There is nothing even remotely troll-like about the OP. I think expecting there to be huge differences over a period of 3500 years is entirely reasonable. In fact, it is absolutely ridiculous to argue that the many advanced societies of the Star Wars universe would somehow remain stagnant in both technology advancement and style.
Did the scientists collectively decide to stop doing science? Did weapons manufacturers decide that they weren't going to make new products? Starship designers felt like the same models every year was a good business plan? Did culture stop changing on its own? I guess consumers everywhere were happy with the current slate of products and would refuse to buy any products that had any hints of stylistic changes or technological improvements?
Sure, the human bronze age lasted a really long time. That's not even a remotely fair comparison, since technology breeds further technological advancements. With the invention of faster and better computers comes the capability to invent faster and better computers. And so on.
Over 3500 years, a lot would have changed. How can anyone deny that? "Because it's a Sci Fi series," isn't a good enough answer. When watching movies and reading stories, there are certain aspects of the fictional reality that are assumed to be based in actual reality, laws of physics, human nature, things that aren't subject to change without changing entire atmosphere, genre, believability, and target audience of the movies. In short, what was once a great storyline is ruined by the insanity of a 3500 year period in the storyline where so incredibly little changes. This is bad writing at it's worse: taking something great and making it terrible.
I'm sure someone will want to pick out one or two sentences in this post and make some mostly irrelevant point, while ignoring the main substance of my post. The only trolls here are the people who don't get this. Whether it bothers you or not is another story, but only the most self deceiving fanboys could find it within themselves to not see why within a science fiction storyline it is ridiculous to have 3500 years pass with about as much cultural, technological, and style changes as about a decades worth here on Earth.
Your post really doesn't have any substance though, unfortunately.
It's one big pile of rhetoric and blanket generalizations based off the sole premise that because over the course of 3500 years in our universe technology would have made some sweeping advancements.
I don't even know why I visit these forums anymore, I think I'm going to stop entirely.
i'd estimate a guess that technology has to stagnate once it reaches a certain point, because developing say weapons tech any further is almost a mute point. Why must it stagnate? Well lets look back at Kotor 1 shall we? Malak destroyed most of a planet with just one giant ship, what can feasibly top that? A weapon that can destroy the universe? At what point does building a better weapon just become silly, if you can already destroy planets then the need to increase destruction has already hit a hard limit, unless you can tell me what an even better weapon for destruction would be?
Top that off with the fact that wars they fought were different then wars we fought, it wasn't just a matter of dominating but destroying all infastructure and sciences/archives. Look back on say before the treaty of coruscant when the capital got sacked, most of all jedi records were destroyed, and many important people to the society were killed, having contious sacking of various center of growth does make it hard to contiously develop new technologies. Its not like a war that has been going on for 50 or even a 100 years, but more like 10,000 the fact is that many places that might have been developing technologies are being constantly destroyed.
Not only with the sacking of coruscant but the mandalorian wars and the mandalorian blockade also killed off a decent portion of the best and brightest in society, this isn't about one civilization wanting new weapons or money, but wanting complete and utter annihilation of the other civilization, its a different mindset.
When does Star Wars: The Old Republic take place in relation to the movies?
Star Wars: The Old Republic takes place more than 3,500 years before the rise of Darth Vader
So, with that in mind, please explain why this entire universe has been basically stagnant for 3500 years? Star Destroyer like ships, Jedi with Lightsabers, The Sith, The Jedi and so on.
What was the Earth like 3500 years ago for comparison?
"A long time go, in a galaxy far, far away..."
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
OP's question is the actually arguing what Bioware have done best in making their previous game and this one: Lore, Story, Atmosphere, Characterisation, Time-line, Narrative options, Companions and all the stuff necessary in solid world-building and making the RIGHT choice in allowing themselves some room and flexibility to USE the IP not the IP using them which often bogs down major titles. Bioware's excellent track record speaks for itself as does the amazing environments and likely colossal size of this game.
OP really does not have a leg to stand on... you can make fatious claims about eg "why is the moon the moon?" such questions don't need an answer.
What is worth being concerned about is the combat mechanic, pvp at the heart of the game. I have watched the footage and as much as I like all the above and the polish this worries me a lot for this title. Perhaps there are many more players where this seems fine, but I am concerned only about this and it does not look up to standard from the little I have seen.
There is nothing even remotely troll-like about the OP. I think expecting there to be huge differences over a period of 3500 years is entirely reasonable. In fact, it is absolutely ridiculous to argue that the many advanced societies of the Star Wars universe would somehow remain stagnant in both technology advancement and style.
Did the scientists collectively decide to stop doing science? Did weapons manufacturers decide that they weren't going to make new products? Starship designers felt like the same models every year was a good business plan? Did culture stop changing on its own? I guess consumers everywhere were happy with the current slate of products and would refuse to buy any products that had any hints of stylistic changes or technological improvements?
Sure, the human bronze age lasted a really long time. That's not even a remotely fair comparison, since technology breeds further technological advancements. With the invention of faster and better computers comes the capability to invent faster and better computers. And so on.
Over 3500 years, a lot would have changed. How can anyone deny that? "Because it's a Sci Fi series," isn't a good enough answer. When watching movies and reading stories, there are certain aspects of the fictional reality that are assumed to be based in actual reality, laws of physics, human nature, things that aren't subject to change without changing entire atmosphere, genre, believability, and target audience of the movies. In short, what was once a great storyline is ruined by the insanity of a 3500 year period in the storyline where so incredibly little changes. This is bad writing at it's worse: taking something great and making it terrible.
I'm sure someone will want to pick out one or two sentences in this post and make some mostly irrelevant point, while ignoring the main substance of my post. The only trolls here are the people who don't get this. Whether it bothers you or not is another story, but only the most self deceiving fanboys could find it within themselves to not see why within a science fiction storyline it is ridiculous to have 3500 years pass with about as much cultural, technological, and style changes as about a decades worth here on Earth.
It's a real cool growth function. It starts out exponential, but as some limit is reached it starts slowing down and eventually almost completely stops.
In the case of technology such a limit could be the human brain. We've only got so many neurons that can only store so much information or understand a certain complexity. Sure, we could build computers to store more information on but we'd be unable to understand what those computers are doing. Would we be able to program those computers? Would we be able to program computers that could program those programming computers? etc.
I think that, eventually, there will be a point at which technology starts slowing down. The point at which we understand almost everything we're capable of understanding there won't be much more left to research. The only thing left will be to find some way of increasing our understanding, which may well be impossible or take millions of years.
Exponential growth ( or any other growth that never stagnates ) is limitless growth. I really don't believe that human understanding is limitless. I mean just look at the sheer amount of prejudice, misunderstanding and stupidity found in people everywhere, even scientists.
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
Everyone who is complaining is trying to compare this with the only thing we know. Our history. Thats a very narrow perspective. You are assuming that if there are other cultures out there they must progress in a similar way as we have. You are also assuming that there will never be a time where our technological advances slow to a stop.
People are just to quick to assume that we are the end all be all of civilization and that everything we know must be correct. That our path has to be the only one possible.
While war may speed small technological advancements, it also slows a civilization to a crawl most of the time. You just need to look at earth for that. Throw in religion and many times it becomes stagnant. Military advancements may bring bigger guns, but it tends to slow great advancements. Civilizations are detroyed, conquered, absorbed, and many times the advancements of these people are not understood completely and the technology becomes second rate. Also prototypes, and the like are constantly wiped out, scientists that may have discovered something are killed, I mean there are a ton of explanations. Technology always hits a plateau and at some point it takes a breakthrough to move beyond that point, and that applies to almost everything. There's only so much a PC can do, at some point they won't be able to make components any smaller, and then we'll need quantum computers which will herald a new era of technological advancement. You can see that in fighter planes. There is a limit at which current engines can propel an object, but there will be a new technology that comes a long and changes everything again. I think what you're seeing here is more of a dark ages in the star wars galaxy. The constant war, the destruction of entire planets, wiping away entire civilizations, it would cast a shadow on history.
I think one thing you're failing to take into account is the effect of the force on the galaxy as well. For most of it's recent history the galaxy has been in constant war mostly involving Sith and Jedi. They have no use for major technological advancements, they feed off of the technology of others and use it for themselves while chasing after the deeper things of the force.
Everyone who is complaining is trying to compare this with the only thing we know. Our history. Thats a very narrow perspective. You are assuming that if there are other cultures out there they must progress in a similar way as we have. You are also assuming that there will never be a time where our technological advances slow to a stop.
People are just to quick to assume that we are the end all be all of civilization and that everything we know must be correct. That our path has to be the only one possible.
LOL, talk to George Lucas, he's the one that designed Star Wars to mirror our own existence.
Technology grows as long as there is a need for improvement and that there be someone with the vision on how to go about it. In those 3500 years can you honestly say when looking at kotor that you can't see any room for improvement?
Also I never said technology will always improve exponentially. Your argument has merit, but in a universe of near constant war, where the race with the biggest guns wins. Technological progression is not going to stop any time soon.
Right, because after I've invented a gun that costs multiple planets to produce that instantly blows up my enemy my next step will without a doubt be to build a gun that takes dozens of planets to produce and instantly blows both my enemy and myself up!
What if the technology in KOTOR is about as effective as people can make it and want it to be and in the Star Wars movies it's basically the same but 100 times cheaper to produce. That's pretty decent technological advancement without making everything look diffirent.
There being room for improvement doesn't make improvement possible. What if science hit some sort of paradox they can't solve. They've been trying for 3500 years but every calculation they make just spews out nonsense. Every model they make fails. The brightest minds come together again and again but they can't solve it. Would such a scenario be impossible?
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
Sigh, ok, here is MY explanation why there was no tecfhnological progress for such a long time in the star wars universe.
"The planets in the star wars universe have a high technological standard (compared to us little earth monkeys). This technological level was possible due to a complex universe wide trading network. Planets needed resources from other planets and those again needed the produced products. The interdependency was very high.
Unfortunately a very powerful organization also known as The Bankers Clan became too greedy. The financial system collapsed. As a result the trading network broke down. There was no more intergalatic trade. As a consequence the now seperated planets couldn't improve or even keep their current technological level. A time of dark ages followed..."
If you don't believe in dark ages at all... just google for it. They are well known in human history and there are many reasons why they can happen (decline of an empire, changing weather conditions....)
Unfortunately a very powerful organization also known as The Bankers Clan became too greedy. The financial system collapsed. As a result the trading network broke down. There was no more intergalatic trade. As a consequence the now seperated planets couldn't improve or even keep their current technological level. A time of dark ages followed..."
That's a good point too. I'm not familiar with the bankers clan so not sure if that's a generic name, but yeah a galaxy that strives off of intergalactic trade would be crippled by a drop of trade routes, yada yada yada, adding more to the effect that war would have on individual species within that galaxy.
When does Star Wars: The Old Republic take place in relation to the movies?
Star Wars: The Old Republic takes place more than 3,500 years before the rise of Darth Vader
So, with that in mind, please explain why this entire universe has been basically stagnant for 3500 years? Star Destroyer like ships, Jedi with Lightsabers, The Sith, The Jedi and so on.
What was the Earth like 3500 years ago for comparison?
Because it's more of a fantasy genre than it is sci-fi, for one. For another, it's a friggin' MADE UP WORLD.
Do you complain about Middle Earth having actually DEVOLVED? That the older a person/place/thing is, the more power it contains? Why is it that there were people thousands of years earlier with swords and plate mail armor, but by the Third Age, Frodo isn't making the trip to Mount Doom in a bi-plane?
Why is it that 3500 years before ANH, the SW universe isn't in an equivelent of, say, the Bronze Age? Because that wouldn't be Star Wars.
A light has shined on me - Luddites took over the Star Wars Universe...
Heh, a bit harsh, don't you think?
Anyway, the question in your OP is an issue that bothered me as well for a while: the progress in the Star Wars universe isn't proportional to how we've seen civilisations and cultures progress in real life, one only has to look at the last 3,000 year, or even more, the last 500 years, and all the changes and shifts in cultures and civilisations in the world to find that civilisation and cultures in Star Wars are rather stagnant and rigid to not have changed that much.
However, this isn't just a BW or SWTOR thing: take a look at the millennia of history in the Star Wars Expanded Universe, all the comics, novels and games, and you'll see that besides the occasional exception there isn't much change at all in all that time in the main factions and cultures in the galactic playing field of domination.
The reason for this is a simple one and has little to do with the many reasons people give: when people pick up Star Wars books or comics or games, then they want to get that typical Star Wars feel from it, something recognisable, the more that's recognisable the more people will have that Star Wars sensation. Every writer and design artist that contributed to the SW Expanded Universe is aware of this and kept close in several ways to the source material, the same does BW with SWTOR.
All the 'scientific' and other reasons people give are nice and interesting, but they ignore the fact that it's a writers and source material reason. They're nice as explanations to maintain immersion in the game though.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
OP's question is the actually arguing what Bioware have done best in making their previous game and this one: Lore, Story, Atmosphere, Characterisation, Time-line, Narrative options, Companions and all the stuff necessary in solid world-building and making the RIGHT choice in allowing themselves some room and flexibility to USE the IP not the IP using them which often bogs down major titles. Bioware's excellent track record speaks for itself as does the amazing environments and likely colossal size of this game.
OP really does not have a leg to stand on... you can make fatious claims about eg "why is the moon the moon?" such questions don't need an answer.
What is worth being concerned about is the combat mechanic, pvp at the heart of the game. I have watched the footage and as much as I like all the above and the polish this worries me a lot for this title. Perhaps there are many more players where this seems fine, but I am concerned only about this and it does not look up to standard from the little I have seen.
What?
I would suppose this guy works for Bioware OR is a Fanboi with blinders fully closed. I don't CARE about the combat mechanic nor the PVP aspect. I've seen one possible answer to my original question which involves familiar ground for the Star Wars Universe and franchise ownership.
I would suggest Bioware get rid of the 3500 year remark and replace it with 100 to 150 years as being more realistic. Large ships used in Episode One looked to be one or two generations BEHIND the ships being displayed in SWTOR media.
All the 'scientific' and other reasons people give are nice and interesting, but they ignore the fact that it's a writers and source material reason. They're nice as explanations to maintain immersion in the game though.
Of course it's a writer's reason. But that doesn't take away the fact that extrapolating the past 500 years of technological advancement over all time and space is silly.
By the third trimester there will be hundreds of babies inside you.
by 2015 we'll have infinity-bladed razors
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
Your post really doesn't have any substance though, unfortunately.
It's one big pile of rhetoric and blanket generalizations based off the sole premise that because over the course of 3500 years in our universe technology would have made some sweeping advancements.
I don't even know why I visit these forums anymore, I think I'm going to stop entirely.
Actually his post had plenty of substance. Certainly enough to form a better response than the one you just provided.
As a general request to all those calling the op a troll, please give us a better explanation than 'because' as to why technology is at an apparent standstill in this universe.
Seems the only people willing to discuss this are those who find it strange, everyone else just accepts it as is and calls anyone who tries to think about it a troll.
I wouldn't go so far as to call the OP a troll. I'd just say his question is irrelevent in a fictional world.
Why do rabbits talk in Watership Down? Why do the Who's in Whoville live in a snowflake?
Fictional worlds are not bound to the same restrictions and mechanics that real ones are. That's the whole point of creating a fictional world in the first place. If the author doesn't make technological advancement an element to the story they create, then it's irrelevent to that story. Demanding to know why technology hasn't evolved much is just as relevent as demanding to know what happened to the vampire lookin' dude in Mos Eisely.
There was also an Era in human history that had no progress for hundreds of thousands of years. Progress will slow down at some point due to the exponential growing overhead of research and development and the reason you can not awake more needs than we have already active. Progress will still be there but its not obvioulsy one and may look stagnant.
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
Comments
Exactly. Big money governments plus constant military conflict breeds technological advancement of almost every kind.
Your post really doesn't have any substance though, unfortunately.
It's one big pile of rhetoric and blanket generalizations based off the sole premise that because over the course of 3500 years in our universe technology would have made some sweeping advancements.
I don't even know why I visit these forums anymore, I think I'm going to stop entirely.
i'd estimate a guess that technology has to stagnate once it reaches a certain point, because developing say weapons tech any further is almost a mute point. Why must it stagnate? Well lets look back at Kotor 1 shall we? Malak destroyed most of a planet with just one giant ship, what can feasibly top that? A weapon that can destroy the universe? At what point does building a better weapon just become silly, if you can already destroy planets then the need to increase destruction has already hit a hard limit, unless you can tell me what an even better weapon for destruction would be?
Top that off with the fact that wars they fought were different then wars we fought, it wasn't just a matter of dominating but destroying all infastructure and sciences/archives. Look back on say before the treaty of coruscant when the capital got sacked, most of all jedi records were destroyed, and many important people to the society were killed, having contious sacking of various center of growth does make it hard to contiously develop new technologies. Its not like a war that has been going on for 50 or even a 100 years, but more like 10,000 the fact is that many places that might have been developing technologies are being constantly destroyed.
Not only with the sacking of coruscant but the mandalorian wars and the mandalorian blockade also killed off a decent portion of the best and brightest in society, this isn't about one civilization wanting new weapons or money, but wanting complete and utter annihilation of the other civilization, its a different mindset.
A light has shined on me - Luddites took over the Star Wars Universe...
"A long time go, in a galaxy far, far away..."
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
OP's question is the actually arguing what Bioware have done best in making their previous game and this one: Lore, Story, Atmosphere, Characterisation, Time-line, Narrative options, Companions and all the stuff necessary in solid world-building and making the RIGHT choice in allowing themselves some room and flexibility to USE the IP not the IP using them which often bogs down major titles. Bioware's excellent track record speaks for itself as does the amazing environments and likely colossal size of this game.
OP really does not have a leg to stand on... you can make fatious claims about eg "why is the moon the moon?" such questions don't need an answer.
What is worth being concerned about is the combat mechanic, pvp at the heart of the game. I have watched the footage and as much as I like all the above and the polish this worries me a lot for this title. Perhaps there are many more players where this seems fine, but I am concerned only about this and it does not look up to standard from the little I have seen.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Could be an alternate universe where civilization is more advanced than in the trilogy years.
In Bioware we trust!
Allow me to introduce you to Logistical Growth.
It's a real cool growth function. It starts out exponential, but as some limit is reached it starts slowing down and eventually almost completely stops.
In the case of technology such a limit could be the human brain. We've only got so many neurons that can only store so much information or understand a certain complexity. Sure, we could build computers to store more information on but we'd be unable to understand what those computers are doing. Would we be able to program those computers? Would we be able to program computers that could program those programming computers? etc.
I think that, eventually, there will be a point at which technology starts slowing down. The point at which we understand almost everything we're capable of understanding there won't be much more left to research. The only thing left will be to find some way of increasing our understanding, which may well be impossible or take millions of years.
Exponential growth ( or any other growth that never stagnates ) is limitless growth. I really don't believe that human understanding is limitless. I mean just look at the sheer amount of prejudice, misunderstanding and stupidity found in people everywhere, even scientists.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
Everyone who is complaining is trying to compare this with the only thing we know. Our history. Thats a very narrow perspective. You are assuming that if there are other cultures out there they must progress in a similar way as we have. You are also assuming that there will never be a time where our technological advances slow to a stop.
People are just to quick to assume that we are the end all be all of civilization and that everything we know must be correct. That our path has to be the only one possible.
While war may speed small technological advancements, it also slows a civilization to a crawl most of the time. You just need to look at earth for that. Throw in religion and many times it becomes stagnant. Military advancements may bring bigger guns, but it tends to slow great advancements. Civilizations are detroyed, conquered, absorbed, and many times the advancements of these people are not understood completely and the technology becomes second rate. Also prototypes, and the like are constantly wiped out, scientists that may have discovered something are killed, I mean there are a ton of explanations. Technology always hits a plateau and at some point it takes a breakthrough to move beyond that point, and that applies to almost everything. There's only so much a PC can do, at some point they won't be able to make components any smaller, and then we'll need quantum computers which will herald a new era of technological advancement. You can see that in fighter planes. There is a limit at which current engines can propel an object, but there will be a new technology that comes a long and changes everything again. I think what you're seeing here is more of a dark ages in the star wars galaxy. The constant war, the destruction of entire planets, wiping away entire civilizations, it would cast a shadow on history.
I think one thing you're failing to take into account is the effect of the force on the galaxy as well. For most of it's recent history the galaxy has been in constant war mostly involving Sith and Jedi. They have no use for major technological advancements, they feed off of the technology of others and use it for themselves while chasing after the deeper things of the force.
LOL, talk to George Lucas, he's the one that designed Star Wars to mirror our own existence.
Right, because after I've invented a gun that costs multiple planets to produce that instantly blows up my enemy my next step will without a doubt be to build a gun that takes dozens of planets to produce and instantly blows both my enemy and myself up!
What if the technology in KOTOR is about as effective as people can make it and want it to be and in the Star Wars movies it's basically the same but 100 times cheaper to produce. That's pretty decent technological advancement without making everything look diffirent.
There being room for improvement doesn't make improvement possible. What if science hit some sort of paradox they can't solve. They've been trying for 3500 years but every calculation they make just spews out nonsense. Every model they make fails. The brightest minds come together again and again but they can't solve it. Would such a scenario be impossible?
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
Sigh, ok, here is MY explanation why there was no tecfhnological progress for such a long time in the star wars universe.
"The planets in the star wars universe have a high technological standard (compared to us little earth monkeys). This technological level was possible due to a complex universe wide trading network. Planets needed resources from other planets and those again needed the produced products. The interdependency was very high.
Unfortunately a very powerful organization also known as The Bankers Clan became too greedy. The financial system collapsed. As a result the trading network broke down. There was no more intergalatic trade. As a consequence the now seperated planets couldn't improve or even keep their current technological level. A time of dark ages followed..."
If you don't believe in dark ages at all... just google for it. They are well known in human history and there are many reasons why they can happen (decline of an empire, changing weather conditions....)
That's a good point too. I'm not familiar with the bankers clan so not sure if that's a generic name, but yeah a galaxy that strives off of intergalactic trade would be crippled by a drop of trade routes, yada yada yada, adding more to the effect that war would have on individual species within that galaxy.
Because it's more of a fantasy genre than it is sci-fi, for one. For another, it's a friggin' MADE UP WORLD.
Do you complain about Middle Earth having actually DEVOLVED? That the older a person/place/thing is, the more power it contains? Why is it that there were people thousands of years earlier with swords and plate mail armor, but by the Third Age, Frodo isn't making the trip to Mount Doom in a bi-plane?
Why is it that 3500 years before ANH, the SW universe isn't in an equivelent of, say, the Bronze Age? Because that wouldn't be Star Wars.
/thread
Heh, a bit harsh, don't you think?
Anyway, the question in your OP is an issue that bothered me as well for a while: the progress in the Star Wars universe isn't proportional to how we've seen civilisations and cultures progress in real life, one only has to look at the last 3,000 year, or even more, the last 500 years, and all the changes and shifts in cultures and civilisations in the world to find that civilisation and cultures in Star Wars are rather stagnant and rigid to not have changed that much.
However, this isn't just a BW or SWTOR thing: take a look at the millennia of history in the Star Wars Expanded Universe, all the comics, novels and games, and you'll see that besides the occasional exception there isn't much change at all in all that time in the main factions and cultures in the galactic playing field of domination.
The reason for this is a simple one and has little to do with the many reasons people give: when people pick up Star Wars books or comics or games, then they want to get that typical Star Wars feel from it, something recognisable, the more that's recognisable the more people will have that Star Wars sensation. Every writer and design artist that contributed to the SW Expanded Universe is aware of this and kept close in several ways to the source material, the same does BW with SWTOR.
All the 'scientific' and other reasons people give are nice and interesting, but they ignore the fact that it's a writers and source material reason. They're nice as explanations to maintain immersion in the game though.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
What?
I would suppose this guy works for Bioware OR is a Fanboi with blinders fully closed. I don't CARE about the combat mechanic nor the PVP aspect. I've seen one possible answer to my original question which involves familiar ground for the Star Wars Universe and franchise ownership.
I would suggest Bioware get rid of the 3500 year remark and replace it with 100 to 150 years as being more realistic. Large ships used in Episode One looked to be one or two generations BEHIND the ships being displayed in SWTOR media.
I would agree that war actually spurs technology. However, I don't think it has to in a video game.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Of course it's a writer's reason. But that doesn't take away the fact that extrapolating the past 500 years of technological advancement over all time and space is silly.
By the third trimester there will be hundreds of babies inside you.
by 2015 we'll have infinity-bladed razors
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
I wouldn't go so far as to call the OP a troll. I'd just say his question is irrelevent in a fictional world.
Why do rabbits talk in Watership Down? Why do the Who's in Whoville live in a snowflake?
Fictional worlds are not bound to the same restrictions and mechanics that real ones are. That's the whole point of creating a fictional world in the first place. If the author doesn't make technological advancement an element to the story they create, then it's irrelevent to that story. Demanding to know why technology hasn't evolved much is just as relevent as demanding to know what happened to the vampire lookin' dude in Mos Eisely.
There was also an Era in human history that had no progress for hundreds of thousands of years.
Progress will slow down at some point due to the exponential growing overhead of research and development and the reason you can not awake more needs than we have already active.
Progress will still be there but its not obvioulsy one and may look stagnant.
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM
Sorry, but I have to laugh at the request for realism in a world where lightsabers and force powers exit.
As others have stated, the game is staying true to the IP. If you have an issue with technology not changing much then blame the IP, not the game.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft