Welll it makes him less random than we are, doesn't it?
That's true, I agree that 8 hours is nice to form your impressions, after all it's more time than most people who played the demo at conventions had. However, it's also just 1 opinion, from 1 person. Nothing bad said about his impressions, after all, it's his opinion and how he experienced things.
Other people can have different opinions though, each person their own taste and viewpoint, here's some other impressions from people who also played SWTOR for 7 to 20 hours (and sometimes more).
[...]
Like said, take 20 people, and you'll have 20 different opinions, and sometimes wildly divergent viewpoints about the same kind of experiences.
Well since nobody knows for sure how the game really is, its much safer to say something nice and look like the positive person/website/magazine.
It sounds a bit illogical, don't you think, if all the positive reports are merely because people are being nice, while the few negative ones are valid opinions. Don't you think you let your hatred/aversion towards SWTOR or the current themepark dominated MMO genre get the better of you and overrule common sense? Because you sound unreasonable when you say that all positive impressions and previews should be discarded and ignored and only any negative comment believed.
Especially since positive impressions are also being given by just regular people who happened to be able to play the game.
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."
Welll it makes him less random than we are, doesn't it?
That's true, I agree that 8 hours is nice to form your impressions, after all it's more time than most people who played the demo at conventions had. However, it's also just 1 opinion, from 1 person. Nothing bad said about his impressions, after all, it's his opinion and how he experienced things.
Other people can have different opinions though, each person their own taste and viewpoint, here's some other impressions from people who also played SWTOR for 7 to 20 hours (and sometimes more).
[...]
Like said, take 20 people, and you'll have 20 different opinions, and sometimes wildly divergent viewpoints about the same kind of experiences.
Well since nobody knows for sure how the game really is, its much safer to say something nice and look like the positive person/website/magazine.
It sounds a bit illogical, don't you think, if all the positive reports are merely because people are being nice, while the few negative ones are valid opinions. Don't you think you let your hatred/aversion towards SWTOR or the current themepark dominated MMO genre get the better of you and overrule common sense? Because you sound unreasonable when you say that all positive impressions and previews should be discarded and ignored and only any negative comment believed.
Especially since positive impressions are also being given by just regular people who happened to be able to play the game.
That really depends in my opinion.
Usually if you read what someone says you can see a lot. Many people we'd use the "hate" label for don't really write well thought statements. So if someone has a premise and they support it with various "facts".. then what they say might be valid even if its negative.
I'd also point out that for MMO's there have been very few that ever were really trashed before launch. Vanguard was ripped apart pretty good before launch.. lot of beta leaks etc
I don't really remember much for negative statements for AoC or especially WAR before launch... but after people who paid for the game started to log in.. I sure did.
Point being... what people say now.. compared to the day this game goes live may change.
Same for any game really.
I've also seen some stellar positive statements made about a game.. that could just as easily be negative.
like...
"this game uses the tried and true design that has become the industry norm. While thowing in a few unique twists of its own..."
or I could say
"This game uses the same tired core design that has become the stagnation point for modern mmo's. While it does have a few unique additions overall its the same game you've already played too many time.. with a new texture pack tossed in."
Both of those statements can be 100% valid at the same time.. just depends on your point of view.
Point being... what people say now.. compared to the day this game goes live may change.
Same for any game really.
I've also seen some stellar positive statements made about a game.. that could just as easily be negative.
like...
"this game uses the tried and true design that has become the industry norm. While thowing in a few unique twists of its own..."
or I could say
"This game uses the same tired core design that has become the stagnation point for modern mmo's. While it does have a few unique additions overall its the same game you've already played too many time.. with a new texture pack tossed in."
Both of those statements can be 100% valid at the same time.. just depends on your point of view.
That's why the more opinions you'll read, both negative as well as positive, the better the impression you get, because people regard the gameplay they experienced from different angles, taking all those angles together gives a better picture than just looking at it from 1 angle or viewpoint.
For example, a sandbox gamer or MMO vet who has burnt out on themepark gameplay, might feel annoyed when they play a new themepark MMORPG, while an MMO gamer who favors or still enjoys themepark MMO's might be bored quickly when they play a (new) sandbox MMORPG. Different tastes, different opinions.
The flaw I see a lot of people make however is ignoring any statement, opinion or preview that doesn't fit their own viewpoint, or to assume that if they don't like (or like) certain gameplay, that everyone should feel the same about it.
Also, with previews it should never be forgotten that people can only say something about what they experienced: in AoC the starter area Tortage really was good fun, the problem was that it wasn't representative of the gameplay in later levels. Same for Aion, where the grind started kicking in only gradually from level 20 onwards. A very common problem with MMO's, previews say little of the endgame content and gameplay at level cap. However, when gameplay didn't feel alright in those early levels, you heard enough outcries about it: Vanguard, FFXIV, APB, there are enough examples of this.
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."
Welll it makes him less random than we are, doesn't it?
That's true, I agree that 8 hours is nice to form your impressions, after all it's more time than most people who played the demo at conventions had. However, it's also just 1 opinion, from 1 person. Nothing bad said about his impressions, after all, it's his opinion and how he experienced things.
Other people can have different opinions though, each person their own taste and viewpoint, here's some other impressions from people who also played SWTOR for 7 to 20 hours (and sometimes more).
[...]
Like said, take 20 people, and you'll have 20 different opinions, and sometimes wildly divergent viewpoints about the same kind of experiences.
Well since nobody knows for sure how the game really is, its much safer to say something nice and look like the positive person/website/magazine.
It sounds a bit illogical, don't you think, if all the positive reports are merely because people are being nice, while the few negative ones are valid opinions. Don't you think you let your hatred/aversion towards SWTOR or the current themepark dominated MMO genre get the better of you and overrule common sense? Because you sound unreasonable when you say that all positive impressions and previews should be discarded and ignored and only any negative comment believed.
Especially since positive impressions are also being given by just regular people who happened to be able to play the game.
I didn't mean that at all.
What I mean is that if you are a journalist, or write for a gaming website, you will play safe and nice. You won't be negative unless you have a very solid argument, and as I said, nobody does right now, because you need a solid month playing to have an opinion on an MMO.
And let's be honest. There is A LOT of money at stake here. Do you really want to have Bioware upset at your website and not renting your space for SWTOR ads? Or developers not wanting to answer your interviews? I don't think so.
Of course it's different for a forumer. This is why we have forums, to speak our mind freely. Well, not in this particular forum maybe, but in general that's the way it is.
Well since nobody knows for sure how the game really is, its much safer to say something nice and look like the positive person/website/magazine.
It sounds a bit illogical, don't you think, if all the positive reports are merely because people are being nice, while the few negative ones are valid opinions. Don't you think you let your hatred/aversion towards SWTOR or the current themepark dominated MMO genre get the better of you and overrule common sense? Because you sound unreasonable when you say that all positive impressions and previews should be discarded and ignored and only any negative comment believed.
Especially since positive impressions are also being given by just regular people who happened to be able to play the game.
I didn't mean that at all.
What I mean is that if you are a journalist, or write for a gaming website, you will play safe and nice. You won't be negative unless you have a very solid argument, and as I said, nobody does right now, because you need a solid month playing to have an opinion on an MMO.
And let's be honest. There is A LOT of money at stake here. Do you really want to have Bioware upset at your website and not renting your space for SWTOR ads? Or developers not wanting to answer your interviews? I don't think so.
Of course it's different for a forumer. This is why we have forums, to speak our mind freely. Well, not in this particular forum maybe, but in general that's the way it is.
I got exactly what you meant. That's why I made the comment of people who played the demo, but who aren't associated to a magazine or website, but who still were very enthusiastic in their impressions of their gameplay, in fact the majority of those demo reports of common players were in line with the majority of the 'professional' previews and impressions, also positive to enthusiastic.
Those were people speaking their mind freely when they gave their (overall positive) impressions of their gameplay experiences.
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."
Well since nobody knows for sure how the game really is, its much safer to say something nice and look like the positive person/website/magazine.
It sounds a bit illogical, don't you think, if all the positive reports are merely because people are being nice, while the few negative ones are valid opinions. Don't you think you let your hatred/aversion towards SWTOR or the current themepark dominated MMO genre get the better of you and overrule common sense? Because you sound unreasonable when you say that all positive impressions and previews should be discarded and ignored and only any negative comment believed.
Especially since positive impressions are also being given by just regular people who happened to be able to play the game.
I didn't mean that at all.
What I mean is that if you are a journalist, or write for a gaming website, you will play safe and nice. You won't be negative unless you have a very solid argument, and as I said, nobody does right now, because you need a solid month playing to have an opinion on an MMO.
And let's be honest. There is A LOT of money at stake here. Do you really want to have Bioware upset at your website and not renting your space for SWTOR ads? Or developers not wanting to answer your interviews? I don't think so.
Of course it's different for a forumer. This is why we have forums, to speak our mind freely. Well, not in this particular forum maybe, but in general that's the way it is.
I got exactly what you meant. That's why I made the comment of people who played the demo, but who aren't associated to a magazine or website, but who still were very enthusiastic in their impressions of their gameplay, in fact the majority of those demo reports of common players were in line with the majority of the 'professional' previews and impressions, also positive to enthusiastic.
Those were people speaking their mind freely when they gave their (overall positive) impressions of their gameplay experiences.
Oh ok.. I thought they were journalists. Well things are looking very good for SWTOR indeed. I don't doubt there is a wide market for this kind of game. Hell, even I am probably going to buy and play it, unless there is a community outrage the first month, which I'm sure it won't happen.
Oh ok.. I thought they were journalists. Well things are looking very good for SWTOR indeed. I don't doubt there is a wide market for this kind of game. Hell, even I am probably going to buy and play it, unless there is a community outrage the first month, which I'm sure it won't happen.
Well, to be honest: personally I think SWTOR has only limited entertainment value for hardcore sandbox fans or those who've gotten themselves burnt out on themepark gameplay and who need something totally different from that to make MMO gaming entertaining for them again. SWTOR frankly just has too little to offer to those people in what they need to make MMO gaming fun for them.
But if people can still enjoy themepark gameplay, or if BW brand of SW storytelling combined with large worlds and lots of themepark oriented content is enough for them to have fun, then SWTOR should be something they can enjoy too.
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."
Yes, Bioware should just go ahead and cancel production A narcissistic 3-rd tier cable show host and 3 obscure gaming websites have completely negated the positive reviews (even with 100x the amount of positive reviews). Thank goodness we have such intellectual giants like OP to show us the true meaning behind the coolness of hating to hate. Hipsters gonna hip, amirite?
Shocking how few people on this board know what hipster means. What any of this has to do with a progressive political view, love of indie-rock, and a fashion movement is beyond me. Hipster doesn't mean someone who denies what is popular. That's an elitist. It means they challenge the ideals (generally fashion-related) of the "sheeplike" mainstream who they find uninformed. Someone reading articles and posting countermeasure is hardly uninformed.
Anyway, there's gonna be this type of review out there. It's not gonna make me lose desire to play the game. Also, I would know wether or not I like a game after playing it for 8 hours, as much as everyone is hating.
To each their own. I'll be at buying at midnight regardless.
Pfff, opinions, so many of them, and so different sometimes.
Measurements of a number of the planets - via officially available footage - indicate those that could be measured to be 1-2 WoW zones (origin worlds) and 7-8 WoW zones, or close to Rift's worldsize (normal planets). Comments from people who spent time ingame so far seem to confirm it: the normal planets are huge, some are wide open to make wandering around them feel excessively long, others have areas that you can't visit (yet?), but still overall they're very large.
Tests from various independent sources have already shown Tatooine to be almost as large in overall worldsize as Rift was. So far nothing has shown that this is different for the other normal planets even if the area design provides a different feel (Coruscant is totally different from a Tatooine ofc), even if some might still find it too restrictive or small in their wandering around, tastes and expectations will always differ
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."
So? The less meaningless distance I have to travel the better IMO.
There I can't agree with you.
While spending many hours to get from a city to another isn't fun having small zones are claustrophobic and make the game feel small. Just look on AoC, it's small zones takes away a lot of the fun and the feeling of being a massive world.
If they want people to travel faster from place a to b then speeder bikes or similar is the right way, not a small world.
I have no clue if this is the case of TOR but if it is it is a big downer for me.
Edit: Meverick: I heard that before and hope that is the case. Bigger is actually better wehe we talk zone size.
So? The less meaningless distance I have to travel the better IMO.
{mod edit}
Well all we have are posts stating one way or the other, reading to much into any of them can lead to such confusion. I personally don't care how large they turn out to be, if they're too big you run into issues with barren landscapes, to small you feel sheltered in. I just hope it's a balance between the two in the end.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
So? The less meaningless distance I have to travel the better IMO.
There I can't agree with you.
While spending many hours to get from a city to another isn't fun having small zones are claustrophobic and make the game feel small. Just look on AoC, it's small zones takes away a lot of the fun and the feeling of being a massive world.
If they want people to travel faster from place a to b then speeder bikes or similar is the right way, not a small world.
I have no clue if this is the case of TOR but if it is it is a big downer for me.
Edit: Meverick: I heard that before and hope that is the case. Bigger is actually better wehe we talk zone size.
I highlighted that word to better convey my point. Meaningless as in barren, worlds too large to stuff full of content are worse than small worlds that feel claustrophobic IMO. I'm not saying I want small AOC zones, I'm saying I don't want huge worlds where everything is far too spread out.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Look at SWG, barren crap as far as the eye can see. Everything that I've seen so far, the planets have a fair portion of places to explore. Not only that, but they look hand-crafted which is nice and to me seems more immersive.
So? The less meaningless distance I have to travel the better IMO.
There I can't agree with you.
While spending many hours to get from a city to another isn't fun having small zones are claustrophobic and make the game feel small. Just look on AoC, it's small zones takes away a lot of the fun and the feeling of being a massive world.
If they want people to travel faster from place a to b then speeder bikes or similar is the right way, not a small world.
I have no clue if this is the case of TOR but if it is it is a big downer for me.
Edit: Meverick: I heard that before and hope that is the case. Bigger is actually better wehe we talk zone size.
I highlighted that word to better convey my point. Meaningless as in barren, worlds too large to stuff full of content are worse than small worlds that feel claustrophobic IMO. I'm not saying I want small AOC zones, I'm saying I don't want huge worlds where everything is far too spread out.
I don't think making a world small to remove "meaningless" distance is the answer. There are other methods of travel, no need to make the worlds small. For me it's better a huge world with teleportation(or other forms of travel) than a small world. Still, I doubt that TOR world will end up so small that it would be a problem.
The problem at this point is easy...SW:TOR is not done. Poeple opinions should be taken with a huge grain of salt. Even beta testers say it seems almost done but not just yet.
We all have a pretty good idea how tor is going to play out but the one thing that really concerns me is its totally unproven engine. Don't get me wrong, I like its potential but Tor will be one of the very first mmo's to ever use it and that is what has got me worried. Running the game at conventions with low / med quality settings, static npc's, low pop area's, tends to have me believe that Bioware is having a hard time optimizing the engine.
Maybe Bioware can calm my fears @ comic con, at least I hope so.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Look at SWG, barren crap as far as the eye can see. Everything that I've seen so far, the planets have a fair portion of places to explore. Not only that, but they look hand-crafted instead of SWG's repeating .bmp's.
I really hope this is the case and that they used these copy-paste methods for DA2 just because they where to busy hand-crafting TOR.
Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Look at SWG, barren crap as far as the eye can see. Everything that I've seen so far, the planets have a fair portion of places to explore. Not only that, but they look hand-crafted instead of SWG's repeating .bmp's.
Yes but the purpose of that large vaste areas was explained early on. player made citys required the vast sizes. many city's had 450m radius and that pretty huge. They needed the room.
"Here’s the thing, compared to Star Wars: The Old Republic (the last MMO I previewed), (censored) is spectacular - it feels fresh, it feels alive and it feels diverse… three adjectivesthat I’d never use to describe BioWare’s upcoming MMO, at least from what I’ve seen so far."
Bad press keeps coming in...
once again dont play the game if you dont like dont play it. simple its not math to figure out what you dont like dont judge a game you never played.
I don't think making a world small to remove "meaningless" distance is the answer. There are other methods of travel, no need to make the worlds small. For me it's better a huge world with teleportation(or other forms of travel) than a small world. Still, I doubt that TOR world will end up so small that it would be a problem.
I agree for the most part, I think my comment was too short to fully convey what I was saying. I like a balance in world size, I guess I could cite Fallout NV or Morrowind as a good example of what I am talking about. The worlds are large, yet not too large, there's plenty of exploration to be had, yet at the same time distances are close enough to not feel a chore to traverse. Fast travel helps cut down travel times as well.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Look at SWG, barren crap as far as the eye can see. Everything that I've seen so far, the planets have a fair portion of places to explore. Not only that, but they look hand-crafted instead of SWG's repeating .bmp's.
Yes but the purpose of that large vaste areas was explained early on. player made citys required the vast sizes. many city's had 450m radius and that pretty huge. They needed the room.
We all know how it is now, though, right? Wasteland of abandoned structures that really do nothing to enhance the immersion. I've said that it was a really cool idea for when the game was booming, but when people leave and don't do anything about the structures they leave, it just takes up space. Big gameworlds are fine and dandy in theory, but most of the time they wind up feeling lifeless.
This is really a case of him just liking GW2 more because it is a little different than other MMOs with its slightly more actiony bent and lack of quests.
To each his own. BW story aspects has really made playing other games really hard. Can't wait for SWTOR.
In the first paragraph the guys says he doesn't like MMOs, so why bother really?
Lol, the majority of press has been positive. Those who have actually played it for long periods at a time,
He played it for 8 hours.
Not what I have heard first hand.... but less of that. DO I believe people I know and trust or second hand tittle tattle....
Regardless of how long this particular person played, the vast majority of reviews from players o the game (professional reviewers or otherwise) have been positive. Plus many of the complaints this guy had are things BioWare let us know from the start would not be here. Sorry, but this is not the sandbox game he was looking for. Time to move on now.
"If half of what you tell me is a lie, how can I believe any of it?"
Lol, the majority of press has been positive. Those who have actually played it for long periods at a time,
He played it for 8 hours.
Not what I have heard first hand.... but less of that. DO I believe people I know and trust or second hand tittle tattle....
Regardless of how long this particular person played, the vast majority of reviews from players o the game (professional reviewers or otherwise) have been positive. Plus many of the complaints this guy had are things BioWare let us know from the start would not be here. Sorry, but this is not the sandbox game he was looking for. Time to move on now.
you know...I am pretty sure that this oguy liked both games. I think that, especially in comparison with each other, he felt that GW2 far outdhined SWTOR in the sense of making the game feel fresh and new...instead of the same old thing in a new skin.
also, seeing as how the article wasn't about SWTOR, im pretty sure he made the statement to give some context to his experience with GW2. Unfortunately, the people most likely to have the context to understand where he is coming from on this are SWTOR fans, and I don't think many of them agree with him (even though the person with hands on experience with both games is saying it).
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
Comments
It sounds a bit illogical, don't you think, if all the positive reports are merely because people are being nice, while the few negative ones are valid opinions. Don't you think you let your hatred/aversion towards SWTOR or the current themepark dominated MMO genre get the better of you and overrule common sense? Because you sound unreasonable when you say that all positive impressions and previews should be discarded and ignored and only any negative comment believed.
Especially since positive impressions are also being given by just regular people who happened to be able to play the game.
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."
That really depends in my opinion.
Usually if you read what someone says you can see a lot. Many people we'd use the "hate" label for don't really write well thought statements. So if someone has a premise and they support it with various "facts".. then what they say might be valid even if its negative.
I'd also point out that for MMO's there have been very few that ever were really trashed before launch. Vanguard was ripped apart pretty good before launch.. lot of beta leaks etc
I don't really remember much for negative statements for AoC or especially WAR before launch... but after people who paid for the game started to log in.. I sure did.
Point being... what people say now.. compared to the day this game goes live may change.
Same for any game really.
I've also seen some stellar positive statements made about a game.. that could just as easily be negative.
like...
"this game uses the tried and true design that has become the industry norm. While thowing in a few unique twists of its own..."
or I could say
"This game uses the same tired core design that has become the stagnation point for modern mmo's. While it does have a few unique additions overall its the same game you've already played too many time.. with a new texture pack tossed in."
Both of those statements can be 100% valid at the same time.. just depends on your point of view.
That's why the more opinions you'll read, both negative as well as positive, the better the impression you get, because people regard the gameplay they experienced from different angles, taking all those angles together gives a better picture than just looking at it from 1 angle or viewpoint.
For example, a sandbox gamer or MMO vet who has burnt out on themepark gameplay, might feel annoyed when they play a new themepark MMORPG, while an MMO gamer who favors or still enjoys themepark MMO's might be bored quickly when they play a (new) sandbox MMORPG. Different tastes, different opinions.
The flaw I see a lot of people make however is ignoring any statement, opinion or preview that doesn't fit their own viewpoint, or to assume that if they don't like (or like) certain gameplay, that everyone should feel the same about it.
Also, with previews it should never be forgotten that people can only say something about what they experienced: in AoC the starter area Tortage really was good fun, the problem was that it wasn't representative of the gameplay in later levels. Same for Aion, where the grind started kicking in only gradually from level 20 onwards. A very common problem with MMO's, previews say little of the endgame content and gameplay at level cap. However, when gameplay didn't feel alright in those early levels, you heard enough outcries about it: Vanguard, FFXIV, APB, there are enough examples of this.
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."
I didn't mean that at all.
What I mean is that if you are a journalist, or write for a gaming website, you will play safe and nice. You won't be negative unless you have a very solid argument, and as I said, nobody does right now, because you need a solid month playing to have an opinion on an MMO.
And let's be honest. There is A LOT of money at stake here. Do you really want to have Bioware upset at your website and not renting your space for SWTOR ads? Or developers not wanting to answer your interviews? I don't think so.
Of course it's different for a forumer. This is why we have forums, to speak our mind freely. Well, not in this particular forum maybe, but in general that's the way it is.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
I got exactly what you meant. That's why I made the comment of people who played the demo, but who aren't associated to a magazine or website, but who still were very enthusiastic in their impressions of their gameplay, in fact the majority of those demo reports of common players were in line with the majority of the 'professional' previews and impressions, also positive to enthusiastic.
Those were people speaking their mind freely when they gave their (overall positive) impressions of their gameplay experiences.
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."
Oh ok.. I thought they were journalists. Well things are looking very good for SWTOR indeed. I don't doubt there is a wide market for this kind of game. Hell, even I am probably going to buy and play it, unless there is a community outrage the first month, which I'm sure it won't happen.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
Well, to be honest: personally I think SWTOR has only limited entertainment value for hardcore sandbox fans or those who've gotten themselves burnt out on themepark gameplay and who need something totally different from that to make MMO gaming entertaining for them again. SWTOR frankly just has too little to offer to those people in what they need to make MMO gaming fun for them.
But if people can still enjoy themepark gameplay, or if BW brand of SW storytelling combined with large worlds and lots of themepark oriented content is enough for them to have fun, then SWTOR should be something they can enjoy too.
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."
Shocking how few people on this board know what hipster means. What any of this has to do with a progressive political view, love of indie-rock, and a fashion movement is beyond me. Hipster doesn't mean someone who denies what is popular. That's an elitist. It means they challenge the ideals (generally fashion-related) of the "sheeplike" mainstream who they find uninformed. Someone reading articles and posting countermeasure is hardly uninformed.
Anyway, there's gonna be this type of review out there. It's not gonna make me lose desire to play the game. Also, I would know wether or not I like a game after playing it for 8 hours, as much as everyone is hating.
To each their own. I'll be at buying at midnight regardless.
Pfff, opinions, so many of them, and so different sometimes.
Measurements of a number of the planets - via officially available footage - indicate those that could be measured to be 1-2 WoW zones (origin worlds) and 7-8 WoW zones, or close to Rift's worldsize (normal planets). Comments from people who spent time ingame so far seem to confirm it: the normal planets are huge, some are wide open to make wandering around them feel excessively long, others have areas that you can't visit (yet?), but still overall they're very large.
Tests from various independent sources have already shown Tatooine to be almost as large in overall worldsize as Rift was. So far nothing has shown that this is different for the other normal planets even if the area design provides a different feel (Coruscant is totally different from a Tatooine ofc), even if some might still find it too restrictive or small in their wandering around, tastes and expectations will always differ
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."
There I can't agree with you.
While spending many hours to get from a city to another isn't fun having small zones are claustrophobic and make the game feel small. Just look on AoC, it's small zones takes away a lot of the fun and the feeling of being a massive world.
If they want people to travel faster from place a to b then speeder bikes or similar is the right way, not a small world.
I have no clue if this is the case of TOR but if it is it is a big downer for me.
Edit: Meverick: I heard that before and hope that is the case. Bigger is actually better wehe we talk zone size.
Well all we have are posts stating one way or the other, reading to much into any of them can lead to such confusion. I personally don't care how large they turn out to be, if they're too big you run into issues with barren landscapes, to small you feel sheltered in. I just hope it's a balance between the two in the end.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I highlighted that word to better convey my point. Meaningless as in barren, worlds too large to stuff full of content are worse than small worlds that feel claustrophobic IMO. I'm not saying I want small AOC zones, I'm saying I don't want huge worlds where everything is far too spread out.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Bigger doesn't necessarily mean better. Look at SWG, barren crap as far as the eye can see. Everything that I've seen so far, the planets have a fair portion of places to explore. Not only that, but they look hand-crafted which is nice and to me seems more immersive.
I don't think making a world small to remove "meaningless" distance is the answer. There are other methods of travel, no need to make the worlds small. For me it's better a huge world with teleportation(or other forms of travel) than a small world. Still, I doubt that TOR world will end up so small that it would be a problem.
The problem at this point is easy...SW:TOR is not done. Poeple opinions should be taken with a huge grain of salt. Even beta testers say it seems almost done but not just yet.
We all have a pretty good idea how tor is going to play out but the one thing that really concerns me is its totally unproven engine. Don't get me wrong, I like its potential but Tor will be one of the very first mmo's to ever use it and that is what has got me worried. Running the game at conventions with low / med quality settings, static npc's, low pop area's, tends to have me believe that Bioware is having a hard time optimizing the engine.
Maybe Bioware can calm my fears @ comic con, at least I hope so.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
I really hope this is the case and that they used these copy-paste methods for DA2 just because they where to busy hand-crafting TOR.
Yes but the purpose of that large vaste areas was explained early on. player made citys required the vast sizes. many city's had 450m radius and that pretty huge. They needed the room.
once again dont play the game if you dont like dont play it. simple its not math to figure out what you dont like dont judge a game you never played.
.....
I agree for the most part, I think my comment was too short to fully convey what I was saying. I like a balance in world size, I guess I could cite Fallout NV or Morrowind as a good example of what I am talking about. The worlds are large, yet not too large, there's plenty of exploration to be had, yet at the same time distances are close enough to not feel a chore to traverse. Fast travel helps cut down travel times as well.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
We all know how it is now, though, right? Wasteland of abandoned structures that really do nothing to enhance the immersion. I've said that it was a really cool idea for when the game was booming, but when people leave and don't do anything about the structures they leave, it just takes up space. Big gameworlds are fine and dandy in theory, but most of the time they wind up feeling lifeless.
In the first paragraph the guys says he doesn't like MMOs, so why bother really?
Not what I have heard first hand.... but less of that. DO I believe people I know and trust or second hand tittle tattle....
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Regardless of how long this particular person played, the vast majority of reviews from players o the game (professional reviewers or otherwise) have been positive. Plus many of the complaints this guy had are things BioWare let us know from the start would not be here. Sorry, but this is not the sandbox game he was looking for. Time to move on now.
"If half of what you tell me is a lie, how can I believe any of it?"
you know...I am pretty sure that this oguy liked both games. I think that, especially in comparison with each other, he felt that GW2 far outdhined SWTOR in the sense of making the game feel fresh and new...instead of the same old thing in a new skin.
also, seeing as how the article wasn't about SWTOR, im pretty sure he made the statement to give some context to his experience with GW2. Unfortunately, the people most likely to have the context to understand where he is coming from on this are SWTOR fans, and I don't think many of them agree with him (even though the person with hands on experience with both games is saying it).
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.