SW:TOR is showing us is simply greed. If they want 20$ a month they should do something to deserve it. You can agree or disagree but it is plain for all those who dare open their eyes, that this game will cater to the "ohh wow jedis with lightsabers kiddy crowd" - and not to mature players. Bioware stresses their love of story only as an excuse to not make a real full mmo. This saves them money and they hope they get that SW kiddy crowd. Fine. It is a design choice maybe - just don't charge a monthly fee if you just plan on holding a player's hand through X levels through a so-called story..
Make a good game - with awesome gameplay, classes with SKILLs rather than levels - or even classless - make depth, endgame, player housing, a real player economy, make player vendors meaningful and not just an AH - give us a REAL deep crafting system and a hunt and fight for ressources - drop those damn instances that removes the players from the game world - engage us in a large open world -- and don't even THINK on making a Star Wars game where space is a frigging expansion - give us all that, and then ......... and then ................ then... I WILL MAKE MY OWN FRIGGIN STORY _ THANK YOU EVER SO MUCH !!
Draccan
P.S. November 26th: May I direct your attention to this post I made much further down with elaborations on what I think!?
wait until beta's come out and more gameplay footage before you make an official opinion, until then.......
OPINION DENIED!!!!!
No...not true. It's good to give -CONSTRUCTIVE- feedback early in the development stage. See the Lightsaber size issue. People complained quick and early, so BioWare fixed the issue.
If you do not add your input now, it won't be heard. If you wait till Beta to complain, you have no right to complain anymore.
However, notice how I capsed -constructive-. OP's first post was poorly phrased and most likely written in heated temper (at least that's what I assume judging by the second post done in this thread).
Constructive Criticism at this stage is needed and wanted. Simple bashing and flaming is not. Simple as that.
Why would anyone respond to this moronic DOOM POST. OP is clearly just a troll. Why Feed?
I think I could have quoted that EXACT post from a 100 of my threads on the old AOC forum pre launch!
Somehow there are always someone out there.. by the droves even ... who blindly follow a game with no criticism and what is worse allowing no one else a critical eye.
Bioware is letting the genre down, pre-CU SWG gamers who wanted vindication.. and so is LA.
Do we really want another WAR, AOC, Matrix Online, Anarchy Online or whatever .. with little or no re-playability / incentive to stay after 2 months?
Or a Lotro with no pvp?
Bioware will follow suit, all the others in their pursuit of the wow-factor.. WAR tried and failed. AOC tried and failed...
And WoW is really just catering to hardcore raiders and kids being allowed to play by parents.
I'll ignore all your little jibes towards me for now, since you seem to take great pleasure in the fact that my previously placed faith in a company was unjustified in the end. Dunno why you seem to love to do that. *shrug* Hints at your maturity, don#t you think?
In any case, I've laid out my reasons for what I am saying. I am also trying to keep a sort of balance betwen hopes and fears right now as you may notice if you read any of the other posts I put into topics that praise TOR to the high heavens.
If you had posted this post first, I might not actually have felt the need to refute your claims, because this is by far more thought out and mature than your OP. Anyway, as you so correctly stated, you cannot know how the game turns out. In your first post, you seemed to claim that you knew just that. If this game is not for you, all well and good, but you have no idea how the game in the end will play, except for the educated guesses that you make (in THIS post, not your first one).
Yes, it will be level-based. It will also not reinvent the wheel. It will add some of the strengths of BioWare to the genre, or at least that's what they tell us. That's what i am looking forward to. Will it be great? How the heck should I know? Will it flop? Again, how the heck should I know?
All I know is, you ranted like an angry little kid in your original post, and that was what ticked me off.
That, plus your apparent joy in pointing out previous mistakes of people who have since already said that their previous trust was misplaced. Grow up, will you?
You know... You call it little jibes. Truth is you come out pretty strong against other people. Not against their viewpoints or the game in general.
So yes, I do think the past is relevant here. I just randomly went 10-20 pages back in your post history and there was tons of posts called people critical about Age of Conan for "doomsayers" etc.
You were the classic fanboy on this forum about the game. You defended everything FC did from letting people pay for fileplanet beta to sieges still being in the game. I really got a kick out of reading it.
So why mention it here? Well if you are going to apply this blind fanboyism here will it help improve the game or hurt the game? Ask yourself!
Just for the record here is a random example of your previous "work":
"Just to point something out here. Spellweaving won't be seen in Closed Beta. It's been stated by Developers that FC wants to keep it as something -New- just like Sieging and DX10 Graphics. All those things are tested internally by the QA Department of FC and all those things will be in at launch. That is the latest word and I am sticking with it, despite the constant stream of people saying it won't be.
Until FC comes out and says sorry, Sieging is not in at launch, I will believe them that it will be, since I have less and less reason not to (seeing as the other features that haters believed not to be in at launch, Spellweaving, is now apparently going to be in. Keep in mind, this is not an assumption on how it will play, merely the fact that it will be there).
If testing Spellweaving and Sieges only internally is a good decision remains to be seen. I have my reservations about that as I stated in other posts, but I am willing to give them the benefit of doubt."
Next time people legitimately question why something is not tested in beta will you be wary? Will you still call them doomsayers?
And:
"Where has it been stated by FC that the High Level Content is not ready? I would really love to see links to those interviews. And having something not in Beta but included in release...yes, that is a reason for raised brows. But again, there's only one way to find out. Namely wait for release. Why don#t you heed your own advice?
All you do here is claiming to know what the game will be like when it is released. I can make these claims as well. I don't. I say to everyone who has doubts about this game to not pre-order and instead wait until it is released. But I don't hand out doom and gloom while doing it."
And:
"I have to step in again. You are assuming 50k people do not like what they are seeing. So far though, I have seen more positive than negative overall. Sure there are people who don't like the game. There are also people who wouldn't even like the game if it was the second coming due to their prior hate. But you have to remember that not just the doomsayers will tell their friends. "
And:
" [posted by Alan0n: You do know that endgame content means right ? Its the e n d game. ATM Funcom is promising players something that they havn't in game. Will it even work ? Who knows... Noone has tested it...
Again - u prove the point of what MMO players are turning into. "Yes we are fine as long as the character can walk at launch ! "
Shut up - Realise that comments like this is affectig not just you but possibly millions of ppl that have to live with unfinished and buggy games at release. And that includes alot of titles that wont ever stand under half of what the devs "PROMISED" at start.]
You, sir, need to be the one to...close your mouth.
You continue to jump on every AoC thread you can find to bash it with you presumptious thoughts which you like to present as facts.
Fact is: You have no idea what End-Game will be in the game when it is released. You have no idea how well it is tested. You have no idea how well it will be implemented. You don't even have an idea of what has been tested in Beta or not (and yes, I know that due to your seriously outdated supposed Beta-Info you keep spewing up).
And the best part about it? If someone calls you out on one of your blatant lies, you just step away, ignore that post and move on to the next thread or next topic to continue your bashing.
I am frankly tired of reading your posts and pointing out all the little tidbits of misinformation and doomsaying you weave into them, but on the other hand, I know that you will simply post some "lololol you faboi, naive etcetc" back at me, which coincidentally seems to be your only defense against people who post their own opinions as opposed to yours, but well, this had to get off my chest.
Enjoy your little rantings here. I for one will wait until the game is released and afterwards to point fingers. And ohhhhh, guess what, if FC does fail to deliver, I won't deny that. At least though, I will be basing my complaints on FACTS and not half-cooked assumptions."
And:
" Originally posted by Martie
Pre rendered still shots, shows nothing of the game. Funcom will never ever show proper pvp in Aoc, because it is a bloody joke. This game fails on all levels, and you can take that to the bank. Another delay imminent.
That's why they had a live showing of the game at TG'08 with hundreds of people watching and everyone seemed quite happy with what they saw?
Get a grip. Your postings of doom are getting repetetive and boring. If you have something to say, at least back it up with something other than simple speculation."
And:
" Originally posted by Martie
To get to Border kingdoms, you have to go to an instaced copy of it. Like GW copy of zones with Id numbers, so yes. IT is not seamless, and trust me when i say border kingdom's and these castle and keep sieges you all think are going to be nice are far from being released in any form.
Dooooooooooom, I say!!! Dooooooooooooooooooooooooooom!!!!
Sorry, I feel like writing that in every thread where people make claims about any game being bad, far from finished, or developed by money-crazy bastards. I'm just kinda amused by these posts by now.
As for the Border Kingdoms, as far as has been released, the Border Kingdoms will be one big Zone (as opposed to Instance), and the Battle Keeps will be scattered throughout this large Zone. So no, it is -not- instanced, but yes, it is one big seperate Zone. Hope that helps. "
I could go on indefinitely... But hey things ARE taken out of a context mostly here. But but but..
Thing is - you are not by any means the worst. Not at all. Most of your posts are reasonable. But the problem is you still jump all over people again and again for being critical. Many people like in this thread just jump in with the usual "wait till beta", "doom doooom" etc.. But what have we seen but doom lately? What? WAR? AOC which you followed religiously?
I wish people learned from those mistake but I guess it is too much to hope. This genre is dead and the only reason companies still try to make these games is the wow-factor. A well polished game with really limited "massive" and "roleplay" aspects. A one in a million chance for companies at the big bucks.
Bioware's CEO openly has said WoW is the right way to do things. That says it all.
Originally posted by Draccan Bioware is letting the genre down, pre-CU SWG gamers who wanted vindication.. and so is LA.
How are they letting the genre down? Thats your opinion of course, but Bioware dont owe the genre or pre-CU SWG players anything.
As long as its an enjoyable game - who cares if its themepark or sandbox. Except of course the people who think the only good game is a sandbox so everyone else should play what they like.
As for replayability - if every class has a different storyline, and they put more content in than all their other titles combined - then it sounds at this point like there will be plenty of replayability. Until we can actually play it - thats all anyone has an opinion with no in game experience to back it up.
Comments
Because you can already tell the direction the game is going in? Just read the website and look at the screenshots. They are cartoony and stylized. The FAQs say it will be mostly soloable and heavy story driven.
IE, a billion instances and playing by yourself most of the time. Anyone who expected anything different from a company that makes single player games should question their ability to think. It is THIS reason that I have always said KotoR and Elderscrolls would NOT make good MMOs.
So, give me ONE game where you can't do many things, if not most things solo? One game, please.
EverQuest
Dark Age of Camelot
I never played EQ very much to be honest, so maybe you are right there, but DAoC?
What are you talking about? You could level alone (granted, it wasn't as fast as in dedicated groups, but you could do it). You could be a kickass Stealther in PvP if you knew how to go about it. And that covers about half of the game. There were loads of people who soloed in DAoC. Sure, loads more played in groups, but that is beside the point.
The point I made was that you could do many if not most things solo. And that is still true for DAoC.
DAoC works two ways.
You COULD solo in DAoC, it just took FOREVER. You could solo as a stealther if you were good enough, but more often than not you'd get killed, but it was possible if you really really wanted to.
That is how more MMOs should be. Give you the option, but make grouping much more appealing.
Then some changes hit DAoC that made it much much easier to solo. And you know what happened? The game died. Mythic has gone back and said that was one of their biggest mistakes with DAoC. It destroyed grouping, no new players came into the game, because there was no one there to help them get into it. And what players DAoC did have were killed off slowly as frustration with the ToA expansion grew. It was the one two punch. No new players + angry current subscribers = dead game.
Grouping should not be penalized like it is in current MMOs.
And so...what tells you that it won't be the same way in TOR?
Personally, I think the biggest problem with modern MMO's are the communities. It#s the players that WANT to solo. If a game FORCED you to group all the time, no one would like that very much either because it would not let you get anywhere if you didn't always have someone on to be with.
Seek the blame for all the soloing in games in the players, not the games. I play WoW...and I have not soloed at any point except like once or twice in my entire time there. So...?
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
Because you can already tell the direction the game is going in? Just read the website and look at the screenshots. They are cartoony and stylized. The FAQs say it will be mostly soloable and heavy story driven.
IE, a billion instances and playing by yourself most of the time. Anyone who expected anything different from a company that makes single player games should question their ability to think. It is THIS reason that I have always said KotoR and Elderscrolls would NOT make good MMOs.
So, give me ONE game where you can't do many things, if not most things solo? One game, please.
EverQuest
Dark Age of Camelot
I never played EQ very much to be honest, so maybe you are right there, but DAoC?
What are you talking about? You could level alone (granted, it wasn't as fast as in dedicated groups, but you could do it). You could be a kickass Stealther in PvP if you knew how to go about it. And that covers about half of the game. There were loads of people who soloed in DAoC. Sure, loads more played in groups, but that is beside the point.
The point I made was that you could do many if not most things solo. And that is still true for DAoC.
DAoC works two ways.
You COULD solo in DAoC, it just took FOREVER. You could solo as a stealther if you were good enough, but more often than not you'd get killed, but it was possible if you really really wanted to.
That is how more MMOs should be. Give you the option, but make grouping much more appealing.
Then some changes hit DAoC that made it much much easier to solo. And you know what happened? The game died. Mythic has gone back and said that was one of their biggest mistakes with DAoC. It destroyed grouping, no new players came into the game, because there was no one there to help them get into it. And what players DAoC did have were killed off slowly as frustration with the ToA expansion grew. It was the one two punch. No new players + angry current subscribers = dead game.
Grouping should not be penalized like it is in current MMOs.
And so...what tells you that it won't be the same way in TOR?
Personally, I think the biggest problem with modern MMO's are the communities. It#s the players that WANT to solo. If a game FORCED you to group all the time, no one would like that very much either because it would not let you get anywhere if you didn't always have someone on to be with.
Seek the blame for all the soloing in games in the players, not the games. I play WoW...and I have not soloed at any point except like once or twice in my entire time there. So...?
It's the WoW generation. They were contained for a while, but it seems a lot of them have finally become aware that there's an entire MMO industry outside of WoW, and unless its noob friendly like WoW, they won't touch it.
But the reason I believe SW will be mostly singleplayer is because they SAID IT THEMSELVES. :P
That, and its coming from a singleplayer game company.
Darkfall Travelogues!
Because you can already tell the direction the game is going in? Just read the website and look at the screenshots. They are cartoony and stylized. The FAQs say it will be mostly soloable and heavy story driven.
IE, a billion instances and playing by yourself most of the time. Anyone who expected anything different from a company that makes single player games should question their ability to think. It is THIS reason that I have always said KotoR and Elderscrolls would NOT make good MMOs.
So, give me ONE game where you can't do many things, if not most things solo? One game, please.
EverQuest
Dark Age of Camelot
I never played EQ very much to be honest, so maybe you are right there, but DAoC?
What are you talking about? You could level alone (granted, it wasn't as fast as in dedicated groups, but you could do it). You could be a kickass Stealther in PvP if you knew how to go about it. And that covers about half of the game. There were loads of people who soloed in DAoC. Sure, loads more played in groups, but that is beside the point.
The point I made was that you could do many if not most things solo. And that is still true for DAoC.
DAoC works two ways.
You COULD solo in DAoC, it just took FOREVER. You could solo as a stealther if you were good enough, but more often than not you'd get killed, but it was possible if you really really wanted to.
That is how more MMOs should be. Give you the option, but make grouping much more appealing.
Then some changes hit DAoC that made it much much easier to solo. And you know what happened? The game died. Mythic has gone back and said that was one of their biggest mistakes with DAoC. It destroyed grouping, no new players came into the game, because there was no one there to help them get into it. And what players DAoC did have were killed off slowly as frustration with the ToA expansion grew. It was the one two punch. No new players + angry current subscribers = dead game.
Grouping should not be penalized like it is in current MMOs.
And so...what tells you that it won't be the same way in TOR?
Personally, I think the biggest problem with modern MMO's are the communities. It#s the players that WANT to solo. If a game FORCED you to group all the time, no one would like that very much either because it would not let you get anywhere if you didn't always have someone on to be with.
Seek the blame for all the soloing in games in the players, not the games. I play WoW...and I have not soloed at any point except like once or twice in my entire time there. So...?
It's the WoW generation. They were contained for a while, but it seems a lot of them have finally become aware that there's an entire MMO industry outside of WoW, and unless its noob friendly like WoW, they won't touch it.
But the reason I believe SW will be mostly singleplayer is because they SAID IT THEMSELVES. :P
That, and its coming from a singleplayer game company.
Where do they say it will be mostly single-player? Please quote me that.
They say that most of it will be solo-able. Not that you HAVE to do it solo. Read correctly and understand what they are saying.
We do not know if that will lead to a "singleplayer" game or to a game such as DAoC where you COULD solo, but didn't need to and probably didn't want to. That is a prediction that can't be verified. Fullstop.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
Because you can already tell the direction the game is going in? Just read the website and look at the screenshots. They are cartoony and stylized. The FAQs say it will be mostly soloable and heavy story driven.
IE, a billion instances and playing by yourself most of the time. Anyone who expected anything different from a company that makes single player games should question their ability to think. It is THIS reason that I have always said KotoR and Elderscrolls would NOT make good MMOs.
So, give me ONE game where you can't do many things, if not most things solo? One game, please.
EverQuest
Dark Age of Camelot
I never played EQ very much to be honest, so maybe you are right there, but DAoC?
What are you talking about? You could level alone (granted, it wasn't as fast as in dedicated groups, but you could do it). You could be a kickass Stealther in PvP if you knew how to go about it. And that covers about half of the game. There were loads of people who soloed in DAoC. Sure, loads more played in groups, but that is beside the point.
The point I made was that you could do many if not most things solo. And that is still true for DAoC.
DAoC works two ways.
You COULD solo in DAoC, it just took FOREVER. You could solo as a stealther if you were good enough, but more often than not you'd get killed, but it was possible if you really really wanted to.
That is how more MMOs should be. Give you the option, but make grouping much more appealing.
Then some changes hit DAoC that made it much much easier to solo. And you know what happened? The game died. Mythic has gone back and said that was one of their biggest mistakes with DAoC. It destroyed grouping, no new players came into the game, because there was no one there to help them get into it. And what players DAoC did have were killed off slowly as frustration with the ToA expansion grew. It was the one two punch. No new players + angry current subscribers = dead game.
Grouping should not be penalized like it is in current MMOs.
And so...what tells you that it won't be the same way in TOR?
Personally, I think the biggest problem with modern MMO's are the communities. It#s the players that WANT to solo. If a game FORCED you to group all the time, no one would like that very much either because it would not let you get anywhere if you didn't always have someone on to be with.
Seek the blame for all the soloing in games in the players, not the games. I play WoW...and I have not soloed at any point except like once or twice in my entire time there. So...?
It's the WoW generation. They were contained for a while, but it seems a lot of them have finally become aware that there's an entire MMO industry outside of WoW, and unless its noob friendly like WoW, they won't touch it.
But the reason I believe SW will be mostly singleplayer is because they SAID IT THEMSELVES. :P
That, and its coming from a singleplayer game company.
You haven't read shit have you? See that thread stickied at the top of the main page? Read every article there or GTFO. The developers building this title have more MMO experience than most devs for other AAA titles. They have what could be considered a "Dream Team" of developers in charge of building it. It's not a single player game.
I seem to remember them saying groups would be necessary for many aspects of game play. I swear people either bitch about having to "raid" or having to solo. I'm almost positive this game will have a little something for everyone. In case you missed it they basically said you will have your own personal story arcs that will be tied to you, some of your story fits in with some of the epic group encounters, which themselves will elements built in that will allow you to break away from your group and complete a part of the quest on your own depending on your role/profession. That sounds pretty damned balanced to me. Sure some of the stuff you can't do alone, and some you have to do by yourself, though I'm sure you could get support if you need it.
Bioware are looking to make money, not to innovate the genre..this game will be similar to lotro and the story will be a cheaper version of a bioware single player game, because with mmo's you can get away with screwing your players.
It is a while after a posted this thread - I had forgotten about it for a while. I can see it is still going on.
It is interesting to see the hate it can spew when you say your opinion about something on these forums.
Most of the haters in this thread has not addressed my points, only whether or not I have a right to say what I say. I find that interesting.
Let me address some common points and in some cases misconceptions:
1. Game isn't finished so why do you have the crystal ball or how can you comment on the state of the game?
If a developer releases info and share it with the public, make a big spectacle and show of it - with lots of hype incl. launching a joint website with Lucasarts and announce their "ground breaking entertainment product" - surely we - the public - and potential customers have the right to comment.
2. Bioware makes great games, are great at story based games, are a great developer or whatever - so you should give them the benefit of the doubt?
Bioware is now owned by EA. Whether or not that is a good thing can be discussed. But I can't see why Bioware should be exempt from scrutiny. Why even have mmorpg.com if we can not discuss games? If players at all have a chance to change things, it is now - not when beta hits. Only early in development can we even have a chance to affect things. Bioware may for some have made great games - personally I didn't like KOTOR but Baldur's Gate was great for a while. However (!) - I can't see that this mean I should put on the blindfolds for what is going on here.
3. You are just some disgruntled, angry ex-SWG player.
Why there may be some truth to that, it is not like what some here thinks. Yes I am very dissappointed in that Bioware is not making a more sandbox approach. And yes I am sad that no game company try to go this way. But it is also about common sense and principles. Why pay 15-20 $ a month for something that is essentially a multiplayer online and not massive? Or pay that amount for something that has the longevitiy of a singleplayer game - meaning there is nothing in it after 1-3 months? TOR chooses to go all storyline, singleplayer focused and don't care about the little man in the star wars world - these are their own words. There is only room for (lightsaber swinging and the like) heroes. How can this appeal as a ROLEPLAYING game OR as a MASSIVE game? Why pay to just do combat, when other games like SWG offered you combat PLUS a whole range of other things. Easy to design and spit out on the gaming market? Yes! Interesting more than a few weeks? I dare say, no. Not as a mmorpg.
4. Many people mention WoW - let me straigthen that out.
WoW is succesful not because it is cookie cutter or easy. Not because it is raid(infested) or level-based. Not because it is linear or childish in graphics. It is succesful because of three things: A. It was in the right place at the right time - B. it got stuck in the snowball effect to the extent it became a household name and something even parents with no clue about mmos or online gaming has heard about and news media talking about and C. it could all happen in the first place because it just had the basics right. Despite the early server problems the game feels complete, has a lot to do, runs smoothly and it adheres to the basic principle of "Don't Make Me Think" (read the book by Steve Krug). Don't make me think - (the principle, not the book) is not about making games cookie-cutter or simple in the sense something has to be linear hold - my - hand - but it is all about making things smooth and not bugging down users with unneccesary problems. What I suggest here is that even a sandbox can be smooth and run in an intelligent way where the user feels he knows what to do.
Look at the combat of WoW vs. WAR. WAR just lack that feeling of smoothness. WoW actually WORKS. WAR is just giving that feeling of chunkiness and something is missing. WoW's great genius is that these things just work without the need to make you THINK. And it is so subtle yet missed by recent alledgedly AAA mmos like AoC and WAR. And Tabula Rasa. And by all accounts seems to be missing from TCoS and SG:W.
5. Sandbox doesn't work - just look at existing games.
Well look at WAR - it is not the big blockbuster Mythic hoped. AoC is a melting pile of rubbish with no endgame, a combat system they never completely made work or tested properly or thought to the end about (look at combos, cool on the paper, but they forgot that people were stuck in animation). Look at where TCoS and SG:W is heading. What happened with Tabula Rasa (this one is a little sore for me as I liked some parts of what they were doing). Does this mean non-sandbox is a failure? I think so.
Sandbox or not sandbox - every one has their preference. But what you or he or she prefers is not the question. The question is this: What has longevity beyond 3 months? Sure WoW has raids. But what has raids really to do with a massive online game? These raid heavy guilds mostly are composed so people with a job can't really be a part of it. And the game world is empty save for newbies, some people gathering materials or other farmers. The real interaction and prize is in those raids for those people. There is no point to play an mmo then.
Sandbox is about having an open world with possibilties for people to make their own allegiances, make their own choices, creating their own content. Talking of which where is mmo 2.0 - where gamers can add and share content. A sandbox is 2.0. But WoW and WAR and AoC and most likely SW:TOR are like Web 1.0 where there is less social interaction, no social media, no facebook, no twitter, no comments or blogs, just participation by flipping existing content.
6. Sandbox is just imitation of real life and there is no purpose to it - just quit games!
Wrong! Sandbox offer a chance not to re-create life, but to create a sustainable online world where it is meaningful to pay a monthly fee and return time and time again, because you are not just sifting through the same quests, raids or content, but engaging meaningfully with other people in a gameworld, where the are more lax boundaries, where you can develop your own story. A sandbox is not just about logging in and killing X number of critters and get X number of XP and X number of cool items - no a sandbox offer other choices like farming, cultivating things, building a cool gathering place for a guild, moving your player house closer to friends or ressources - meeting up and trading (player vendors instead of an AH) with other players. You would (in SWG for example) go harvest running with friends, make friends with crafters who are more powerful than many warriors because they can make the latest armours. And ressources would be (SHOULD be) shifting around unpredictable, so there is a hunt for the greatest ressources. There could be camping out (camping skills incl.) or meetings at the hospital to get fixed off. How many times haven't I been pissed at waiting for that next shuttle or to have that Doctor pop up and fix me up - but Oh how I miss that.
7. If SWG was so great why did it fail? / Or: SWG was already losing subs before the NGE/CU!
Yes. SWG was NOT a perfect game. But it had the ideas right and proved all those things could happen. It is NOT too expensive to make such a game. But they fucked up their own concept. The whole jedi-debacle and how it was implemented was wrong from start to finish, holo-grind etc. There were some game-breaking bugs that weren't prioritised, like bountyhunter missions that were fucked up and couldn't be completed (and wasn't fixed until like more than a year later). They had a horrible balance with Creature Handlers that created too much lag and wasn't balanced with the game or Tera Kasi artists that were super powerful and then got nerfed to oblivion. And also can you imagine how powerful the game would have been if simple things like speeders and less simple things like SPACE would have been included from day one?
But SWG had the concepts down and showed that MMORPGS are indeed MASSIVE and indeed ROLEPLAYING GAMES. There WERE a point to give them a monthly fee.
I can not for sure know everything SW:TOR is or is not. But I can listen to developers and read what they write about their game. From the CEO's love of WoW, to the launch of the website, and the latest bits of news, there is nothing to indicate that they are creating a MASSIVE game with focus on ROLEPLAYING. The focus on story could be great in a sandbox style game if the storylines were ultra flexible. But I don't pay 15-20$ a month to see a prolonged version of the same movie over and over. I don't care how captivating it is - it is not what I (ME) seek in an mmo. I want to be free to add my content to the game world, I want meaningful interaction with other players (like harvest runs), I want there to be other pursuits but combat to fill my time (and not stupid minigames). There must be good crafting. There must be advanced economics and ressources.
If SW:TOR offered anything of that wouldn't it have been stated by now. Everything the creators say so far has worked contrary to what I believe in.
So yes I am very sceptical now. And SW: TOR was one of the last hopes. After this another great IP is dead to me the way WAR, CONAN and LoTRo (due to no pvp) has died.
These are my thoughts. If this pisses some people off enough to use name-calling - this is their choice. But I think a lot of the hateful posts so far from a little group of posters like Singshiswhatever(ex aoc fanboy poster who defended FC in everything) shows a complete lack of maturity.
Have a nice day
____________________________
CASUAL CONFESSIONS - Draccan's blog
____________________________
This is the single greatest post I have ever read concering MMO's, their current state, and the future. I love your points on sandbox games, linear MMO's, the monthly fee's, and everything else before, between and after. I wish I could send you a cookie. My praise will have to do:
Boy, do I agree!
Draccan, you are spot on!
I'll ignore all your little jibes towards me for now, since you seem to take great pleasure in the fact that my previously placed faith in a company was unjustified in the end. Dunno why you seem to love to do that. *shrug* Hints at your maturity, don#t you think?
In any case, I've laid out my reasons for what I am saying. I am also trying to keep a sort of balance betwen hopes and fears right now as you may notice if you read any of the other posts I put into topics that praise TOR to the high heavens.
If you had posted this post first, I might not actually have felt the need to refute your claims, because this is by far more thought out and mature than your OP. Anyway, as you so correctly stated, you cannot know how the game turns out. In your first post, you seemed to claim that you knew just that. If this game is not for you, all well and good, but you have no idea how the game in the end will play, except for the educated guesses that you make (in THIS post, not your first one).
Yes, it will be level-based. It will also not reinvent the wheel. It will add some of the strengths of BioWare to the genre, or at least that's what they tell us. That's what i am looking forward to. Will it be great? How the heck should I know? Will it flop? Again, how the heck should I know?
All I know is, you ranted like an angry little kid in your original post, and that was what ticked me off.
That, plus your apparent joy in pointing out previous mistakes of people who have since already said that their previous trust was misplaced. Grow up, will you?
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
Well, first, I'm not a "hater". I'm just not quick to drink the Jonestown kool-aid as so many others are. I know (at least I think, I'm not in your mind so there's no way to tell 100%) that you weren't directing that specifically at me so please don't think I am responding to some perceived personal attack, lol.
There, that said, one aspect of this game that I do not like is the decision to go with a level based system as opposed to a skill based. I know that I enjoyed UO's skill based system more than any other I have played and from reading Mortal Online's skill based plan I think it is a really interesting way to go about progression. In my opinion more games should start expanding on this method of progression as there are many attempts at level based progression already in the market.
http://www.mortalonline.com/attributesskills
The next aspect that I don't like is their decision to state "Choose to be a Jedi, a Sith or from a variety of other classic roles, and make decisions which define your personal story and determine your path down the light or dark side of the Force." Reading that it says to me that the Jedi and Sith are the important classes and all the others are ancillary. It also says to me that no matter what your path will be heavily entwined with the light or dark side of the Force, even if you prefer to not get caught up in that element of the game. I would have liked to have seen 2 or 3 more professions thrown out to give, in my opinion, a presentation of breadth of play options that you don't have to get involved in the light side/dark side back and forth. Mind you, I'm not saying that the light side/dark side element shouldn't be there. It should for those who want it. I just think equal consideration/representation should have been shown as well for those who enjoy the Star Wars universe for its other aspects.
http://www.swtor.com/info
I'm also not sold on the Companion aspect of the game at this time as I see it in part taking away from some of potential opportunities for player to player interaction with regard to completing content. The opportunities these days in my view are getting less and less with respect of giving meritable cause for players to work together with respect to PvE content and not including raid content. Admittedly I don't hate the idea. At first mention of it, however, I'm not in favor of it either. After more information is released I can form a final opinion.
So, those are 3 aspects of this title I am not too keen on.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Well, first, I'm not a "hater". I'm just not quick to drink the Jonestown kool-aid as so many others are. I know (at least I think, I'm not in your mind so there's no way to tell 100%) that you weren't directing that specifically at me so please don't think I am responding to some perceived personal attack, lol.
There, that said, one aspect of this game that I do not like is the decision to go with a level based system as opposed to a skill based. I know that I enjoyed UO's skill based system more than any other I have played and from reading Mortal Online's skill based plan I think it is a really interesting way to go about progression. In my opinion more games should start expanding on this method of progression as there are many attempts at level based progression already in the market.
http://www.mortalonline.com/attributesskills
The next aspect that I don't like is their decision to state "Choose to be a Jedi, a Sith or from a variety of other classic roles, and make decisions which define your personal story and determine your path down the light or dark side of the Force." Reading that it says to me that the Jedi and Sith are the important classes and all the others are ancillary. It also says to me that no matter what your path will be heavily entwined with the light or dark side of the Force, even if you prefer to not get caught up in that element of the game. I would have liked to have seen 2 or 3 more professions thrown out to give, in my opinion, a presentation of breadth of play options that you don't have to get involved in the light side/dark side back and forth. Mind you, I'm not saying that the light side/dark side element shouldn't be there. It should for those who want it. I just think equal consideration/representation should have been shown as well for those who enjoy the Star Wars universe for its other aspects.
http://www.swtor.com/info
I'm also not sold on the Companion aspect of the game at this time as I see it in part taking away from some of potential opportunities for player to player interaction with regard to completing content. The opportunities these days in my view are getting less and less with respect of giving meritable cause for players to work together with respect to PvE content and not including raid content. Admittedly I don't hate the idea. At first mention of it, however, I'm not in favor of it either. After more information is released I can form a final opinion.
So, those are 3 aspects of this title I am not too keen on.
About this. This is something that worries me, too. Since they have released just about -nothing- on how Companion Characters will be, what they will be capable of etc, it is difficult to say, but I can see the same problem as you do, namely, another incentive for players to stick by themselves. While I like the general idea behind Companions I can influence, I do not want to see everyone in this game ignoring grouping with other players and just using companions.
As I've said in another thread, what they really NEED, is an incentive for people to play with other people. Grouping should be encouraged (albeit not forced). I seriously hope they remember that. I do think they will not let you do more difficult things with just your companions and I seriously hope the companions will just be a sort of...fluff and a little help on the way instead of a full fledged party-member that can theoretically replace a Player.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
I agree with ya OP.
Sadly, as people keep pointing out, gaming companies these days want to make money...so they shoot for mass-market appeal.
This is their self destruction. These companies want a piece of the great WoW pie...what they don't understand is that the people who want to play a game like that....are already playing it.
Look at the WoW-clone, linear failures lately. One after another, they get hyped up, are released, and after a month or two, are struggling.
These companies dump millions into these games, and then don't make their money back. Soon, no company is going to finance MMO development anymore, because it is a poor risk.
ALL because they FAIL to understand that we don't fucking need more WoW clones.
WoW has poisoned the entire MMO industry.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"
SWTOR will be a fun game but so far hardly a MMO, at least a conventional MMO but for the monthly fees.
Now about SWG, let me put my hands on a Pre-CU environment and I will be millionaire in less than a year... and venerated through the whole MMO community
I think what you are looking for is 2nd life in a Star Wars skin.
I also think what pissed people off was your arrogant know it all attitude in your original post with gems like these
So you insulted everyone who disagrees with you. If you had made your later post first there would have been a much better dialogue instead of the responses you got to your original rant post.
As a mature - casual player - I will wait for the game to hit open beta so I can try it before I decide to buy it. As far as value for entertainment goes - I currently pay $20 for a Star Wars book (yes prices are obscene in Australia), that lasts me 4 or 5 hours.
So I would be happy to pay $20 a month for a story based game that has more content than their last 8 games combined. That amount of content should last me a year or more.
I think with this game Bioware is catering to the I want to be the Hero crowd which is the usual audience for single player games, as most mmo's you arent the hero - everyone else is doing the same quest and it resets 30 seconds after you kill the boss dude.
I think what you are looking for is 2nd life in a Star Wars skin.
I also think what pissed people off was your arrogant know it all attitude in your original post with gems like these
So you insulted everyone who disagrees with you. If you had made your later post first there would have been a much better dialogue instead of the responses you got to your original rant post.
As a mature - casual player - I will wait for the game to hit open beta so I can try it before I decide to buy it. As far as value for entertainment goes - I currently pay $20 for a Star Wars book (yes prices are obscene in Australia), that lasts me 4 or 5 hours.
So I would be happy to pay $20 a month for a story based game that has more content than their last 8 games combined. That amount of content should last me a year or more.
I think with this game Bioware is catering to the I want to be the Hero crowd which is the usual audience for single player games, as most mmo's you arent the hero - everyone else is doing the same quest and it resets 30 seconds after you kill the boss dude.
That's pretty much the adverage Star Wars fan. I playing just some guy in a SW world, I think I would also be down with playinga hero. FFS it's Star Wars.
I'm down for whateva
Why would anyone respond to this moronic DOOM POST. OP is clearly just a troll. Why Feed?
wait until beta's come out and more gameplay footage before you make an official opinion, until then.......
OPINION DENIED!!!!!
I really like how Bioware is progressing with the game and hears the players critics out (look at the sword size they redone them ^^)
This is exactly WHY we can't "wait until beta" before we start giving feedback and voicing our opinions. NOW is the time to let them know what they are doing right / wrong, so that they can take our feedback into account before too much work would have to be changed.
I remember back in 1999, folks kept asking me if I was stockpiling food. I always answered, "No, I'm stockpiling ammo and making a list of people who are stockpiling food"
Who in the world cares about sword sizes?? Do you pay 15$ a month depending on sword sizes??
____________________________
CASUAL CONFESSIONS - Draccan's blog
____________________________
Doh!
If we are not to comment they shouldn't release info at all (especially not hype it like they do) before beta.
At beta gamers are just sheep-herded through the game to find obvious bugs, test the framework etc. By then all design decisions are set in stone more or less.
Your opinion on my opinion is DENIED!!!!
____________________________
CASUAL CONFESSIONS - Draccan's blog
____________________________
wait until beta's come out and more gameplay footage before you make an official opinion, until then.......
OPINION DENIED!!!!!
No...not true. It's good to give -CONSTRUCTIVE- feedback early in the development stage. See the Lightsaber size issue. People complained quick and early, so BioWare fixed the issue.
If you do not add your input now, it won't be heard. If you wait till Beta to complain, you have no right to complain anymore.
However, notice how I capsed -constructive-. OP's first post was poorly phrased and most likely written in heated temper (at least that's what I assume judging by the second post done in this thread).
Constructive Criticism at this stage is needed and wanted. Simple bashing and flaming is not. Simple as that.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
I think I could have quoted that EXACT post from a 100 of my threads on the old AOC forum pre launch!
Somehow there are always someone out there.. by the droves even ... who blindly follow a game with no criticism and what is worse allowing no one else a critical eye.
Bioware is letting the genre down, pre-CU SWG gamers who wanted vindication.. and so is LA.
Do we really want another WAR, AOC, Matrix Online, Anarchy Online or whatever .. with little or no re-playability / incentive to stay after 2 months?
Or a Lotro with no pvp?
Bioware will follow suit, all the others in their pursuit of the wow-factor.. WAR tried and failed. AOC tried and failed...
And WoW is really just catering to hardcore raiders and kids being allowed to play by parents.
____________________________
CASUAL CONFESSIONS - Draccan's blog
____________________________
I'll ignore all your little jibes towards me for now, since you seem to take great pleasure in the fact that my previously placed faith in a company was unjustified in the end. Dunno why you seem to love to do that. *shrug* Hints at your maturity, don#t you think?
In any case, I've laid out my reasons for what I am saying. I am also trying to keep a sort of balance betwen hopes and fears right now as you may notice if you read any of the other posts I put into topics that praise TOR to the high heavens.
If you had posted this post first, I might not actually have felt the need to refute your claims, because this is by far more thought out and mature than your OP. Anyway, as you so correctly stated, you cannot know how the game turns out. In your first post, you seemed to claim that you knew just that. If this game is not for you, all well and good, but you have no idea how the game in the end will play, except for the educated guesses that you make (in THIS post, not your first one).
Yes, it will be level-based. It will also not reinvent the wheel. It will add some of the strengths of BioWare to the genre, or at least that's what they tell us. That's what i am looking forward to. Will it be great? How the heck should I know? Will it flop? Again, how the heck should I know?
All I know is, you ranted like an angry little kid in your original post, and that was what ticked me off.
That, plus your apparent joy in pointing out previous mistakes of people who have since already said that their previous trust was misplaced. Grow up, will you?
You know... You call it little jibes. Truth is you come out pretty strong against other people. Not against their viewpoints or the game in general.
So yes, I do think the past is relevant here. I just randomly went 10-20 pages back in your post history and there was tons of posts called people critical about Age of Conan for "doomsayers" etc.
You were the classic fanboy on this forum about the game. You defended everything FC did from letting people pay for fileplanet beta to sieges still being in the game. I really got a kick out of reading it.
So why mention it here? Well if you are going to apply this blind fanboyism here will it help improve the game or hurt the game? Ask yourself!
Just for the record here is a random example of your previous "work":
"Just to point something out here. Spellweaving won't be seen in Closed Beta. It's been stated by Developers that FC wants to keep it as something -New- just like Sieging and DX10 Graphics. All those things are tested internally by the QA Department of FC and all those things will be in at launch. That is the latest word and I am sticking with it, despite the constant stream of people saying it won't be.
Until FC comes out and says sorry, Sieging is not in at launch, I will believe them that it will be, since I have less and less reason not to (seeing as the other features that haters believed not to be in at launch, Spellweaving, is now apparently going to be in. Keep in mind, this is not an assumption on how it will play, merely the fact that it will be there).
If testing Spellweaving and Sieges only internally is a good decision remains to be seen. I have my reservations about that as I stated in other posts, but I am willing to give them the benefit of doubt."
Next time people legitimately question why something is not tested in beta will you be wary? Will you still call them doomsayers?
And:
"Where has it been stated by FC that the High Level Content is not ready? I would really love to see links to those interviews. And having something not in Beta but included in release...yes, that is a reason for raised brows. But again, there's only one way to find out. Namely wait for release. Why don#t you heed your own advice?
All you do here is claiming to know what the game will be like when it is released. I can make these claims as well. I don't. I say to everyone who has doubts about this game to not pre-order and instead wait until it is released. But I don't hand out doom and gloom while doing it."
And:
"I have to step in again. You are assuming 50k people do not like what they are seeing. So far though, I have seen more positive than negative overall. Sure there are people who don't like the game. There are also people who wouldn't even like the game if it was the second coming due to their prior hate. But you have to remember that not just the doomsayers will tell their friends. "
And:
" [posted by Alan0n: You do know that endgame content means right ? Its the e n d game. ATM Funcom is promising players something that they havn't in game. Will it even work ? Who knows... Noone has tested it...
Again - u prove the point of what MMO players are turning into. "Yes we are fine as long as the character can walk at launch ! "
Shut up - Realise that comments like this is affectig not just you but possibly millions of ppl that have to live with unfinished and buggy games at release. And that includes alot of titles that wont ever stand under half of what the devs "PROMISED" at start.]
You, sir, need to be the one to...close your mouth.
You continue to jump on every AoC thread you can find to bash it with you presumptious thoughts which you like to present as facts.
Fact is: You have no idea what End-Game will be in the game when it is released. You have no idea how well it is tested. You have no idea how well it will be implemented. You don't even have an idea of what has been tested in Beta or not (and yes, I know that due to your seriously outdated supposed Beta-Info you keep spewing up).
And the best part about it? If someone calls you out on one of your blatant lies, you just step away, ignore that post and move on to the next thread or next topic to continue your bashing.
I am frankly tired of reading your posts and pointing out all the little tidbits of misinformation and doomsaying you weave into them, but on the other hand, I know that you will simply post some "lololol you faboi, naive etcetc" back at me, which coincidentally seems to be your only defense against people who post their own opinions as opposed to yours, but well, this had to get off my chest.
Enjoy your little rantings here. I for one will wait until the game is released and afterwards to point fingers. And ohhhhh, guess what, if FC does fail to deliver, I won't deny that. At least though, I will be basing my complaints on FACTS and not half-cooked assumptions."
And:
" Originally posted by Martie
Pre rendered still shots, shows nothing of the game. Funcom will never ever show proper pvp in Aoc, because it is a bloody joke. This game fails on all levels, and you can take that to the bank. Another delay imminent.
That's why they had a live showing of the game at TG'08 with hundreds of people watching and everyone seemed quite happy with what they saw?
Get a grip. Your postings of doom are getting repetetive and boring. If you have something to say, at least back it up with something other than simple speculation."
And:
" Originally posted by Martie
To get to Border kingdoms, you have to go to an instaced copy of it. Like GW copy of zones with Id numbers, so yes. IT is not seamless, and trust me when i say border kingdom's and these castle and keep sieges you all think are going to be nice are far from being released in any form.
Dooooooooooom, I say!!! Dooooooooooooooooooooooooooom!!!!
Sorry, I feel like writing that in every thread where people make claims about any game being bad, far from finished, or developed by money-crazy bastards. I'm just kinda amused by these posts by now.
As for the Border Kingdoms, as far as has been released, the Border Kingdoms will be one big Zone (as opposed to Instance), and the Battle Keeps will be scattered throughout this large Zone. So no, it is -not- instanced, but yes, it is one big seperate Zone. Hope that helps. "
I could go on indefinitely... But hey things ARE taken out of a context mostly here. But but but..
Thing is - you are not by any means the worst. Not at all. Most of your posts are reasonable. But the problem is you still jump all over people again and again for being critical. Many people like in this thread just jump in with the usual "wait till beta", "doom doooom" etc.. But what have we seen but doom lately? What? WAR? AOC which you followed religiously?
I wish people learned from those mistake but I guess it is too much to hope. This genre is dead and the only reason companies still try to make these games is the wow-factor. A well polished game with really limited "massive" and "roleplay" aspects. A one in a million chance for companies at the big bucks.
Bioware's CEO openly has said WoW is the right way to do things. That says it all.
____________________________
CASUAL CONFESSIONS - Draccan's blog
____________________________
How are they letting the genre down? Thats your opinion of course, but Bioware dont owe the genre or pre-CU SWG players anything.
As long as its an enjoyable game - who cares if its themepark or sandbox. Except of course the people who think the only good game is a sandbox so everyone else should play what they like.
As for replayability - if every class has a different storyline, and they put more content in than all their other titles combined - then it sounds at this point like there will be plenty of replayability. Until we can actually play it - thats all anyone has an opinion with no in game experience to back it up.