come on, we all know that the majority of the writers on gaming sides aren't trained journalist, which have to be objective and factual. its a waste of time to argue about why some of them like or dislike a game.
He is a qualified journalist, hes the deputy editor of the site which makes the fact he has no pc even more pathetic.. Swtor and other mmos are showing these guys up who think the only way to play games is on their consoles..
come on, we all know that the majority of the writers on gaming sides aren't trained journalist, which have to be objective and factual. its a waste of time to argue about why some of them like or dislike a game.
I hate to point this out, but no game reviewers are 'objective and factual'. Those would be the worst reviews ever.
Gaming are entertainment, and therefore are completely subjective. An 'objective and factual review of a game' would read like the gaming requirements on the side of the box, and the blurbs on the back without all the adjectives.
Not 'Fantastic graphics', merely 'This game has graphics'.
You can't say 'It has a great story', you can merely say 'This game has a story'.
Factual, objective reviews of games would be completely dry, completely boring and totally useless.
Well, unless you're checking to see if your computer has the minimum requirements to play it.
Reviews (... and this isn't a review anyway, since the game isn't even out) are opinion pieces.
Opinion pieces are, by their very nature, all subjective.
Even the news isn't really objective, if you watch it. When was the last time you heard them say something like 'Terrorists killed 80 people, but hey. NO judgement calls here. It's okay I guess.' If you want objectivity, go... watch science news or something. :T Not gaming opinion pieces.
This article has helped me come to a conclusion. A final one.
Have any of you ever heard it said that reviews about mmorpgs cant really be written or be legitemate for the first few months or so? Well that might be true, or it might not be.
But I have to say honestly? You cant really write a decent preview on an entire game when you're playing it at a game show. You might have 15 minutes, or half an hour, or maybe an entire hour, but thats just not enough. Now if you're writing about one single aspect like PVP that might be okay. If you keep your preview focused on one mechanic. But these previews that dub the entire game "bad" or "good"? Okay these authors have absolutely NO IDEA what they are talking about.
If you are going to write about the entire scope of the game, to even get a half decent idea, you need whole days to play it. At your leasure and plenty of time to do it. Otherwise? You cant possibly know if you'll like it or not.
I demoed a certain game recently, and for the first few hours I wasnt sure what to think. Then I decided I liked it. Then I changed my mind and decided I didnt. Then I changed my mind back again. Days later after feeling both those extremes from time to time, I settled on a fairly solid, but not definite opinion.
But you cant sit down for 15 minutes or even a few hours and get any reasonable idea of a game at all. You might can say you really enjoyed the PVP you played, or enjoyed running that particular instanced dungeon and talk about that, but you cant reasonably say what you think of the game as a whole. Even with days of play thats not really possible. And if anyone thinks they can form a reasonable opinion that quickly, especially with a game thats as large in scope as something like Swtor, then they are wrong.
Thats like staring at Mount Everest for ten minutes and then me acting like an expert and telling people all about the mountain and proclaiming myself a guide. It doesnt work that way.
"My first experience with the game was impaired by high expectations."
This admission by the author is probably why 90% of the people who say they don't like SWTOR says that. They went into the beta or demo with the expectation of a game that was genre changing. They automatically figured that since SWTOR was brand new, it would eclipse every other mmo made before it due to all the technology available and the money spent on it. In short, the game failed for them because their own expectations are too lofty.
No one is saying go in expecting a shade higher than crap. What they are saying is these people should have READ interviews and articles by the devs and company, and they'll see that this game was never meant to be groundbreaking from the typical mold. It was meant to be heavy on lore and story, adventuring and exploration.. a game where every class has it's own heroic path. That is unlike any other game to date for the most part where older mmos have you as part of a cog in a machine doing random hub quests, grinding out gear and living in dungeons over and over.
Once people take out the 'perfect mmo' idea that's stuck in the back of their minds, then see SWTOR for what it was meant to be they will appreciate it much more. If they can't do that, then move on because your perfect MMO isn't made yet.. and never will be.
Originally posted by Robsolf Originally posted by Biggus99 Bottom line is that that guy isn't an MMO player, so maybe he's not the best one suited to do an MMO review.
Yep... that would be kinda like hiring me to review the latest Super Mario platform game or Farmville clone.
You should have reviews from non-mmorpg players, so long as they note that somewhere in the review. What if you are not an mmorpg player, but you're interested in the game? It's a point of view that would be important to the developers as well. They want to know if their game is attractive to the mindless Facebook hordes.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The conclusion I've reached from several impressions is this:
Those who have only demoed TOR briefly liken it to a WOW clone and are disappointed.
But those who are actually in beta, and have spent time playing, say it is awesome.
My conclusion from this is the STORY, which Bioware has been emphasising all along, makes all the difference. But you must first spend the time to experience the story to appreciate this game.
I like the mixture of words Professional along with Kotaku. Funny stuff.
Other than that, not really mcuh to discuss is there? If Your liking or disliking a game depends on how gaming "press" feels about it, You already lost.
Don't think this violates the NDA. I've run it on 2 weekend beta invites using a 27" iMac. Runs great on Windows 7 on bootcamp. Max resolution. Just for anyone who may be wondering.
'My first experience with the game was impaired by high expectations. I don't play massively multiplayer role-playing games.'
Oh.
Hey if the guy has changed his mind then good for him. But not convinced a non MMO player is the best option when reviewing an MMO.
Only in this sub genre would someone review something their not, 'into'. Or is it just the height of internet stupidity? The guy sounds like he's just discovered computers about six months ago and is now a self proclaimed, 'expert', because he hasn't accidently flushed he's Macbook down the loo...
"I used to not like The Old Republic because it seemed like it might be just another MMO. That is, it might be one of those games that's just not for me.
Now I like The Old Republic, because it seems like it might be just another BioWare Star Wars role-playing game. That is, it might be one of those games that's just for me."
Does this mean it is more of a single player, voice over, story game, that your companions are like your extra guys form single player games, like Baldurs Gate? I hope not, thats some of what I was worried about. I want a MMORPG, not a RPG....
Ahaha, oh dear, still reading but already laughing.
I didn't thought it was possible for him to discredit his initial negative impression (which was the cause of multiple threadnoughts here) more than he already did, but he proved me wrong, alright ...
Glad he changed his mind though, sadly that doesn't account for much in his case.
I wish him good luck reviewing games on his MAC.
(For the love of god, noone ever tell him about Bootcamp or other means to run Windows on a Mac).
Edit: Crap, someone already did: "[UPDATE: A few people have e-mailed me to say they've heard that the developers say the game can run on a Mac running Boot Camp, which supports Windows. Until I try it myself on my MacBook Air, I don't want to get anyone, myself included, to excited.]"
*laughs again about the red part*
*laughs some more*
He discredited quite a bit of his previous review, but look closer; he's mostly talking about things that were not in the previous impressions, and putting an oddly positive spin on the things he does talk about.
For example:
"I brought my heroine through her first few quests. She killed some giant bugs in a cave, murdered some bandits with Sith lightning and completed a blood trial for a guy named Spindrall."
That's an odd spin on the whole "kill quests suck" mantra. I guess generic quests are fine when there is story behind them. What?
He does the same with other things. Previously, he went on a ton about number keys and how horrible abilities are in MMOs (which apparently he had never played). Now none of that is an issue, or he just doesn't go into it.
Seems like this reviewer is just a shortsighted dumbass and shouldn't be trusted by haters or fanboys.
Problem is when people were saying that before they were damned to the hellfire of Oblivion.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
After reading the reviewers "intresting" article Im left wondering why i cant get the last 5 min of my life back.....
***Raises Plunger in salute to the Season 2 Walking dead premiere!!***
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care. Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes
Originally posted by Kost Kotaku writer's are more amusing than the funny page in my morning paper, very comical stuff. - The Reviewer is not into MMORPGs. - The Reviewer is a KOTOR fan that is not happy that SWTOR was developed as an MMORPG instead of a Single Player RPG. - The Reviewer does not own a PC. - The Reviewer admits that the conclusion he came to in the first article was based on his own false expectations. - The Reviewer stomps all over his own credibility during this article, by contradicting so much of what he claimed in his previous article. Kotaku needs to get there shit together, I'd be extremely embarrassed if it were my site.
Well, actually everything you listed gives reasons for why Bioware should be excited.
If the reviewer isn't into MMORPGs, but he actually likes this one that could bode well meaning TOR has "cross appeal" which many mmos don't.
He was a fan of KOTOR, was disappointed that SWTOR wasn't made as a single player game, yet he still likes it. Again, that's a plus not a minus.
Not owning a PC has nothing to do with him playing it at the demo though, right? The demo site had a PC for him to play on and try which he did and liked so...
Admitting previous mistakes in judgement is a STRENGTH, not a weakness, lol. I have more respect for someone who admitted they made a mistake or were hasty in judgement (either for or AGAINST any game) than to stubbornly keep pretending they like or dislike something dishonestly.
I have more respect for people who played RIFT at beta and launch, and now say they were wrong about the game more than people who know they were wrong about the game being 'genre changing' or better than WoW, but don't want to look wrong to a mass of anonymous people on the internet.
Kotaku writer's are more amusing than the funny page in my morning paper, very comical stuff.
- The Reviewer is not into MMORPGs.
- The Reviewer is a KOTOR fan that is not happy that SWTOR was developed as an MMORPG instead of a Single Player RPG.
- The Reviewer does not own a PC.
- The Reviewer admits that the conclusion he came to in the first article was based on his own false expectations.
- The Reviewer stomps all over his own credibility during this article, by contradicting so much of what he claimed in his previous article.
Kotaku needs to get there shit together, I'd be extremely embarrassed if it were my site.
Well, actually everything you listed gives reasons for why Bioware should be excited.
If the reviewer isn't into MMORPGs, but he actually likes this one that could bode well meaning TOR has "cross appeal" which many mmos don't.
He was a fan of KOTOR, was disappointed that SWTOR wasn't made as a single player game, yet he still likes it. Again, that's a plus not a minus.
Not owning a PC has nothing to do with him playing it at the demo though, right? The demo site had a PC for him to play on and try which he did and liked so...
Admitting previous mistakes in judgement is a STRENGTH, not a weakness, lol. I have more respect for someone who admitted they made a mistake or were hasty in judgement (either for or AGAINST any game) than to stubbornly keep pretending they like or dislike something dishonestly.
I have more respect for people who played RIFT at beta and launch, and now say they were wrong about the game more than people who know they were wrong about the game being 'genre changing' or better than WoW, but don't want to look wrong to a mass of anonymous people on the internet.
He shouldn't be reviewing MMORPGs, that is an undeniable fact.
Which was the entire point of my response, you seem to have missed that point.
Originally posted by Kost Originally posted by popinjay
Originally posted by Kost Kotaku writer's are more amusing than the funny page in my morning paper, very comical stuff. - The Reviewer is not into MMORPGs. - The Reviewer is a KOTOR fan that is not happy that SWTOR was developed as an MMORPG instead of a Single Player RPG. - The Reviewer does not own a PC. - The Reviewer admits that the conclusion he came to in the first article was based on his own false expectations. - The Reviewer stomps all over his own credibility during this article, by contradicting so much of what he claimed in his previous article. Kotaku needs to get there shit together, I'd be extremely embarrassed if it were my site.
Well, actually everything you listed gives reasons for why Bioware should be excited.
If the reviewer isn't into MMORPGs, but he actually likes this one that could bode well meaning TOR has "cross appeal" which many mmos don't.
He was a fan of KOTOR, was disappointed that SWTOR wasn't made as a single player game, yet he still likes it. Again, that's a plus not a minus.
Not owning a PC has nothing to do with him playing it at the demo though, right? The demo site had a PC for him to play on and try which he did and liked so...
Admitting previous mistakes in judgement is a STRENGTH, not a weakness, lol. I have more respect for someone who admitted they made a mistake or were hasty in judgement (either for or AGAINST any game) than to stubbornly keep pretending they like or dislike something dishonestly.
I have more respect for people who played RIFT at beta and launch, and now say they were wrong about the game more than people who know they were wrong about the game being 'genre changing' or better than WoW, but don't want to look wrong to a mass of anonymous people on the internet.
He shouldn't be reviewing MMORPGs, that is an undeniable fact. Which was the entire point of my response, you seem to have missed that point. It wasn't a "review", which I think you missed the point.
He was talking about how the game affected him. I'm not going to re-read the entire thing again but I don't even think he used the word "review" once. Nor do I remember a "reviewing score" attached to it like .. reviews.
The point you missed is this, which I think said 'review' to you somehow:
I used to not like The Old Republic because it seemed like it might be just another MMO. That is, it might be one of those games that's just not for me.
Now I like The Old Republic, because it seems like it might be just another BioWare Star Wars role-playing game. That is, it might be one of those games that's just for me.
Your responses to the article only bolstered a case FOR SWTOR, whether intentional or not from the point of a non-MMOer without a PC, lol.
Kotaku writer's are more amusing than the funny page in my morning paper, very comical stuff.
- The Reviewer is not into MMORPGs.
- The Reviewer is a KOTOR fan that is not happy that SWTOR was developed as an MMORPG instead of a Single Player RPG.
- The Reviewer does not own a PC.
- The Reviewer admits that the conclusion he came to in the first article was based on his own false expectations.
- The Reviewer stomps all over his own credibility during this article, by contradicting so much of what he claimed in his previous article.
Kotaku needs to get there shit together, I'd be extremely embarrassed if it were my site.
Well, actually everything you listed gives reasons for why Bioware should be excited.
If the reviewer isn't into MMORPGs, but he actually likes this one that could bode well meaning TOR has "cross appeal" which many mmos don't.
He was a fan of KOTOR, was disappointed that SWTOR wasn't made as a single player game, yet he still likes it. Again, that's a plus not a minus.
Not owning a PC has nothing to do with him playing it at the demo though, right? The demo site had a PC for him to play on and try which he did and liked so...
Admitting previous mistakes in judgement is a STRENGTH, not a weakness, lol. I have more respect for someone who admitted they made a mistake or were hasty in judgement (either for or AGAINST any game) than to stubbornly keep pretending they like or dislike something dishonestly.
I have more respect for people who played RIFT at beta and launch, and now say they were wrong about the game more than people who know they were wrong about the game being 'genre changing' or better than WoW, but don't want to look wrong to a mass of anonymous people on the internet.
He shouldn't be reviewing MMORPGs, that is an undeniable fact.
Which was the entire point of my response, you seem to have missed that point.
It wasn't a "review", which I think you missed the point.
He was talking about how the game affected him. I'm not going to re-read the entire thing again but I don't even think he used the word "review" once. Nor do I remember a "reviewing score" attached to it like .. reviews.
The point you missed is this, which I think said 'review' to you somehow:
I used to not like The Old Republic because it seemed like it might be just another MMO. That is, it might be one of those games that's just not for me.
Now I like The Old Republic, because it seems like it might be just another BioWare Star Wars role-playing game. That is, it might be one of those games that's just for me.
Your responses to the article only bolstered a case FOR SWTOR, whether intentional or not from the point of a non-MMOer without a PC, lol.
Semantics.
He is a professional reviewer, who should not be reviewing MMORPGs. Whether this was an impression, a review, or any other type of article is completely irrelevant. This is a very simple premise, there is nothing more to be read into my original statement.
Stop putting words in my mouth.
I don't appreciate it at all, and I find it extremely bad form for you to be attempting to do so. I understand exactly where you are coming from, and comprehend the meaning of your responses to mine completely. I am not addressing your responses in a similar fashion, the least you can do is express a small amount of mutual respect.
Originally posted by BadSpock Originally posted by popinja
Your responses to the article only bolstered a case FOR SWTOR, whether intentional or not from the point of a non-MMOer without a PC, lol.
Maybe it's not such a bad thing that a non-MMOer who isn't a PC gamer likes TOR? WoW didn't get its millions of subs from old EQ players alone... Precisely my point. Thanks
See, most "mmoers" look at TOR and say "Bah, it's single player. I don't play mmos to be single player." That's without them looking at the whole game and then HONESTLY looking at whatever mmo they are playing now.
ANY mmo you start now or in the past for the most part was single player for the majority of your play. For most people the first month is nothing but a single player experience with small elements of group play (dungeons, duo/trio questing) thrown in. It's not a "mmo" in the least. The only difference is those people are generally not reading quests, not paying attention to lore but are trying to get to "endgame" so the MMO part can start (raiding/more dungeoning/rep grinding). This is what they aren't honest about.
SWTOR removes that and says right out "This will be an ADVENTURE game. You will have a story to make your toon feel heroic from the start." That involves a story and lore and most mmoers aren't used to that. They like clickky-clikky on the quest.
Console players aren't like that. Most console players don't like to clicky-click through their games. They like to explore every single thing in the game. They like the side quests. They like the cutscences. They like the epicness their toon gets from doing heroic things and want to be in the forefore. This is what MMOs DON'T give players for the most part and why they don't like them. Most mmos you are a part of a machine but half the time you don't even "see" the machine because everyone is sitting in towns waiting for LFG.
I think Bioware is really smart designing the game this way. Sure, people raised in mmos that they have to grind dungeons, rep and raid will go to Rift or WoW, but Bioware wasn't interested in those players anyways. They want that market that mmos usually don't get; console/other types of game players. Bioware probably would be happy if all the WoW players stayed in WoW because they are already tainted in a way.
When WoW came out, it got it's own player base of NEW players to mmos; not mostly rehashed burnout out vets. Vets looked at WoW and went "Meh, who'd play this? it's kiddie like, not enough action, this will fail." But Blizzard knew to keep it's game for the brand new MMO player and later branch it off for raiders and such opening it up.
Originally posted by Kost Originally posted by popinjay
Originally posted by Kost
Originally posted by popinjay
Originally posted by Kost Kotaku writer's are more amusing than the funny page in my morning paper, very comical stuff. - The Reviewer is not into MMORPGs. - The Reviewer is a KOTOR fan that is not happy that SWTOR was developed as an MMORPG instead of a Single Player RPG. - The Reviewer does not own a PC. - The Reviewer admits that the conclusion he came to in the first article was based on his own false expectations. - The Reviewer stomps all over his own credibility during this article, by contradicting so much of what he claimed in his previous article. Kotaku needs to get there shit together, I'd be extremely embarrassed if it were my site.
Well, actually everything you listed gives reasons for why Bioware should be excited.
If the reviewer isn't into MMORPGs, but he actually likes this one that could bode well meaning TOR has "cross appeal" which many mmos don't.
He was a fan of KOTOR, was disappointed that SWTOR wasn't made as a single player game, yet he still likes it. Again, that's a plus not a minus.
Not owning a PC has nothing to do with him playing it at the demo though, right? The demo site had a PC for him to play on and try which he did and liked so...
Admitting previous mistakes in judgement is a STRENGTH, not a weakness, lol. I have more respect for someone who admitted they made a mistake or were hasty in judgement (either for or AGAINST any game) than to stubbornly keep pretending they like or dislike something dishonestly.
I have more respect for people who played RIFT at beta and launch, and now say they were wrong about the game more than people who know they were wrong about the game being 'genre changing' or better than WoW, but don't want to look wrong to a mass of anonymous people on the internet.
He shouldn't be reviewing MMORPGs, that is an undeniable fact. Which was the entire point of my response, you seem to have missed that point.
It wasn't a "review", which I think you missed the point.
He was talking about how the game affected him. I'm not going to re-read the entire thing again but I don't even think he used the word "review" once. Nor do I remember a "reviewing score" attached to it like .. reviews.
The point you missed is this, which I think said 'review' to you somehow:
I used to not like The Old Republic because it seemed like it might be just another MMO. That is, it might be one of those games that's just not for me.
Now I like The Old Republic, because it seems like it might be just another BioWare Star Wars role-playing game. That is, it might be one of those games that's just for me.
Your responses to the article only bolstered a case FOR SWTOR, whether intentional or not from the point of a non-MMOer without a PC, lol.
Semantics. He is a professional reviewer, who should not be reviewing MMORPGs. Whether this was an impression, a review, or any other type of article is completely irrelevant. This is a very simple premise, there is nothing more to be read into my original statement. Stop putting words in my mouth. I don't appreciate it at all, and I find it extremely bad form for you to be attempting to do so. I understand exactly where you are coming from, and comprehend the meaning of your responses to mine completely. I am not addressing your responses in a similar fashion, the least you can do is express a small amount of mutual respect.
It's not semantics just because you say it is, lol. He is not reviewing a MMO. He's talking about things he likes about the game (or dislikes) but isn't giving a review of the game. If you can't tell the difference between a review and someone's opinion of how they personally like something, I don't know what to tell you. But there is a difference.
I can say "I don't like Big Macs because they are sloppy. They use sesame seeds on buns and I'm actually a cheesesteak kind of guy." I'm not reviewing McD's burgers and grading them against BK, Wendy's, etc. I'm telling you why I don't like the taste.
Comments
Maybe someone got a little help on his opinion, maybe.
He is a qualified journalist, hes the deputy editor of the site which makes the fact he has no pc even more pathetic.. Swtor and other mmos are showing these guys up who think the only way to play games is on their consoles..I hate to point this out, but no game reviewers are 'objective and factual'. Those would be the worst reviews ever.
Gaming are entertainment, and therefore are completely subjective. An 'objective and factual review of a game' would read like the gaming requirements on the side of the box, and the blurbs on the back without all the adjectives.
Not 'Fantastic graphics', merely 'This game has graphics'.
You can't say 'It has a great story', you can merely say 'This game has a story'.
Factual, objective reviews of games would be completely dry, completely boring and totally useless.
Well, unless you're checking to see if your computer has the minimum requirements to play it.
Reviews (... and this isn't a review anyway, since the game isn't even out) are opinion pieces.
Opinion pieces are, by their very nature, all subjective.
Even the news isn't really objective, if you watch it. When was the last time you heard them say something like 'Terrorists killed 80 people, but hey. NO judgement calls here. It's okay I guess.' If you want objectivity, go... watch science news or something. :T Not gaming opinion pieces.
This article has helped me come to a conclusion. A final one.
Have any of you ever heard it said that reviews about mmorpgs cant really be written or be legitemate for the first few months or so? Well that might be true, or it might not be.
But I have to say honestly? You cant really write a decent preview on an entire game when you're playing it at a game show. You might have 15 minutes, or half an hour, or maybe an entire hour, but thats just not enough. Now if you're writing about one single aspect like PVP that might be okay. If you keep your preview focused on one mechanic. But these previews that dub the entire game "bad" or "good"? Okay these authors have absolutely NO IDEA what they are talking about.
If you are going to write about the entire scope of the game, to even get a half decent idea, you need whole days to play it. At your leasure and plenty of time to do it. Otherwise? You cant possibly know if you'll like it or not.
I demoed a certain game recently, and for the first few hours I wasnt sure what to think. Then I decided I liked it. Then I changed my mind and decided I didnt. Then I changed my mind back again. Days later after feeling both those extremes from time to time, I settled on a fairly solid, but not definite opinion.
But you cant sit down for 15 minutes or even a few hours and get any reasonable idea of a game at all. You might can say you really enjoyed the PVP you played, or enjoyed running that particular instanced dungeon and talk about that, but you cant reasonably say what you think of the game as a whole. Even with days of play thats not really possible. And if anyone thinks they can form a reasonable opinion that quickly, especially with a game thats as large in scope as something like Swtor, then they are wrong.
Thats like staring at Mount Everest for ten minutes and then me acting like an expert and telling people all about the mountain and proclaiming myself a guide. It doesnt work that way.
"My first experience with the game was impaired by high expectations."
This admission by the author is probably why 90% of the people who say they don't like SWTOR says that. They went into the beta or demo with the expectation of a game that was genre changing. They automatically figured that since SWTOR was brand new, it would eclipse every other mmo made before it due to all the technology available and the money spent on it. In short, the game failed for them because their own expectations are too lofty.
No one is saying go in expecting a shade higher than crap. What they are saying is these people should have READ interviews and articles by the devs and company, and they'll see that this game was never meant to be groundbreaking from the typical mold. It was meant to be heavy on lore and story, adventuring and exploration.. a game where every class has it's own heroic path. That is unlike any other game to date for the most part where older mmos have you as part of a cog in a machine doing random hub quests, grinding out gear and living in dungeons over and over.
Once people take out the 'perfect mmo' idea that's stuck in the back of their minds, then see SWTOR for what it was meant to be they will appreciate it much more. If they can't do that, then move on because your perfect MMO isn't made yet.. and never will be.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Yep... that would be kinda like hiring me to review the latest Super Mario platform game or Farmville clone.
You should have reviews from non-mmorpg players, so long as they note that somewhere in the review. What if you are not an mmorpg player, but you're interested in the game? It's a point of view that would be important to the developers as well. They want to know if their game is attractive to the mindless Facebook hordes.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The conclusion I've reached from several impressions is this:
Those who have only demoed TOR briefly liken it to a WOW clone and are disappointed.
But those who are actually in beta, and have spent time playing, say it is awesome.
My conclusion from this is the STORY, which Bioware has been emphasising all along, makes all the difference. But you must first spend the time to experience the story to appreciate this game.
I like the mixture of words Professional along with Kotaku. Funny stuff.
Other than that, not really mcuh to discuss is there? If Your liking or disliking a game depends on how gaming "press" feels about it, You already lost.
What I find so humorous about this review is the fact that a video game reviewer owns a Mac rather than a PC...
What kind of serious game reviewer would own a Mac? Seriously...
Then again, I guess someone does need to review the 10 games that exist for Apple.
how legally binding is the NDA on MMOs? I mean it isn't at M&A transaction...
Regarding his mentioning running it on bootcamp:
Don't think this violates the NDA. I've run it on 2 weekend beta invites using a 27" iMac. Runs great on Windows 7 on bootcamp. Max resolution. Just for anyone who may be wondering.
Only in this sub genre would someone review something their not, 'into'. Or is it just the height of internet stupidity? The guy sounds like he's just discovered computers about six months ago and is now a self proclaimed, 'expert', because he hasn't accidently flushed he's Macbook down the loo...
This looks like a job for....The Riviera Kid!
Does this mean it is more of a single player, voice over, story game, that your companions are like your extra guys form single player games, like Baldurs Gate? I hope not, thats some of what I was worried about. I want a MMORPG, not a RPG....
Kotaku writer's are more amusing than the funny page in my morning paper, very comical stuff.
- The Reviewer is not into MMORPGs.
- The Reviewer is a KOTOR fan that is not happy that SWTOR was developed as an MMORPG instead of a Single Player RPG.
- The Reviewer does not own a PC.
- The Reviewer admits that the conclusion he came to in the first article was based on his own false expectations.
- The Reviewer stomps all over his own credibility during this article, by contradicting so much of what he claimed in his previous article.
Kotaku needs to get there shit together, I'd be extremely embarrassed if it were my site.
Problem is when people were saying that before they were damned to the hellfire of Oblivion.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
After reading the reviewers "intresting" article Im left wondering why i cant get the last 5 min of my life back.....
***Raises Plunger in salute to the Season 2 Walking dead premiere!!***
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care.
Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes
If the reviewer isn't into MMORPGs, but he actually likes this one that could bode well meaning TOR has "cross appeal" which many mmos don't.
He was a fan of KOTOR, was disappointed that SWTOR wasn't made as a single player game, yet he still likes it. Again, that's a plus not a minus.
Not owning a PC has nothing to do with him playing it at the demo though, right? The demo site had a PC for him to play on and try which he did and liked so...
Admitting previous mistakes in judgement is a STRENGTH, not a weakness, lol. I have more respect for someone who admitted they made a mistake or were hasty in judgement (either for or AGAINST any game) than to stubbornly keep pretending they like or dislike something dishonestly.
I have more respect for people who played RIFT at beta and launch, and now say they were wrong about the game more than people who know they were wrong about the game being 'genre changing' or better than WoW, but don't want to look wrong to a mass of anonymous people on the internet.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Professional???
Wait does that mean someone actually pays this nutjob?
He shouldn't be reviewing MMORPGs, that is an undeniable fact.
Which was the entire point of my response, you seem to have missed that point.
Well, actually everything you listed gives reasons for why Bioware should be excited.
If the reviewer isn't into MMORPGs, but he actually likes this one that could bode well meaning TOR has "cross appeal" which many mmos don't.
He was a fan of KOTOR, was disappointed that SWTOR wasn't made as a single player game, yet he still likes it. Again, that's a plus not a minus.
Not owning a PC has nothing to do with him playing it at the demo though, right? The demo site had a PC for him to play on and try which he did and liked so...
Admitting previous mistakes in judgement is a STRENGTH, not a weakness, lol. I have more respect for someone who admitted they made a mistake or were hasty in judgement (either for or AGAINST any game) than to stubbornly keep pretending they like or dislike something dishonestly.
I have more respect for people who played RIFT at beta and launch, and now say they were wrong about the game more than people who know they were wrong about the game being 'genre changing' or better than WoW, but don't want to look wrong to a mass of anonymous people on the internet.
He shouldn't be reviewing MMORPGs, that is an undeniable fact.
Which was the entire point of my response, you seem to have missed that point.
It wasn't a "review", which I think you missed the point.
He was talking about how the game affected him. I'm not going to re-read the entire thing again but I don't even think he used the word "review" once. Nor do I remember a "reviewing score" attached to it like .. reviews.
The point you missed is this, which I think said 'review' to you somehow:
Your responses to the article only bolstered a case FOR SWTOR, whether intentional or not from the point of a non-MMOer without a PC, lol.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Maybe it's not such a bad thing that a non-MMOer who isn't a PC gamer likes TOR?
WoW didn't get its millions of subs from old EQ players alone...
Semantics.
He is a professional reviewer, who should not be reviewing MMORPGs. Whether this was an impression, a review, or any other type of article is completely irrelevant. This is a very simple premise, there is nothing more to be read into my original statement.
Stop putting words in my mouth.
I don't appreciate it at all, and I find it extremely bad form for you to be attempting to do so. I understand exactly where you are coming from, and comprehend the meaning of your responses to mine completely. I am not addressing your responses in a similar fashion, the least you can do is express a small amount of mutual respect.
WoW didn't get its millions of subs from old EQ players alone...
Precisely my point. Thanks
See, most "mmoers" look at TOR and say "Bah, it's single player. I don't play mmos to be single player." That's without them looking at the whole game and then HONESTLY looking at whatever mmo they are playing now.
ANY mmo you start now or in the past for the most part was single player for the majority of your play. For most people the first month is nothing but a single player experience with small elements of group play (dungeons, duo/trio questing) thrown in. It's not a "mmo" in the least. The only difference is those people are generally not reading quests, not paying attention to lore but are trying to get to "endgame" so the MMO part can start (raiding/more dungeoning/rep grinding). This is what they aren't honest about.
SWTOR removes that and says right out "This will be an ADVENTURE game. You will have a story to make your toon feel heroic from the start." That involves a story and lore and most mmoers aren't used to that. They like clickky-clikky on the quest.
Console players aren't like that. Most console players don't like to clicky-click through their games. They like to explore every single thing in the game. They like the side quests. They like the cutscences. They like the epicness their toon gets from doing heroic things and want to be in the forefore. This is what MMOs DON'T give players for the most part and why they don't like them. Most mmos you are a part of a machine but half the time you don't even "see" the machine because everyone is sitting in towns waiting for LFG.
I think Bioware is really smart designing the game this way. Sure, people raised in mmos that they have to grind dungeons, rep and raid will go to Rift or WoW, but Bioware wasn't interested in those players anyways. They want that market that mmos usually don't get; console/other types of game players. Bioware probably would be happy if all the WoW players stayed in WoW because they are already tainted in a way.
When WoW came out, it got it's own player base of NEW players to mmos; not mostly rehashed burnout out vets. Vets looked at WoW and went "Meh, who'd play this? it's kiddie like, not enough action, this will fail." But Blizzard knew to keep it's game for the brand new MMO player and later branch it off for raiders and such opening it up.
"TO MICHAEL!"
He shouldn't be reviewing MMORPGs, that is an undeniable fact.
Which was the entire point of my response, you seem to have missed that point.
It wasn't a "review", which I think you missed the point.
He was talking about how the game affected him. I'm not going to re-read the entire thing again but I don't even think he used the word "review" once. Nor do I remember a "reviewing score" attached to it like .. reviews.
The point you missed is this, which I think said 'review' to you somehow:
I used to not like The Old Republic because it seemed like it might be just another MMO. That is, it might be one of those games that's just not for me.
Now I like The Old Republic, because it seems like it might be just another BioWare Star Wars role-playing game. That is, it might be one of those games that's just for me.
Your responses to the article only bolstered a case FOR SWTOR, whether intentional or not from the point of a non-MMOer without a PC, lol.
Semantics.
He is a professional reviewer, who should not be reviewing MMORPGs. Whether this was an impression, a review, or any other type of article is completely irrelevant. This is a very simple premise, there is nothing more to be read into my original statement.
Stop putting words in my mouth.
I don't appreciate it at all, and I find it extremely bad form for you to be attempting to do so. I understand exactly where you are coming from, and comprehend the meaning of your responses to mine completely. I am not addressing your responses in a similar fashion, the least you can do is express a small amount of mutual respect.
It's not semantics just because you say it is, lol. He is not reviewing a MMO. He's talking about things he likes about the game (or dislikes) but isn't giving a review of the game. If you can't tell the difference between a review and someone's opinion of how they personally like something, I don't know what to tell you. But there is a difference.
I can say "I don't like Big Macs because they are sloppy. They use sesame seeds on buns and I'm actually a cheesesteak kind of guy." I'm not reviewing McD's burgers and grading them against BK, Wendy's, etc. I'm telling you why I don't like the taste.
"TO MICHAEL!"