The story changing depending on your choices is pretty cool, I'll give ya that . I love a well-told story in a MMO so I would appreciate that for sure. Sadly, though, there are so many who don't even bother to follow the storylines in MMOs - because they're only interested in the xp and "phat lewt" - that I fear it's going to go wasted on a lot of its players. Not that that's the game's fault... just that fewer and fewer people these days seem to care why their character's doing something, who or what it's affecting, etc. etc. They're only doing it for the reward.
I'm sure you are right about many players, but I'm not interested in a personal story line OR phat lewt OR racing to max level.
If an MMO wants to get my interest in a story - it has to be server-wide, affecting all players. I am not interested in playing a single player game with a chat channel.
SWTOR's personal story lines are going to keep players away from each other, not bring them together. If I roll a smuggler and you roll a Jedi Knight, then we are going to start on different planets and have different story lines.
Dammit, MMORPG.com, fix the damned editor! This is a joke!
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Theres currently a thread going on, with a poll, whether people would prefer voice acting over alien playable races. Im fine by people discussing there opinions there, but now its becoming a thread ranting about how Bioware spent money on voice acting. This is just sad. SWTOR is going to be the first fully voice acted mmo, and people are complaining that its a bad decsion. People always say SWTOR is the same WoW formula with a new coat, blah blah ya. Well Bioware is trying to be innovative with the voice acting. Most developers aren't doing that anymore. So its a start to innovation I guess. It's also controvercial. Many people say mmos today lack innovation, they need to bring something new to the table. All that stuff. I agree, but you don't wake up one day and that mmo is born. MMOs will most likely slowly get there. I'm no SWTOR fan, I follow it but thats it, but the day when us mmoers start hating on a game for trying something new from the norm, is a sad day.
Dude don't fret. About 85% of this site is Asians and Europeans, look at all the games those two countries have produced to date. All trash honestly. Us North Americans have much better taste when it comes to videogames. SWTOR will be just fine, remember there is also about another 30% of trolls who just use flamebait to start trouble.
Kthxbai!
"The King and the Pawn return to the same box at the end of the game"
Dude don't fret. About 85% of this site is Asians and Europeans, look at all the games those two countries have produced to date. All trash honestly. Us North Americans have much better taste when it comes to videogames. SWTOR will be just fine, remember there is also about another 30% of trolls who just use flamebait to start trouble.
Kthxbai!
Hello, neighbor! You're full of it, BTW.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Dude don't fret. About 85% of this site is Asians and Europeans, look at all the games those two countries have produced to date. All trash honestly. Us North Americans have much better taste when it comes to videogames. SWTOR will be just fine, remember there is also about another 30% of trolls who just use flamebait to start trouble.
Kthxbai!
Hello, neighbor! You're full of it, BTW.
Just ask Don Cherry, he knows best.
"The King and the Pawn return to the same box at the end of the game"
Dont let the EMMO kids fool you, this place was full of love for ToR untill it became popular then the usual culture of "Mainstream sucks" came to play.
Truth is no one knows how much or how little innovation ToR will bring to the table because Bioware are playing it very cagey. They release details of features they have implimented, for everyone banging on about GW2 and what is promised, just remember how many times you were promised things before that never happened.
I dont think Bioware are discouraging innovation at all with ToR, I think they are simply aiming to do what Wow at launch did but better (Remember Vanilla wow the game you all say you loved) in that they are taking all the good parts of current MMOs and polishing them up, then adding their own touches to it.
I for one am very excited about the prospect of sharing a Bioware adventure with my gaming friends, but if it fails, then I have Gw2, Tera, FF XIV, DCU online and Cataclysm to fill that void. You need to accept that the MMO market is currently in the maturing stage, that means innovation doesnt happen as much as you would like, the market is still finding its self and its limits.
Also please stop using the word innovation out of context
Voice acting, in this time and age, does NOT indicate innovation. It is just fluff to get people buying the game. As a matter of fact I haven't heard anything innovative about this game. Someone please name one feature that is.
As a comparison Guild Wars 2 Dynamic Quest feature is true innovation (if it works) because it gives a whole new dimension to old and tired quests that have been more or less since EQ (Public Quest only exception).
Overall this game will be nothing but WoW with a Star Wars skin, nothing has indicated otherwise.
Its not the voice over, its the fact that with THE AMOUNT of money dumped into such a cosmetic feature it could have been used to further enhance and develop the game both code and hardware wise!
Absolutely right.
Oh, it sounds like you both must know how much they're spending on voice acting. Can you please post the links or information where you found this information? I'm sure the information will point out that 150 million spent on BioWares current version of the game has a large chunk already spent on voice acting. I'm sure it will also say that the money spent on voice acting could have been used elsewhere but wasn't due to the need to spend it on voice acting.
Voice acting, in this time and age, does NOT indicate innovation. It is just fluff to get people buying the game. As a matter of fact I haven't heard anything innovative about this game. Someone please name one feature that is.
As a comparison Guild Wars 2 Dynamic Quest feature is true innovation (if it works) because it gives a whole new dimension to old and tired quests that have been more or less since EQ (Public Quest only exception).
Overall this game will be nothing but WoW with a Star Wars skin, nothing has indicated otherwise.
Dynamic questing is not innovation. Arenanet didn't create dynamic questing, they modified two current systems into one cyclical linear system. Have we seen what exactly the dynamic questing system is capable of, or just heard about it? Thats the problem, we haven't seen nearly anything to do with guild wars, yet some people rather put their stake in GW2 rather then in TOR, based on what their imagination implies. Dynamic can mean anything... it doesn't mean that every time the quests will be different. On the contrary Anet already said that these would be cyclical in nature, meaning they will repeat if brought back to point 1, which is the purpose of the game.
Voice acting isn't innovation, BioWare has done it in just about every one of their games. They are adapting it into an MMO setting to bring the kind of polish they do on their single player games that are widely successful.
Modern Warfare 2 wasn't innovative, FPS's have been around for more than a decade before it was released, yet it was widely popular.
People are mistaking what innovation really is, and let me tell you, GW2 is just as innovative as TOR is, which is just as innovative as Darkfall, which is just as innovative as WoW. Its all been done before. Its time to drop the "my game is more innovative than your game" attitude. A game needs to be able to stand on its own merits. It doesn't matter how "innovative" you think the game is, if it plays terribly and is no fun. As of late, I don't know of a single player thats tried GW2, but I know of many that have played TOR, and from what I hear, its pretty fun.
Thats what I base my opinions on, not some perceived notion that this game could have some potential innovation to the genre. I've been gaming for far too long to base my entire hopes of enjoyment on some "innovative" feature.
Voice acting, in this time and age, does NOT indicate innovation. It is just fluff to get people buying the game. As a matter of fact I haven't heard anything innovative about this game. Someone please name one feature that is.
As a comparison Guild Wars 2 Dynamic Quest feature is true innovation (if it works) because it gives a whole new dimension to old and tired quests that have been more or less since EQ (Public Quest only exception).
Overall this game will be nothing but WoW with a Star Wars skin, nothing has indicated otherwise.
Dynamic questing is not innovation. Arenanet didn't create dynamic questing, they modified two current systems into one cyclical linear system. Have we seen what exactly the dynamic questing system is capable of, or just heard about it? Thats the problem, we haven't seen nearly anything to do with guild wars, yet some people rather put their stake in GW2 rather then in TOR, based on what their imagination implies. Dynamic can mean anything... it doesn't mean that every time the quests will be different. On the contrary Anet already said that these would be cyclical in nature, meaning they will repeat if brought back to point 1, which is the purpose of the game.
Except if anyone with half a brain didn't put their misconceptions on it you would have a pretty good idea what the dynamics events is. A-net isn't feeding their misconceptions we know depending on human interaction the events change back they but they WON't do it on their own.
Multiple are layered events on top of each other at different stages due to player interaction meaning that it will be unlike to see an the same combination of events again. Thats the core of what the dynamic events is, thousands of events make up variables to produce hundreds of thousands of event combinations. We know this A-net haven't stated it. That is essentially what the event system is. There is no misconception about that and I highly doubt a-net is lying. Regardless it is pretty dam different to what has gone before it. it isn't cyclical Public quests it's principle is very different. How good the event system is only time will tell but oversimpilifation of something to prove it isn't more innovative than something else is just bad arguing.
Hell it's not like it's even important it's not like it's the only "different" thing it's doing, Cross class combo's, enviornmental weapons, Compleetly even, hot joinable 5v5 pvp, personal story dicated by a 10 question personal biography, not to even mention not so common features in mmo's like instanced player housing, multiple mini games like shooting galleries and bar fights, Expansive underwater content as large as those on land and many others.
With the information we've got gw2 is so much more fresh and different if not innovative compared to swtor it really isn't even funny.
Voice acting, in this time and age, does NOT indicate innovation. It is just fluff to get people buying the game. As a matter of fact I haven't heard anything innovative about this game. Someone please name one feature that is.
As a comparison Guild Wars 2 Dynamic Quest feature is true innovation (if it works) because it gives a whole new dimension to old and tired quests that have been more or less since EQ (Public Quest only exception).
Overall this game will be nothing but WoW with a Star Wars skin, nothing has indicated otherwise.
Dynamic questing is not innovation. Arenanet didn't create dynamic questing, they modified two current systems into one cyclical linear system. Have we seen what exactly the dynamic questing system is capable of, or just heard about it? Thats the problem, we haven't seen nearly anything to do with guild wars, yet some people rather put their stake in GW2 rather then in TOR, based on what their imagination implies. Dynamic can mean anything... it doesn't mean that every time the quests will be different. On the contrary Anet already said that these would be cyclical in nature, meaning they will repeat if brought back to point 1, which is the purpose of the game.
Except if anyone with half a brain didn't put their misconceptions on it you would have a pretty good idea what the dynamics events is. A-net isn't feeding their misconceptions we know depending on human interaction the events change back they but they WON't do it on their own.
Multiple are layered events on top of each other at different stages due to player interaction meaning that it will be unlike to see an the same combination of events again. Thats the core of what the dynamic events is, thousands of events make up variables to produce hundreds of thousands of event combinations. We know this A-net haven't stated it. That is essentially what the event system is. There is no misconception about that and I highly doubt a-net is lying. Regardless it is pretty dam different to what has gone before it. it isn't cyclical Public quests it's principle is very different. How good the event system is only time will tell but oversimpilifation of something to prove it isn't more innovative than something else is just bad arguing.
Hell it's not like it's even important it's not like it's the only "different" thing it's doing, Cross class combo's, enviornmental weapons, Compleetly even, hot joinable 5v5 pvp, personal story dicated by a 10 question personal biography, not to even mention not so common features in mmo's like instanced player housing, multiple mini games like shooting galleries and bar fights, Expansive underwater content as large as those on land and many others.
With the information we've got gw2 is so much more fresh and different if not innovative compared to swtor it really isn't even funny.
Fresh and different based on what? What the developers said or what you've seen?
Cross class combos? Games have been doing that forever, SW has a group ability pool too. Environmental weapons? Really? Completely even, hot joinable 5v5 pvp? Like how WAR did their PvP just on a larger scale and how CO also implemented it? The 10 question personal biography that I got to play on the SNES with Ogre Battle so many years ago. Its okay if they want to recycle content but don't get it twisted and think this is innovative.
GW2 doesn't sound any more fresh then how fresh WAR or AOC or CoX or CO sounded when they released. Dynamic events are still linear, programmed specifically to do one thing... go in order of the stages pre set. You can either pass or fail each stage and it will do something different. Multiple events are programmed to be multiple events. Its not that they just threw a bunch of events in an area and said "maybe one day these will interact, who knows?"
They know whats going to happen with their events in the same quest like way a regular quest or PQ is. You basically have 1 game full of PQs that can interact, yet this is somehow new and fresh. Thats fine if thats what floats your boat, but just because you like what you're hearing doesn't make it A) better than another game especially since you haven't played it or more fresh just because you like what this company is saying.
I've seen the combat, and the story system, and some PvP and grouping for TOR and I like what I'm seeing. I've seen 1 class and some abilities from an elementalist from GW2 and apart from the graphics being guild warsy which I like, its nothing but some fancy spells to me.
Hopefully this will change when they release more information and videos... but I have to see them first.
You say that you don't think people are getting a skewed view of the dynamic events ,but its apparent they are, and it appears you think they are something different then what they really are.... which are situational PQs with a dynamic spawn time.
::edit:: Oh and instead of 10 question up front, TOR gives you plenty of questions to create and change your story throughout the whole game. TOR will give you new abilities, items and content based on your choices. The choices will but just as dynamic as your events system will be. I'm not biased here, I'm just being real about it, both games have their high and low points. Lets be real about them. I like both games and will buy both, but I know what I'm getting into.
How is combining and altering two existing systems into a third system not innovation..
According to that logic.. the .mp3 file format was nothing new when it came out.. After all, music existed digitally already, and file compression had already been around for over a decade.. Combining the two, and altering the algorithm to be effective on dynamic musical data.. no innovation there.. he just copied and pasted right??
Your argument fails on every level dude.
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
Voice acting, in this time and age, does NOT indicate innovation. It is just fluff to get people buying the game. As a matter of fact I haven't heard anything innovative about this game. Someone please name one feature that is.
As a comparison Guild Wars 2 Dynamic Quest feature is true innovation (if it works) because it gives a whole new dimension to old and tired quests that have been more or less since EQ (Public Quest only exception).
Overall this game will be nothing but WoW with a Star Wars skin, nothing has indicated otherwise.
Dynamic questing is not innovation. Arenanet didn't create dynamic questing, they modified two current systems into one cyclical linear system. Have we seen what exactly the dynamic questing system is capable of, or just heard about it? Thats the problem, we haven't seen nearly anything to do with guild wars, yet some people rather put their stake in GW2 rather then in TOR, based on what their imagination implies. Dynamic can mean anything... it doesn't mean that every time the quests will be different. On the contrary Anet already said that these would be cyclical in nature, meaning they will repeat if brought back to point 1, which is the purpose of the game.
Except if anyone with half a brain didn't put their misconceptions on it you would have a pretty good idea what the dynamics events is. A-net isn't feeding their misconceptions we know depending on human interaction the events change back they but they WON't do it on their own.
Multiple are layered events on top of each other at different stages due to player interaction meaning that it will be unlike to see an the same combination of events again. Thats the core of what the dynamic events is, thousands of events make up variables to produce hundreds of thousands of event combinations. We know this A-net haven't stated it. That is essentially what the event system is. There is no misconception about that and I highly doubt a-net is lying. Regardless it is pretty dam different to what has gone before it. it isn't cyclical Public quests it's principle is very different. How good the event system is only time will tell but oversimpilifation of something to prove it isn't more innovative than something else is just bad arguing.
Hell it's not like it's even important it's not like it's the only "different" thing it's doing, Cross class combo's, enviornmental weapons, Compleetly even, hot joinable 5v5 pvp, personal story dicated by a 10 question personal biography, not to even mention not so common features in mmo's like instanced player housing, multiple mini games like shooting galleries and bar fights, Expansive underwater content as large as those on land and many others.
With the information we've got gw2 is so much more fresh and different if not innovative compared to swtor it really isn't even funny.
Fresh and different based on what? What the developers said or what you've seen?
Not even going to argue we're not going to get anyway. But seriously if you think swtor's just as innovative as gw2 then just do some simply math on the "on paper" features known and you'll quickly discover how lacking swtor is.
Seriously I doubt even hardcore swtor fans would call swtor just as innovative as gw2. Innovation isn't necessarily good or bad thing swtor could be the better game but calling something just as innovative as something else when it blatantly isn't is just bias at it's highest.
How is combining and altering two existing systems into a third system not innovation..
According to that logic.. the .mp3 file format was nothing new when it came out.. After all, music existed digitally already, and file compression had already been around for over a decade.. Combining the two, and altering the algorithm to be effective on dynamic musical data.. no innovation there.. he just copied and pasted right??
Your argument fails on every level dude.
This isn't a different file format. This is taking a PQ and adding static instances of it. And besides, changing to a different file format isn't innovative, that would be like saying porting a game from one programming language to another is innovative. Wavs were out long before MP3s were, MP3s just compresses the sound to a smaller file. Its like saying a .7z file is better than a .zip file. Lets get a grip here.
This is the same thing CoX did with their player events.
Its a WAR PQ with a sequence system.
This is the same thing randomly generated content does on single player games.
But you're right, its totally new and different because thats what players want to believe.
Not even going to argue we're not going to get anyway. But seriously if you think swtor's just as innovative as gw2 then just do some simply math on the "on paper" features known and you'll quickly discover how lacking swtor is.
Seriously I doubt even hardcore swtor fans would call swtor just as innovative as gw2. Innovation isn't necessarily good or bad thing swtor could be the better game but calling something just as innovative as something else when it blatantly isn't is just bias at it's highest.
I always find it very funny when people say "Oh my god it's so blatantly obvious! You're stupid if you can't see it!"; when the guy they're speaking to has gone through the effort of explaining his points, but you yourself fail to actually put the 'blatantly obvious' into words.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Voice acting, in this time and age, does NOT indicate innovation. It is just fluff to get people buying the game. As a matter of fact I haven't heard anything innovative about this game. Someone please name one feature that is.
As a comparison Guild Wars 2 Dynamic Quest feature is true innovation (if it works) because it gives a whole new dimension to old and tired quests that have been more or less since EQ (Public Quest only exception).
Overall this game will be nothing but WoW with a Star Wars skin, nothing has indicated otherwise.
Dynamic questing is not innovation. Arenanet didn't create dynamic questing, they modified two current systems into one cyclical linear system. Have we seen what exactly the dynamic questing system is capable of, or just heard about it? Thats the problem, we haven't seen nearly anything to do with guild wars, yet some people rather put their stake in GW2 rather then in TOR, based on what their imagination implies. Dynamic can mean anything... it doesn't mean that every time the quests will be different. On the contrary Anet already said that these would be cyclical in nature, meaning they will repeat if brought back to point 1, which is the purpose of the game.
Except if anyone with half a brain didn't put their misconceptions on it you would have a pretty good idea what the dynamics events is. A-net isn't feeding their misconceptions we know depending on human interaction the events change back they but they WON't do it on their own.
Multiple are layered events on top of each other at different stages due to player interaction meaning that it will be unlike to see an the same combination of events again. Thats the core of what the dynamic events is, thousands of events make up variables to produce hundreds of thousands of event combinations. We know this A-net haven't stated it. That is essentially what the event system is. There is no misconception about that and I highly doubt a-net is lying. Regardless it is pretty dam different to what has gone before it. it isn't cyclical Public quests it's principle is very different. How good the event system is only time will tell but oversimpilifation of something to prove it isn't more innovative than something else is just bad arguing.
Hell it's not like it's even important it's not like it's the only "different" thing it's doing, Cross class combo's, enviornmental weapons, Compleetly even, hot joinable 5v5 pvp, personal story dicated by a 10 question personal biography, not to even mention not so common features in mmo's like instanced player housing, multiple mini games like shooting galleries and bar fights, Expansive underwater content as large as those on land and many others.
With the information we've got gw2 is so much more fresh and different if not innovative compared to swtor it really isn't even funny.
Fresh and different based on what? What the developers said or what you've seen?
Not even going to argue we're not going to get anyway. But seriously if you think swtor's just as innovative as gw2 then just do some simply math on the "on paper" features known and you'll quickly discover how lacking swtor is.
Seriously I doubt even hardcore swtor fans would call swtor just as innovative as gw2. Innovation isn't necessarily good or bad thing swtor could be the better game but calling something just as innovative as something else when it blatantly isn't is just bias at it's highest.
Show me something they've done, and I'll show you where its been done similarly before. I never called SWTOR innovative, I said GW2 is just as innovative as TOR, and I think neither are innovative. Feature lists mean very little to me. What means something is when I can be shown at least in a rudimentary fashion that these things have been implemented.
I already know GW2 will be cyclical in nature, that it will be voiced like TOR, and that they are trying to bring story to the game as well, in the sort of avenue TOR is, and I'm still planning on playing it. Even based on the little information we have on it currently, and thats solely because I enjoyed the first one.
They would have to show some pretty uninteresting gameplay for me to lose interest. Meanwhile I have TOR which I see as being a great game showing something I would love to play, so as it may seem like I'm betting against GW2, I'm more so just staying grounded to the reality of what is going on here. If you try and keep level headed on the subject and take the information as it comes, theres less to be disappointed about in the end, and it will increase the enjoyment of the game.
I think that the word innovation is used here somewhat mis-leadingly; you don't have to be the guy who invented the wheel to be innovative with cars. Everyone would consider that absurd, but with games similar analogy is the wittiest argument ever made. SW:TOR has its fair share of innovative game ideas, but they come with a cost that might de-rail it from strict "massive multiplayer" to simple multiplayer. Future will show whether such a decision was worth taking. I foresee some issues with end-game content not allowing similar flexibility of player choices which might, for some, mean that the game equals to the amount of single player content it has, hence, effectively nullifying the entire purpose of MMOGs.
Guild Wars 2's dynamic quest content basicly means implementing the age old finite state machine to generate quests; the bigger the database and the more there are variables the longer it will take for the events to start re-produce themselves but the states are still finite. The effect of this decision is roughly the polar opposite of what SW:TOR is trying: by making dynamic content where players can affect the game of others you are forcing everyone to parttake on massive multiplayer gameplay whether you wanted it or not. You are no longer in control of what occurs but a collective of other players can dictate your choices which, for some, might mean that the game simply isn't enjoyable anymore. If your friend tells that she did join a group to kill a vile dragon slaughtering farmers you want to do the same but with this system it might just as well never happen.
The innovation comes with a price as we players aren't necessarily looking forward for drastic changes to our gaming experience. Some of these innovations work, others don't. ArenaNet has maybe a better position with this innovation struggle as their players are not paying monthly from playing and therefore might be somewhat more lenient to features they might not like. All-in-all, I atleast am pleased to see some new ideas tried in the more traditional AAA MMOG field. Who knows, maybe these will be the new memes to copy for next-next gen MMOs.
Not even going to argue we're not going to get anyway. But seriously if you think swtor's just as innovative as gw2 then just do some simply math on the "on paper" features known and you'll quickly discover how lacking swtor is.
Seriously I doubt even hardcore swtor fans would call swtor just as innovative as gw2. Innovation isn't necessarily good or bad thing swtor could be the better game but calling something just as innovative as something else when it blatantly isn't is just bias at it's highest.
I always find it very funny when people say "Oh my god it's so blatantly obvious! You're stupid if you can't see it!"; when the guy they're speaking to has gone through the effort of explaining his points, but you yourself fail to actually put the 'blatantly obvious' into words.
If you saw someone was calling a cat a dog and you pointed out all the features that made it cat and yet they still believed it was a dog, how do you think the a far amount of people would react? Frustration.
It's the same here You could list all the "different" features swtor brings and I could name 3 times as many equally different features for gw2. What other proof does a person need? The fact the majority of people here consider gw2 more innovative and also another majority considers swtor to be far too similar to other games yet many hail gw2 ideas as "fresh and different" seriously what more proof do you need. There's arguable and then there's plain bias.
You know it I know it we all know it. How about instead of trying to make one game seem better by degrading another, how about you focus on what makes your game great. ok?
Not even going to argue we're not going to get anyway. But seriously if you think swtor's just as innovative as gw2 then just do some simply math on the "on paper" features known and you'll quickly discover how lacking swtor is.
Seriously I doubt even hardcore swtor fans would call swtor just as innovative as gw2. Innovation isn't necessarily good or bad thing swtor could be the better game but calling something just as innovative as something else when it blatantly isn't is just bias at it's highest.
I always find it very funny when people say "Oh my god it's so blatantly obvious! You're stupid if you can't see it!"; when the guy they're speaking to has gone through the effort of explaining his points, but you yourself fail to actually put the 'blatantly obvious' into words.
If you saw someone was calling a cat a dog and you pointed out all the features that made it cat and yet they still believed it was a dog, how do you think the a far amount of people would react? Frustration.
It's the same here You could list all the "different" features swtor brings and I could name 3 times as many equally different features for gw2. What other proof does a person need? The fact the majority of people here consider gw2 more innovative and also another majority considers swtor to be far too similar to other games yet many hail gw2 ideas as "fresh and different" seriously what more proof do you need. There's arguable and then there's plain bias.
You know it I know it we all know it. How about instead of trying to make one game seem better by degrading another, how about you focus on what makes your game great. ok?
A few points
1) Just because some people haven't played it before doesn't mean something doesn't exist or hasn't been implemented before. I've stated 2 MMOs that were similar and I could name plenty more games with similar features.
2) I wasn't calling one thing anything other than what the developers have said it was. Thats not calling a cat a dog. Thats skirting the subject on your end.
3)The only proof you have is what the developers have said and not what they have shown, so we're both going on interpretations. I feel mine is much more literal an interpretation.
4) Many people still believe TOR to be a single player game with grouping added in second hand with no PvP, and that voice acting is a waste of time and money. Those same people turn around and say guild wars is more innovative. Talk about frustration...
5) I talk about the good points that have been released thus far on TOR, as I have with GW2, but I have proof of the good items that are currently in TOR. You automatically make me the biased one because I see things differently but I've said many times in many different threads I'm not against GW2 and that I'm actually a fan. People try and hype things that aren't there, and even after the devs said the game was cyclical with a pass fail objective system in the way they progress people still think dynamic means "anything can happen" and thats incorrect.
Not even going to argue we're not going to get anyway. But seriously if you think swtor's just as innovative as gw2 then just do some simply math on the "on paper" features known and you'll quickly discover how lacking swtor is.
Seriously I doubt even hardcore swtor fans would call swtor just as innovative as gw2. Innovation isn't necessarily good or bad thing swtor could be the better game but calling something just as innovative as something else when it blatantly isn't is just bias at it's highest.
I always find it very funny when people say "Oh my god it's so blatantly obvious! You're stupid if you can't see it!"; when the guy they're speaking to has gone through the effort of explaining his points, but you yourself fail to actually put the 'blatantly obvious' into words.
If you saw someone was calling a cat a dog and you pointed out all the features that made it cat and yet they still believed it was a dog, how do you think the a far amount of people would react? Frustration.
It's the same here You could list all the "different" features swtor brings and I could name 3 times as many equally different features for gw2. What other proof does a person need? The fact the majority of people here consider gw2 more innovative and also another majority considers swtor to be far too similar to other games yet many hail gw2 ideas as "fresh and different" There's more proof for gw2 beening more "fresh and different" than swtor being equally fresh.
You know it I know it we all know it. How about instead of trying to make one game seem better by degrading another, how about you focus on what makes your game great. ok?
I stopped arguing because it was pointless even a moron could see that arguement was going anyway. I couldn't change his mind he couldn't change my mind and most of the arguemnet was based on opinions rather than fact. Is it such a bad thing to prevent another pointless arguement?
So its a start to innovation I guess. It's also controvercial. Many people say mmos today lack innovation, they need to bring something new to the table. All that stuff. I agree, but you don't wake up one day and that mmo is born. MMOs will most likely slowly get there.
"Slow and steady wins the race" is quickly thrown out the window when a dev starts blurting out the words "NEW AND REVOLUTIONARY!" Sadly, it's true. BioWare is going about it the right way - taking tried-and-true concepts and adding enough distinction to separate TOR from its competitors. ArenaNet is riding the hype train by revealing their glittering features list, so it's not surprising that they've garnered a large following that believes they're being "innovative." In the end, we'll see who wins - most likely, both games will.
Not even going to argue we're not going to get anyway. But seriously if you think swtor's just as innovative as gw2 then just do some simply math on the "on paper" features known and you'll quickly discover how lacking swtor is.
Seriously I doubt even hardcore swtor fans would call swtor just as innovative as gw2. Innovation isn't necessarily good or bad thing swtor could be the better game but calling something just as innovative as something else when it blatantly isn't is just bias at it's highest.
I always find it very funny when people say "Oh my god it's so blatantly obvious! You're stupid if you can't see it!"; when the guy they're speaking to has gone through the effort of explaining his points, but you yourself fail to actually put the 'blatantly obvious' into words.
If you saw someone was calling a cat a dog and you pointed out all the features that made it cat and yet they still believed it was a dog, how do you think the a far amount of people would react? Frustration.
It's the same here You could list all the "different" features swtor brings and I could name 3 times as many equally different features for gw2. What other proof does a person need? The fact the majority of people here consider gw2 more innovative and also another majority considers swtor to be far too similar to other games yet many hail gw2 ideas as "fresh and different" seriously what more proof do you need. There's arguable and then there's plain bias.
You know it I know it we all know it. How about instead of trying to make one game seem better by degrading another, how about you focus on what makes your game great. ok?
A few points
1) Just because some people haven't played it before doesn't mean something doesn't exist or hasn't been implemented before. I've stated 2 MMOs that were similar and I could name plenty more games with similar features.
2) I wasn't calling one thing anything other than what the developers have said it was. Thats not calling a cat a dog. Thats skirting the subject on your end.
3)The only proof you have is what the developers have said and not what they have shown, so we're both going on interpretations. I feel mine is much more literal an interpretation.
4) Many people still believe TOR to be a single player game with grouping added in second hand with no PvP, and that voice acting is a waste of time and money. Those same people turn around and say guild wars is more innovative. Talk about frustration...
5) I talk about the good points that have been released thus far on TOR, as I have with GW2, but I have proof of the good items that are currently in TOR. You automatically make me the biased one because I see things differently but I've said many times in many different threads I'm not against GW2 and that I'm actually a fan. People try and hype things that aren't there, and even after the devs said the game was cyclical with a pass fail objective system in the way they progress people still think dynamic means "anything can happen" and thats incorrect.
Your missing the point why I said it was "fresh and different". I never said these features haven't existed before but the fact that they're rare or obscure in current mmo's or were in far older mmo's doesn't change how different it is to "current" mmo's. I could use an ancient technique from thousands of years ago it doesn't change how "fresh or different" it is compared to things today.
The cat and the dog analogy wasn't about your view of A-net's information it's was about the the belief that Those few "innovations" to current mmo's is just as fresh as gw2 many and and equally different "innovations". It just doesn't make sense since the event system alone is about as "different" as swtors voice acting and story which was basically just a copy and paste from previous bioware games and multiplied. You could argue something similar for the event system but GW2 has many others almost equally different whereas bioware has few. Saying swtor is equally as "fresh as gw2" just doesn't make sense.
GW2 has many more different features than Swtor that's the simply fact of the matter. People moan about swtor because the story is the ONLY innovating they've shown SO FAR. Whether they have more we don't know. GW2 has shown many more different features than swtor so, so far it pretty much is the most innovating. It's pretty hard to argue against it/
Comments
I'm sure you are right about many players, but I'm not interested in a personal story line OR phat lewt OR racing to max level.
If an MMO wants to get my interest in a story - it has to be server-wide, affecting all players. I am not interested in playing a single player game with a chat channel.
SWTOR's personal story lines are going to keep players away from each other, not bring them together. If I roll a smuggler and you roll a Jedi Knight, then we are going to start on different planets and have different story lines.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Dude don't fret. About 85% of this site is Asians and Europeans, look at all the games those two countries have produced to date. All trash honestly. Us North Americans have much better taste when it comes to videogames. SWTOR will be just fine, remember there is also about another 30% of trolls who just use flamebait to start trouble.
Kthxbai!
Hello, neighbor! You're full of it, BTW.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Just ask Don Cherry, he knows best.
I have a dream, a dream that my 2 little GPU's can judge games on the content of their character and not by the colour..... damn wrong meeting.
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
Dont let the EMMO kids fool you, this place was full of love for ToR untill it became popular then the usual culture of "Mainstream sucks" came to play.
Truth is no one knows how much or how little innovation ToR will bring to the table because Bioware are playing it very cagey. They release details of features they have implimented, for everyone banging on about GW2 and what is promised, just remember how many times you were promised things before that never happened.
I dont think Bioware are discouraging innovation at all with ToR, I think they are simply aiming to do what Wow at launch did but better (Remember Vanilla wow the game you all say you loved) in that they are taking all the good parts of current MMOs and polishing them up, then adding their own touches to it.
I for one am very excited about the prospect of sharing a Bioware adventure with my gaming friends, but if it fails, then I have Gw2, Tera, FF XIV, DCU online and Cataclysm to fill that void. You need to accept that the MMO market is currently in the maturing stage, that means innovation doesnt happen as much as you would like, the market is still finding its self and its limits.
Also please stop using the word innovation out of context
Whatever, this game is going to be so good it will get a stand innovation.
I'm here all week!
-----
The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species.
Voice acting, in this time and age, does NOT indicate innovation. It is just fluff to get people buying the game. As a matter of fact I haven't heard anything innovative about this game. Someone please name one feature that is.
As a comparison Guild Wars 2 Dynamic Quest feature is true innovation (if it works) because it gives a whole new dimension to old and tired quests that have been more or less since EQ (Public Quest only exception).
Overall this game will be nothing but WoW with a Star Wars skin, nothing has indicated otherwise.
My gaming blog
Oh, it sounds like you both must know how much they're spending on voice acting. Can you please post the links or information where you found this information? I'm sure the information will point out that 150 million spent on BioWares current version of the game has a large chunk already spent on voice acting. I'm sure it will also say that the money spent on voice acting could have been used elsewhere but wasn't due to the need to spend it on voice acting.
I am excited to read these articles.
Dynamic questing is not innovation. Arenanet didn't create dynamic questing, they modified two current systems into one cyclical linear system. Have we seen what exactly the dynamic questing system is capable of, or just heard about it? Thats the problem, we haven't seen nearly anything to do with guild wars, yet some people rather put their stake in GW2 rather then in TOR, based on what their imagination implies. Dynamic can mean anything... it doesn't mean that every time the quests will be different. On the contrary Anet already said that these would be cyclical in nature, meaning they will repeat if brought back to point 1, which is the purpose of the game.
Voice acting isn't innovation, BioWare has done it in just about every one of their games. They are adapting it into an MMO setting to bring the kind of polish they do on their single player games that are widely successful.
Modern Warfare 2 wasn't innovative, FPS's have been around for more than a decade before it was released, yet it was widely popular.
People are mistaking what innovation really is, and let me tell you, GW2 is just as innovative as TOR is, which is just as innovative as Darkfall, which is just as innovative as WoW. Its all been done before. Its time to drop the "my game is more innovative than your game" attitude. A game needs to be able to stand on its own merits. It doesn't matter how "innovative" you think the game is, if it plays terribly and is no fun. As of late, I don't know of a single player thats tried GW2, but I know of many that have played TOR, and from what I hear, its pretty fun.
Thats what I base my opinions on, not some perceived notion that this game could have some potential innovation to the genre. I've been gaming for far too long to base my entire hopes of enjoyment on some "innovative" feature.
Except if anyone with half a brain didn't put their misconceptions on it you would have a pretty good idea what the dynamics events is. A-net isn't feeding their misconceptions we know depending on human interaction the events change back they but they WON't do it on their own.
Multiple are layered events on top of each other at different stages due to player interaction meaning that it will be unlike to see an the same combination of events again. Thats the core of what the dynamic events is, thousands of events make up variables to produce hundreds of thousands of event combinations. We know this A-net haven't stated it. That is essentially what the event system is. There is no misconception about that and I highly doubt a-net is lying. Regardless it is pretty dam different to what has gone before it. it isn't cyclical Public quests it's principle is very different. How good the event system is only time will tell but oversimpilifation of something to prove it isn't more innovative than something else is just bad arguing.
Hell it's not like it's even important it's not like it's the only "different" thing it's doing, Cross class combo's, enviornmental weapons, Compleetly even, hot joinable 5v5 pvp, personal story dicated by a 10 question personal biography, not to even mention not so common features in mmo's like instanced player housing, multiple mini games like shooting galleries and bar fights, Expansive underwater content as large as those on land and many others.
With the information we've got gw2 is so much more fresh and different if not innovative compared to swtor it really isn't even funny.
Fresh and different based on what? What the developers said or what you've seen?
Cross class combos? Games have been doing that forever, SW has a group ability pool too. Environmental weapons? Really? Completely even, hot joinable 5v5 pvp? Like how WAR did their PvP just on a larger scale and how CO also implemented it? The 10 question personal biography that I got to play on the SNES with Ogre Battle so many years ago. Its okay if they want to recycle content but don't get it twisted and think this is innovative.
GW2 doesn't sound any more fresh then how fresh WAR or AOC or CoX or CO sounded when they released. Dynamic events are still linear, programmed specifically to do one thing... go in order of the stages pre set. You can either pass or fail each stage and it will do something different. Multiple events are programmed to be multiple events. Its not that they just threw a bunch of events in an area and said "maybe one day these will interact, who knows?"
They know whats going to happen with their events in the same quest like way a regular quest or PQ is. You basically have 1 game full of PQs that can interact, yet this is somehow new and fresh. Thats fine if thats what floats your boat, but just because you like what you're hearing doesn't make it A) better than another game especially since you haven't played it or
more fresh just because you like what this company is saying.
I've seen the combat, and the story system, and some PvP and grouping for TOR and I like what I'm seeing. I've seen 1 class and some abilities from an elementalist from GW2 and apart from the graphics being guild warsy which I like, its nothing but some fancy spells to me.
Hopefully this will change when they release more information and videos... but I have to see them first.
You say that you don't think people are getting a skewed view of the dynamic events ,but its apparent they are, and it appears you think they are something different then what they really are.... which are situational PQs with a dynamic spawn time.
::edit:: Oh and instead of 10 question up front, TOR gives you plenty of questions to create and change your story throughout the whole game. TOR will give you new abilities, items and content based on your choices. The choices will but just as dynamic as your events system will be. I'm not biased here, I'm just being real about it, both games have their high and low points. Lets be real about them. I like both games and will buy both, but I know what I'm getting into.
How is combining and altering two existing systems into a third system not innovation..
According to that logic.. the .mp3 file format was nothing new when it came out.. After all, music existed digitally already, and file compression had already been around for over a decade.. Combining the two, and altering the algorithm to be effective on dynamic musical data.. no innovation there.. he just copied and pasted right??
Your argument fails on every level dude.
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
Not even going to argue we're not going to get anyway. But seriously if you think swtor's just as innovative as gw2 then just do some simply math on the "on paper" features known and you'll quickly discover how lacking swtor is.
Seriously I doubt even hardcore swtor fans would call swtor just as innovative as gw2. Innovation isn't necessarily good or bad thing swtor could be the better game but calling something just as innovative as something else when it blatantly isn't is just bias at it's highest.
This isn't a different file format. This is taking a PQ and adding static instances of it. And besides, changing to a different file format isn't innovative, that would be like saying porting a game from one programming language to another is innovative. Wavs were out long before MP3s were, MP3s just compresses the sound to a smaller file. Its like saying a .7z file is better than a .zip file. Lets get a grip here.
This is the same thing CoX did with their player events.
Its a WAR PQ with a sequence system.
This is the same thing randomly generated content does on single player games.
But you're right, its totally new and different because thats what players want to believe.
I always find it very funny when people say "Oh my god it's so blatantly obvious! You're stupid if you can't see it!"; when the guy they're speaking to has gone through the effort of explaining his points, but you yourself fail to actually put the 'blatantly obvious' into words.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Show me something they've done, and I'll show you where its been done similarly before. I never called SWTOR innovative, I said GW2 is just as innovative as TOR, and I think neither are innovative. Feature lists mean very little to me. What means something is when I can be shown at least in a rudimentary fashion that these things have been implemented.
I already know GW2 will be cyclical in nature, that it will be voiced like TOR, and that they are trying to bring story to the game as well, in the sort of avenue TOR is, and I'm still planning on playing it. Even based on the little information we have on it currently, and thats solely because I enjoyed the first one.
They would have to show some pretty uninteresting gameplay for me to lose interest. Meanwhile I have TOR which I see as being a great game showing something I would love to play, so as it may seem like I'm betting against GW2, I'm more so just staying grounded to the reality of what is going on here. If you try and keep level headed on the subject and take the information as it comes, theres less to be disappointed about in the end, and it will increase the enjoyment of the game.
I think that the word innovation is used here somewhat mis-leadingly; you don't have to be the guy who invented the wheel to be innovative with cars. Everyone would consider that absurd, but with games similar analogy is the wittiest argument ever made. SW:TOR has its fair share of innovative game ideas, but they come with a cost that might de-rail it from strict "massive multiplayer" to simple multiplayer. Future will show whether such a decision was worth taking. I foresee some issues with end-game content not allowing similar flexibility of player choices which might, for some, mean that the game equals to the amount of single player content it has, hence, effectively nullifying the entire purpose of MMOGs.
Guild Wars 2's dynamic quest content basicly means implementing the age old finite state machine to generate quests; the bigger the database and the more there are variables the longer it will take for the events to start re-produce themselves but the states are still finite. The effect of this decision is roughly the polar opposite of what SW:TOR is trying: by making dynamic content where players can affect the game of others you are forcing everyone to parttake on massive multiplayer gameplay whether you wanted it or not. You are no longer in control of what occurs but a collective of other players can dictate your choices which, for some, might mean that the game simply isn't enjoyable anymore. If your friend tells that she did join a group to kill a vile dragon slaughtering farmers you want to do the same but with this system it might just as well never happen.
The innovation comes with a price as we players aren't necessarily looking forward for drastic changes to our gaming experience. Some of these innovations work, others don't. ArenaNet has maybe a better position with this innovation struggle as their players are not paying monthly from playing and therefore might be somewhat more lenient to features they might not like. All-in-all, I atleast am pleased to see some new ideas tried in the more traditional AAA MMOG field. Who knows, maybe these will be the new memes to copy for next-next gen MMOs.
If you saw someone was calling a cat a dog and you pointed out all the features that made it cat and yet they still believed it was a dog, how do you think the a far amount of people would react? Frustration.
It's the same here You could list all the "different" features swtor brings and I could name 3 times as many equally different features for gw2. What other proof does a person need? The fact the majority of people here consider gw2 more innovative and also another majority considers swtor to be far too similar to other games yet many hail gw2 ideas as "fresh and different" seriously what more proof do you need. There's arguable and then there's plain bias.
You know it I know it we all know it. How about instead of trying to make one game seem better by degrading another, how about you focus on what makes your game great. ok?
A few points
1) Just because some people haven't played it before doesn't mean something doesn't exist or hasn't been implemented before. I've stated 2 MMOs that were similar and I could name plenty more games with similar features.
2) I wasn't calling one thing anything other than what the developers have said it was. Thats not calling a cat a dog. Thats skirting the subject on your end.
3)The only proof you have is what the developers have said and not what they have shown, so we're both going on interpretations. I feel mine is much more literal an interpretation.
4) Many people still believe TOR to be a single player game with grouping added in second hand with no PvP, and that voice acting is a waste of time and money. Those same people turn around and say guild wars is more innovative. Talk about frustration...
5) I talk about the good points that have been released thus far on TOR, as I have with GW2, but I have proof of the good items that are currently in TOR. You automatically make me the biased one because I see things differently but I've said many times in many different threads I'm not against GW2 and that I'm actually a fan. People try and hype things that aren't there, and even after the devs said the game was cyclical with a pass fail objective system in the way they progress people still think dynamic means "anything can happen" and thats incorrect.
If you saw someone was calling a cat a dog and you pointed out all the features that made it cat and yet they still believed it was a dog, how do you think the a far amount of people would react? Frustration.
It's the same here You could list all the "different" features swtor brings and I could name 3 times as many equally different features for gw2. What other proof does a person need? The fact the majority of people here consider gw2 more innovative and also another majority considers swtor to be far too similar to other games yet many hail gw2 ideas as "fresh and different" There's more proof for gw2 beening more "fresh and different" than swtor being equally fresh.
You know it I know it we all know it. How about instead of trying to make one game seem better by degrading another, how about you focus on what makes your game great. ok?
I stopped arguing because it was pointless even a moron could see that arguement was going anyway. I couldn't change his mind he couldn't change my mind and most of the arguemnet was based on opinions rather than fact. Is it such a bad thing to prevent another pointless arguement?
"Slow and steady wins the race" is quickly thrown out the window when a dev starts blurting out the words "NEW AND REVOLUTIONARY!" Sadly, it's true. BioWare is going about it the right way - taking tried-and-true concepts and adding enough distinction to separate TOR from its competitors. ArenaNet is riding the hype train by revealing their glittering features list, so it's not surprising that they've garnered a large following that believes they're being "innovative." In the end, we'll see who wins - most likely, both games will.
Your missing the point why I said it was "fresh and different". I never said these features haven't existed before but the fact that they're rare or obscure in current mmo's or were in far older mmo's doesn't change how different it is to "current" mmo's. I could use an ancient technique from thousands of years ago it doesn't change how "fresh or different" it is compared to things today.
The cat and the dog analogy wasn't about your view of A-net's information it's was about the the belief that Those few "innovations" to current mmo's is just as fresh as gw2 many and and equally different "innovations". It just doesn't make sense since the event system alone is about as "different" as swtors voice acting and story which was basically just a copy and paste from previous bioware games and multiplied. You could argue something similar for the event system but GW2 has many others almost equally different whereas bioware has few. Saying swtor is equally as "fresh as gw2" just doesn't make sense.
GW2 has many more different features than Swtor that's the simply fact of the matter. People moan about swtor because the story is the ONLY innovating they've shown SO FAR. Whether they have more we don't know. GW2 has shown many more different features than swtor so, so far it pretty much is the most innovating. It's pretty hard to argue against it/
Seems to me that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences between innovative and revolutionary.
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford