He's expecting to get into a group in an exclusive press only hands-on for a pre-beta game.... just lol...
This "show us MMO elements" crap has to stop, what warrants those questions in the first place? You don't see them asked for games like GW2, FFXIV and other upcoming mmo's which haven't revealed any group play either.
For the rest, the article sucks, I can live with negative opinions but at least tell me something about the freaking experience you had.
I can summarize this article and the one from Eurogamer in one sentence: "We played an alien bounty hunter who had several skills then went on a mission to kill a guy; now lets go over the questions they didn't answer, which we are pissed about."
If someone wants a more informative article: Belgian gaming site 9lives.be went to the hands-on event as well and wrote a somewhat more detailed article on their experience, the original is in Dutch but I translated it for the fans at the official site.
Thanks for the link! The ariticle you've linked to is a more professional review..it manages to point out the pros and cons of TOR gameplay in its current state, without being overtly negative or fanboi-ish. The videogamer.com review seems a bit half-assed, with a writing style reminiscent of a smart ass, junior high school student's book report.
I suspect, although I can only speculate that some of these writers may have been anticipating a scoop of sorts before E3 arrived. However Bioware seems to be taking its time to try to get the game right, and the drip..drip of info and hands on gameplay has got the reviewers/writers panties all bunched up in a knot.
One thing the videogamer.com reviewer wrote that stood out was, "Really, a year from release, I still haven't got a clue what kind of game BioWare is making."
I'm not at all against skepticism, I'm skeptical about things in the game as well if you'd read some of my posts, including things like customization, instanced nature of PvP, etc...
There are still a lot of situations to be cleared out in the above system, and the quality of the group content besides the solo leveling has to be convincing.
What I am against, is writing uninformative previews like this one, with a lack of consistency in skepticism and a lack of research on the actual facts.
I agree that the reviewer should have made some research about the grouping decision making feature beforehand.. but other than that, I don't really see anything too bad about this article. I probably would have had the same thoughts, except I wouldn't have been as forgiving in my review, lol.
Except you didn't play the game so you couldn't know...
When writing, you follow a basic chronological order about your experience and you try to be as detailed and to the point as possible, not actually telling people about the experience you had but being pissed at not getting a feature that is impossible to get at that stage and event is just stupid.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Thanks for the link! The ariticle you've linked to is a more professional review..it manages to point out the pros and cons of TOR gameplay in its current state, without being overtly negative or fanboi-ish. The videogamer.com review seems a bit half-assed, with a writing style reminiscent of a smart ass, junior high school student's book report.
No problem. That article is also not uniformly positive and the author states some things he finds unimpressive or bizarre.
But he talks about the actual experience instead about resorting to negative speculation to fill up his editorial.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
I can't say I'm too fond of that seemingly biased review. I do understand how he feels, but does he understand why a lengthy development time can occur?
IMO, there seems to be 3 major reasons for a game to take a year or more for development:
1. It's dead in the water. This doesn't mean they lost interest in the project, but that they can't find a home for their game or have come up against technical/legal issues preventing it from being released (RIP Duke Nukem Forever).
2. They LOVE their game and want it to be as polished as possible. Some developers will not even try to give a release date if they themselves are not happy with their game, even if they have to go back to the drawing board. This is one of my favourite reasons as, 9 out of 10 times means the game is tested to the gills and usually results in extremely smooth launches.
3. New technology advances. Let's face it. Technology advances are made on an almost regular basis these days. If some new graphics engine comes out making things smoother for the game, why not try to implement it? This can be both good and bad. Sometimes these implementations (not just graphics/physics) can go smoothly, and sometimes they can break a game if the new tech, like a new kidney, gets rejected.
Of course there are many reasons why a game seems to take longer than we'd expect to develop, but I feel these are the most common factors. The videogamer.com review seems not take any of these in consideration, though I am 95% sure it's not the first major reason. There are even more than a few examples of demos coming out that end up seeming like a different game compared to the full version because of things that get cut in the final stages or added/changed.
I, for one, have no qualms waiting a year or more for a game that is nicely polished and truly cared for by developers as more than just a cash cow.
No problem. That article is also not uniformly positive and the author states some things he finds unimpressive or bizarre.
But he talks about the actual experience instead about resorting to negative speculation to fill up his editorial.
I am concerned about the 'stepping outside the instance to recover' bit he mentioned.
That is a little bit bizarre indeed, on the other hand I can see why they did that.
The hut is basically a 'phased' space, you go inside and seamlessly enter a mini-instance, if you have the quest you'll find the guy there and engage in a dialogue.
But if you were to kill that guy, you wouldn't find him inside, that's how it works in other games that do this like WoW.
Now if you killed the rebel dude and later returned to that spot, you wouldn't see him inside the hut, but he would suddenly appear outside to chase other people who are still on the quest and are running from him, which makes it again like any mmo in that stuff you killed just respawns.
In this system he doesn't chase you but when he's dead, he really is dead for you in the game world, as that guy doesn't appear for you anymore.
The monsters do recover as well if you step outside though, so it isn't really a combat advantage either.
I think it would indeed look rather bizarre in this case, because it was apparently just a small space, but if you were inside a larger area where the mobs could chase you for a length regardless, it would be less apparent.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Nope. If Han was intent on joining the Empire in Star Wars, but he had to team up with Luke to escape the Death Star, would Luke be more inclined to join the Sith? I don't think so.
I don't understand what you mean by that, honestly.
Plus, in cases like that there is just far too much potential for griefing. In an MMO every single thing must be able to be overridden for the sake of preventing griefing because the griefed player won't have fun and will quit the game. That's why you have to sacrifice realism instead of allowing other players to block doorways and the like.
Ah - WTF does blocking doorways have to do with anything in this discussion?
My point is that opposite sides in a war don't generally fraternize with each other.
I happen to think that Smugglers and Bounty Hunters ought to be neutral, but no way should Sith and Jedi be grouping together.
Dark side and light side are going to be separate things from Sith Empire and Galactic Republic it looks like. You won't be teaming with any Sith Empire people if you're Republic, but you might be teaming with a Jedi that's turning to the dark side.
Can someone please explain me what the issue of the OP is?
It is revolutionary? Or not? Man, thats what PR and mags say. Its saying all or nothing. What IS revolutionary? Everyone will find something else revolutionary. Some may want to stick to the roots or some want everything totally different with each run. I don't see anything to talk about here, unless I am really mistaken.
As always, we'll have to wait and see, but I am starting to have a sinking feeling. More explicitly, a feeling that this is really just yet another MMO with the same gameplay we are so used to, i.e. questing.
The same feeling struck me when I first saw gameplay footage.
Well what made you think it would be anything else? All evidence thus far points to just another simple linear solo focused "MMO" with an instanced quest based Bioware story slapped on.
A little pre mature for a preview in my opinion. Wait till closed beta or open beta starts. Then let it fly.
It's a hands on review of what is in the game thus far. Companies do it ALL THE TIME.
Granted, as far as MMO goes, saying "its only in beta" is almost NEVER a viable excuse, because its very likely NOT going to change. I can count on one finger how many MMOs I tested in alpha that ended up totally different by release.
As always, we'll have to wait and see, but I am starting to have a sinking feeling. More explicitly, a feeling that this is really just yet another MMO with the same gameplay we are so used to, i.e. questing.
The same feeling struck me when I first saw gameplay footage.
Well what made you think it would be anything else? All evidence thus far points to just another simple linear solo focused "MMO" with an instanced quest based Bioware story slapped on.
The financial investment and the development time, and that Bioware had never done an MMO before. Which is not to say that when I finally get to play the game I will feel dissapointed. On the contrary I may be awestruck by the quality of the class specific storylines, feel that this DOES provide a distinct gameplay in an MMO and absolutely love it.
I am saying though that so far it all looks just too familiar to a long time MMO player. I'm also saying that the kind of "new" gameplay Guild Wars 2 announced is comparatively way more exciting.
BW is making the same mistake as Mythic did and I can't understand why. Mythic always talked about the revolutionary RvR, mass battles but never ever showed the real endgame nor group dynamics. Since the start BW hyped the game too early, they keep the telling the crowd things we already know over and over...
story based
ultra fast paced combat style
you can solo your way to max level
100 % VO
how much $ they're investing (who cares?!)
so other than that we know nothing about the MMO(rpg) features of this game:
how does group COMBAT (not the decission system) work *
wheres the risk vs reward? *
death penalty?
heavily instanced or open world? *
plans for the final gfx? Seriously this pink gay cartoony effects, running effects has to be placeholders.
high end? So whats coming after you're done with your storyline? *
The game is one year away so at some point they'll have to release some information about that. Judging the game at the status quo (based on videos interviews), I'll have to admit its looking more like a solo game with some MMO(rpg) elements. Note, I'm not saying this game will rock (could happen) or suck (see rock).
VO maybe nice the first time but especially twinkaholics will soon get bored of it. I really hope they're doing this VO for raid bosses too.
* = very important for me
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play." "Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
Seriously guys, you're coming to decisions based on this dude going through just a few battles at level 6.....
Then tell BioWare to release a lot more information. That they haven't is a reason for concern, itself.
Not really, they've released far more information than a lot of other upcoming mmo's on this site, that have been in development for equally long.
Agreed, I don't see anything to be worried about yet. Bioware has worked with this IP before and has been successful with it. There has been a lot of info released already, but we all would like to see more specifics no doubt. However, they have another year (maybe more) to flesh out the game. Even after the game is released it will be tweaked and fine tuned.
I remember the makers of WAR releasing some comprehensive vids regarding how their game would work. It didn't make their game any better.
Seriously guys, you're coming to decisions based on this dude going through just a few battles at level 6.....
Then tell BioWare to release a lot more information. That they haven't is a reason for concern, itself.
Not really, they've released far more information than a lot of other upcoming mmo's on this site, that have been in development for equally long.
Agreed, I don't see anything to be worried about yet. Bioware has worked with this IP before and has been successful with it. There has been a lot of info released already, but we all would like to see more specifics no doubt. However, they have another year (maybe more) to flesh out the game. Even after the game is released it will be tweaked and fine tuned.
I remember the makers of WAR releasing some comprehensive vids regarding how their game would work. It didn't make their game any better.
It was what struck me when reading the review, he's judging the game based on a single questline at level 6?! Does being level 6 in WoW give you any idea about what the game will be like by level 80? Not really. Far from it in fact.
Bioware have consistently said that they're saying nothing about anything until they're 100% sure it will be in game. First they talked about what made the game different (voice acting, moral choices etc.) and then people said it wasn't an MMO, so then they started talking about the standard MMO things that would be in the game (grouping etc.) and now it's either "generic MMO #546454" or "a SPG with online connectivity".
Truth of the matter is we don't know, we won't know until we can play it. No matter how much or how little info Bioware release (and I'm hoping for more from E3), people will continue to speculate. Which is all it is, speculation.
Nothing wrong with players saying they will/won't play a game based on info currently to hand, but info currently to hand is incomplete. We all know that.
I'm not interested in the hype and speculation, it's your standard pre-release MMO cycle and is generated as much by fans of the game as by Bioware's drip-feed of info. As it stands I'd be happy with Kotor 3,4,5,6 and beyond in one bundle. I don't care whether it fits the definition of the week of what a MMO "is", I care about whether it'll be fun or not. The "fun factor" can only be judged by playing the thing, so I'll wait for the chance to do that (even if I have to wait til release), before I decide on whether the game is for me or not.
How can you call that a review? I'd really like to know.
At best you might be able to pull opinion out of your ass but review? Please.
That's like reviewing a burger after only looking at the bun.
A waste of time to read, and a waste of time for me to make this reply.
I thought it was a pretty good review, clear and relevant, by someone who has actually played the game given to him. He wasn't a negative troll nor some idiotic, crotch-pulling fanboi but a gameplaying reviewer on a reputable site giving his honest opinion. He saw weaknesses in the part of the game he played - and if Bioware doesn't't fix them before launch, I think we'll probably see those weaknesses too.
Comments
Thanks for the link! The ariticle you've linked to is a more professional review..it manages to point out the pros and cons of TOR gameplay in its current state, without being overtly negative or fanboi-ish. The videogamer.com review seems a bit half-assed, with a writing style reminiscent of a smart ass, junior high school student's book report.
I suspect, although I can only speculate that some of these writers may have been anticipating a scoop of sorts before E3 arrived. However Bioware seems to be taking its time to try to get the game right, and the drip..drip of info and hands on gameplay has got the reviewers/writers panties all bunched up in a knot.
One thing the videogamer.com reviewer wrote that stood out was, "Really, a year from release, I still haven't got a clue what kind of game BioWare is making."
Maybe this can help: http://www.google.com/search?q=star+wars+the+old+republic+youtube&hl=en&rlz=1T4GZAZ_enUS354US354&prmd=v&source=univ&tbs=vid:1&tbo=u&ei=rfL2S5ryBIv8NdKWmLoF&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CB0QqwQwAA
Except you didn't play the game so you couldn't know...
When writing, you follow a basic chronological order about your experience and you try to be as detailed and to the point as possible, not actually telling people about the experience you had but being pissed at not getting a feature that is impossible to get at that stage and event is just stupid.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
No problem. That article is also not uniformly positive and the author states some things he finds unimpressive or bizarre.
But he talks about the actual experience instead about resorting to negative speculation to fill up his editorial.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
I am concerned about the 'stepping outside the instance to recover' bit he mentioned.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
I can't say I'm too fond of that seemingly biased review. I do understand how he feels, but does he understand why a lengthy development time can occur?
IMO, there seems to be 3 major reasons for a game to take a year or more for development:
1. It's dead in the water. This doesn't mean they lost interest in the project, but that they can't find a home for their game or have come up against technical/legal issues preventing it from being released (RIP Duke Nukem Forever).
2. They LOVE their game and want it to be as polished as possible. Some developers will not even try to give a release date if they themselves are not happy with their game, even if they have to go back to the drawing board. This is one of my favourite reasons as, 9 out of 10 times means the game is tested to the gills and usually results in extremely smooth launches.
3. New technology advances. Let's face it. Technology advances are made on an almost regular basis these days. If some new graphics engine comes out making things smoother for the game, why not try to implement it? This can be both good and bad. Sometimes these implementations (not just graphics/physics) can go smoothly, and sometimes they can break a game if the new tech, like a new kidney, gets rejected.
Of course there are many reasons why a game seems to take longer than we'd expect to develop, but I feel these are the most common factors. The videogamer.com review seems not take any of these in consideration, though I am 95% sure it's not the first major reason. There are even more than a few examples of demos coming out that end up seeming like a different game compared to the full version because of things that get cut in the final stages or added/changed.
I, for one, have no qualms waiting a year or more for a game that is nicely polished and truly cared for by developers as more than just a cash cow.
Was this game delayed?
I always thought it was supposed to be released in 2011.
That is a little bit bizarre indeed, on the other hand I can see why they did that.
The hut is basically a 'phased' space, you go inside and seamlessly enter a mini-instance, if you have the quest you'll find the guy there and engage in a dialogue.
But if you were to kill that guy, you wouldn't find him inside, that's how it works in other games that do this like WoW.
Now if you killed the rebel dude and later returned to that spot, you wouldn't see him inside the hut, but he would suddenly appear outside to chase other people who are still on the quest and are running from him, which makes it again like any mmo in that stuff you killed just respawns.
In this system he doesn't chase you but when he's dead, he really is dead for you in the game world, as that guy doesn't appear for you anymore.
The monsters do recover as well if you step outside though, so it isn't really a combat advantage either.
I think it would indeed look rather bizarre in this case, because it was apparently just a small space, but if you were inside a larger area where the mobs could chase you for a length regardless, it would be less apparent.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
well, not neccessarily meaning delayed. More referring to the fact it was announced 2 years ago and this guy's impatience.
I've edited my post as I was making dinner at the same time and it's hard to stay completely on topic when it takes you an hour to post
How can you call that a review? I'd really like to know.
At best you might be able to pull opinion out of your ass but review? Please.
That's like reviewing a burger after only looking at the bun.
A waste of time to read, and a waste of time for me to make this reply.
Dark side and light side are going to be separate things from Sith Empire and Galactic Republic it looks like. You won't be teaming with any Sith Empire people if you're Republic, but you might be teaming with a Jedi that's turning to the dark side.
Can someone please explain me what the issue of the OP is?
It is revolutionary? Or not? Man, thats what PR and mags say. Its saying all or nothing. What IS revolutionary? Everyone will find something else revolutionary. Some may want to stick to the roots or some want everything totally different with each run. I don't see anything to talk about here, unless I am really mistaken.
Well what made you think it would be anything else? All evidence thus far points to just another simple linear solo focused "MMO" with an instanced quest based Bioware story slapped on.
A little pre mature for a preview in my opinion. Wait till closed beta or open beta starts. Then let it fly.
It's a hands on review of what is in the game thus far. Companies do it ALL THE TIME.
Granted, as far as MMO goes, saying "its only in beta" is almost NEVER a viable excuse, because its very likely NOT going to change. I can count on one finger how many MMOs I tested in alpha that ended up totally different by release.
The financial investment and the development time, and that Bioware had never done an MMO before. Which is not to say that when I finally get to play the game I will feel dissapointed. On the contrary I may be awestruck by the quality of the class specific storylines, feel that this DOES provide a distinct gameplay in an MMO and absolutely love it.
I am saying though that so far it all looks just too familiar to a long time MMO player. I'm also saying that the kind of "new" gameplay Guild Wars 2 announced is comparatively way more exciting.
BW is making the same mistake as Mythic did and I can't understand why. Mythic always talked about the revolutionary RvR, mass battles but never ever showed the real endgame nor group dynamics. Since the start BW hyped the game too early, they keep the telling the crowd things we already know over and over...
story based
ultra fast paced combat style
you can solo your way to max level
100 % VO
how much $ they're investing (who cares?!)
so other than that we know nothing about the MMO(rpg) features of this game:
how does group COMBAT (not the decission system) work *
wheres the risk vs reward? *
death penalty?
heavily instanced or open world? *
plans for the final gfx? Seriously this pink gay cartoony effects, running effects has to be placeholders.
high end? So whats coming after you're done with your storyline? *
The game is one year away so at some point they'll have to release some information about that. Judging the game at the status quo (based on videos interviews), I'll have to admit its looking more like a solo game with some MMO(rpg) elements. Note, I'm not saying this game will rock (could happen) or suck (see rock).
VO maybe nice the first time but especially twinkaholics will soon get bored of it. I really hope they're doing this VO for raid bosses too.
* = very important for me
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play."
"Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
You are joking right?
No. You disagree?
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Seriously guys, you're coming to decisions based on this dude going through just a few battles at level 6.....
Completely agreed.
Then tell BioWare to release a lot more information. That they haven't is a reason for concern, itself.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Not really, they've released far more information than a lot of other upcoming mmo's on this site, that have been in development for equally long.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Agreed, I don't see anything to be worried about yet. Bioware has worked with this IP before and has been successful with it. There has been a lot of info released already, but we all would like to see more specifics no doubt. However, they have another year (maybe more) to flesh out the game. Even after the game is released it will be tweaked and fine tuned.
I remember the makers of WAR releasing some comprehensive vids regarding how their game would work. It didn't make their game any better.
It was what struck me when reading the review, he's judging the game based on a single questline at level 6?! Does being level 6 in WoW give you any idea about what the game will be like by level 80? Not really. Far from it in fact.
Bioware have consistently said that they're saying nothing about anything until they're 100% sure it will be in game. First they talked about what made the game different (voice acting, moral choices etc.) and then people said it wasn't an MMO, so then they started talking about the standard MMO things that would be in the game (grouping etc.) and now it's either "generic MMO #546454" or "a SPG with online connectivity".
Truth of the matter is we don't know, we won't know until we can play it. No matter how much or how little info Bioware release (and I'm hoping for more from E3), people will continue to speculate. Which is all it is, speculation.
Nothing wrong with players saying they will/won't play a game based on info currently to hand, but info currently to hand is incomplete. We all know that.
I'm not interested in the hype and speculation, it's your standard pre-release MMO cycle and is generated as much by fans of the game as by Bioware's drip-feed of info. As it stands I'd be happy with Kotor 3,4,5,6 and beyond in one bundle. I don't care whether it fits the definition of the week of what a MMO "is", I care about whether it'll be fun or not. The "fun factor" can only be judged by playing the thing, so I'll wait for the chance to do that (even if I have to wait til release), before I decide on whether the game is for me or not.
I thought it was a pretty good review, clear and relevant, by someone who has actually played the game given to him. He wasn't a negative troll nor some idiotic, crotch-pulling fanboi but a gameplaying reviewer on a reputable site giving his honest opinion. He saw weaknesses in the part of the game he played - and if Bioware doesn't't fix them before launch, I think we'll probably see those weaknesses too.