WoW didn't improve anything. Improve implies it added and expanded the features.
It didn't. It gutted them, pulling them down to the simplest core mechanics. They lack any sort of depth, innovation, or expansion.
Taking the EverQuest class/level/gear based advancement system, then just making it easier all around, does not make it better. It makes it more accessible to the type of people who were daunted by deep and complex game mechanics, but that doesn't mean it's a better system.
Dumbed down does not equal better.
Yes, having multiple specs for different classes and different roles a single class could play was a "dumbed down" version of having a class with no room for variation or customization...
Yes, having more ways to level up like quests a "dumbed down" version of earlier mechanics, as it was SO fun to do nothing but party up and grind mobs...
Yes, using instances to negate the problem of camping and kill stealing was "dumbing down" the absolutely brilliant practice of.. sitting around and waiting.
Dark Age of Camelot had multiple specs for classes since 2000.
Dark Age of Camelot had multiple ways of leveling up, from quests, to tasks, to grinding, to battlegrounds, to PvP missions.
EverQuest had instances, but good game design circumvents the need for instances. Kill stealing and camping was not an issue in Dark Age of Camelot ever in the 6 years that I played it, because the game wasn't a one dimensional grind fest, and more to do than just camp mobs and get gear.
Do you even read what you type? WoW didn't come up with any of these things.
Some people rather create their own story than have it forced into their face, some people rather do non-combat activities, craft, fishing, enteraining, doing things that are not forcing you down into one thing like a good number of MMO's today do, lack of options, lack of choices, stories and voice-acting no matter how much they throw it in your face. I found the article myself to be full of arrogance, some questions desire to be asked from this which current MMOs was he pointing at ? Or was it a thinly veiled attempt to bash all MMOs in vain effort to boost TOR, with little to no info released on their , crafting, space, non-combat activities, or raids , all that has been spoken of is voice acting , classes, and story, which so far hasn't impressed me , choices and lots of them are why I play MMOs, activities, community,minigames, non-combat features, housing.
If they really want to be different from everyone else is first not be a gear progression game, and get rid of the classes and leveling process, 150 million and all to show for it so far is voice acting and story writing and it takes money to record voice overs and write stories, and a lot of this money I can see so far will be for marketing and advertising, so in reality this may be all it has going for this game and has the potential to fall flat on its face, I await to hear more of these so -called features that will keep MMO players paying a monthly sub for this game for months and years. But until then my concerns for this game grow more and more.
So they came to their conclusions about what they felt was missing in MMO's, presented it in a way that doesn't single out any other MMO, said they want to fix the issue they feel is missing, and that is somehow arrogance?? Seems to me he is offering his companies perspective, while at the same time speaking of how they plan to solve this perceived shortcoming. OK, maybe you don't agree with the fact that stories are important; but that is your opinion. It doesn't make his statement arrogant, it just makes it not what you want to hear. Is it presented in such a way as to be "thought provoking".. YEAH, it's called marketting after all..
Personally, I agree with his statement; and at the same time I am extremely happy that they aren't releasing alot of information about other stuff, for many reasons, one of them is watching how the purists and self proclaimed hardcores get all emo and throw their keyboard around posting how they think the game is sacreligous. It reminds me of how pathetic my life might have been had I continued to be the uber geek I was in high school.
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
WoW didn't improve anything. Improve implies it added and expanded the features.
It didn't. It gutted them, pulling them down to the simplest core mechanics. They lack any sort of depth, innovation, or expansion.
Taking the EverQuest class/level/gear based advancement system, then just making it easier all around, does not make it better. It makes it more accessible to the type of people who were daunted by deep and complex game mechanics, but that doesn't mean it's a better system.
Dumbed down does not equal better.
Yes, having multiple specs for different classes and different roles a single class could play was a "dumbed down" version of having a class with no room for variation or customization...
Yes, having more ways to level up like quests a "dumbed down" version of earlier mechanics, as it was SO fun to do nothing but party up and grind mobs...
Yes, using instances to negate the problem of camping and kill stealing was "dumbing down" the absolutely brilliant practice of.. sitting around and waiting.
Dark Age of Camelot had multiple specs for classes since 2000.
Dark Age of Camelot had multiple ways of leveling up, from quests, to tasks, to grinding, to battlegrounds, to PvP missions.
EverQuest had instances, but good game design circumvents the need for instances. Kill stealing and camping was not an issue in Dark Age of Camelot ever in the 6 years that I played it, because the game wasn't a one dimensional grind fest, and more to do than just camp mobs and get gear.
Do you even read what you type? WoW didn't come up with any of these things.
Taking the EverQuest class/level/gear based advancement system, then just making it easier all around, does not make it better. It makes it more accessible to the type of people who were daunted by deep and complex game mechanics, but that doesn't mean it's a better system.
Dumbed down does not equal better.
Sounds like DaoC just dumbed down Everquest to me. Right? I mean, they are your words.
Some people rather create their own story than have it forced into their face, some people rather do non-combat activities, craft, fishing, enteraining, doing things that are not forcing you down into one thing like a good number of MMO's today do, lack of options, lack of choices, stories and voice-acting no matter how much they throw it in your face. I found the article myself to be full of arrogance, some questions desire to be asked from this which current MMOs was he pointing at ? Or was it a thinly veiled attempt to bash all MMOs in vain effort to boost TOR, with little to no info released on their , crafting, space, non-combat activities, or raids , all that has been spoken of is voice acting , classes, and story, which so far hasn't impressed me , choices and lots of them are why I play MMOs, activities, community,minigames, non-combat features, housing.
If they really want to be different from everyone else is first not be a gear progression game, and get rid of the classes and leveling process, 150 million and all to show for it so far is voice acting and story writing and it takes money to record voice overs and write stories, and a lot of this money I can see so far will be for marketing and advertising, so in reality this may be all it has going for this game and has the potential to fall flat on its face, I await to hear more of these so -called features that will keep MMO players paying a monthly sub for this game for months and years. But until then my concerns for this game grow more and more.
So they came to their conclusions about what they felt was missing in MMO's, presented it in a way that doesn't single out any other MMO, said they want to fix the issue they feel is missing, and that is somehow arrogance?? Seems to me he is offering his companies perspective, while at the same time speaking of how they plan to solve this perceived shortcoming. OK, maybe you don't agree with the fact that stories are important; but that is your opinion. It doesn't make his statement arrogant, it just makes it not what you want to hear. Is it presented in such a way as to be "thought provoking".. YEAH, it's called marketting after all..
Personally, I agree with his statement; and at the same time I am extremely happy that they aren't releasing alot of information about other stuff, for many reasons, one of them is watching how the purists and self proclaimed hardcores get all emo and throw their keyboard around posting how they think the game is sacreligous. It reminds me of how pathetic my life might have been had I continued to be the uber geek I was in high school.
WoW didn't improve anything. Improve implies it added and expanded the features.
It didn't. It gutted them, pulling them down to the simplest core mechanics. They lack any sort of depth, innovation, or expansion.
Taking the EverQuest class/level/gear based advancement system, then just making it easier all around, does not make it better. It makes it more accessible to the type of people who were daunted by deep and complex game mechanics, but that doesn't mean it's a better system.
Dumbed down does not equal better.
Yes, having multiple specs for different classes and different roles a single class could play was a "dumbed down" version of having a class with no room for variation or customization...
Yes, having more ways to level up like quests a "dumbed down" version of earlier mechanics, as it was SO fun to do nothing but party up and grind mobs...
Yes, using instances to negate the problem of camping and kill stealing was "dumbing down" the absolutely brilliant practice of.. sitting around and waiting.
Dark Age of Camelot had multiple specs for classes since 2000.
Dark Age of Camelot had multiple ways of leveling up, from quests, to tasks, to grinding, to battlegrounds, to PvP missions.
EverQuest had instances, but good game design circumvents the need for instances. Kill stealing and camping was not an issue in Dark Age of Camelot ever in the 6 years that I played it, because the game wasn't a one dimensional grind fest, and more to do than just camp mobs and get gear.
Do you even read what you type? WoW didn't come up with any of these things.
Taking the EverQuest class/level/gear based advancement system, then just making it easier all around, does not make it better. It makes it more accessible to the type of people who were daunted by deep and complex game mechanics, but that doesn't mean it's a better system.
Dumbed down does not equal better.
Sounds like DaoC just dumbed down Everquest to me. Right? I mean, they are your words.
Dark Age of Camelot expanded the system, added layers and layers of depth, not to mention the entirety of the RvR system, one of the biggest leaps in MMORPG game design, something WoW hasn't even been able to slightly reproduce.
DAoC is a perfect example of taking something and BUILDING upon it. Not gutting it for the sake of selling it to people who don't like MMOs.
And Miley Cyrus broke music records thanks to the Disney marketing machine and the simple accessible mass marketed music. That doesn't mean that it's good, or that the people who are fans of actual music want even more of it.
Well, who is to say what is good? That's a very subjective judgment. WoW runs very well, on low power machines, and has tons of content and smooth combat. Frankly, name another MMO that does all that.
If more people like fast hamburgers and fries than a good slice of roast beef and baked potato, that doesn't mean hamburgers and fries are bad food.
Low power machines= people too cheap to invest 400-500$ more into a mid range computer if you have low income coming in it's called saving. Getting a decent computer that runs high end graphics well these days can be picked up or custom built for around 700-1000$ these days. Polish is always good if you have the budget to delay and do that in it's not always going to be the case in any MMO in development.
I am interested to see how well Bioware can pull off the story driven MMO. SWToR looks to be quite a different MMO than what we have seen so far in other MMOs.
Anyone who believes that a compelling story (ala single player games such as KotoR) cannot be meshed with the core principles of the MMO genre is - I fear - ignorant and very short-sighted indeed. There is no realistic reason that it can't be done and - as we have seen from the game footage that has been released - Bioware are trying their hardest not to dilute their MMO down so that it is merely an online single player game but are trying to bring compelling, flowing and interesting story content that will allow for more of a connection between the players and other players, their characters and the world around them. And that is quite clearly missing from a lot of the MMOs we have on offer now. Most of the big titles out there offer loose connections that make the world around you function to the extent that you can suspend your disbelief enough to tolerate what's happening, but none of them try to engage you in the plot line to any real extent.
And the mistake that the nay sayers and over zealous critics are making is a simple mistake to make but a mistake none-the-less. Your entire point revolves around the notion that Bioware AREN'T including staple MMO content which clearly isn't the case.
That's not clear at all. Show it to us. Where is it? Where's the crafting, PvP content (there have shown three people playing PvP), and end game content?
Bioware have demonstrated that the game HAS that staple content in there and for the elements that haven't been demonstrated as of yet, they have already stated that they will be in the game at release.
'Stated' means nothing. Devs claim features and content that don't make it into release all the time.
Of the things that they have shown us, they have actually demonstrated how they have meshed their idea of story in an MMO with these core elements of existing titles, such as group content for example. They've stated in the past that about 15% of your total game time will involve dialogue and heavily story orientated content; the rest of the time you will be playing the game in the same way you would play any MMORPG, completing quests, running instanced encounters, levelling professions, gearing up.
As for Bioware slandering other MMOs... I haven't seen them do that at all. In this case they've pointed out a very accurate point, in so much as these games have interesting content to begin with and may also extent that to end game... but the central part of the game - the bit between beginning and hitting cap - is generally lack-lustre at best and utterly uninspiring at worst. Take World of Warcraft: Cataclysm for example (and I am well aware it hasn't released); Blizzard have stated that Cataclysm will introduce 2 new races, and for the first 10-15 levels you will play through an, "introductory," story that will introduce you to the race and the class you are playing as well as the basics of the game. What happens when you've done that?... You'll just do what everyone has done since the beginning of time - grind quests, instances and monsters until you hit cap, where some semi-interesting content may rear its head if you are lucky. They did it with the Death Knight as well (to a lesser extent). Same applies to Age of Conan - Tortage was a brilliant MMO experience... and then you were thrown out into an utterly shit world to do the normal, boring stuff that we've all done endlessly in every MMO we've played. Same applies to Warhammer Online,
WH Online, (despite its many serious flaws) was more innovative than SWTOR looks to be.
Aion, Anarchy Online, Lord of the Rings Online etc, etc. It's not a fallacy to point this fact out, so you can't attack them for making what is largely an accurate and well rounded observation. It remains to be seen if Bioware can actually deliver on the promises they make, and justify their position in this matter but that doesn't alter the legitimacy of the point.
So yeah... my 2 cents.
The only promises I have seen are tons of story, tons of voice acting, - and all the typical elements of MMORPGs.
This is hard work , arguing for the sake of it becomes pointless after a while, especially when your point are out of context and fail , with the available evidence. So so amusing.
It is very clear that Bioware are delivering the MMO staples , it is also even clearer that they do not feel it necessary to highlight the basics as it is what can be easily done.
End game content is not an MMO staple it is something that comes with bad design.
Stated means everything, there is no reson to disbelieve what they have said.
WH Online was inovative but sadly very badly implemented and of all the MMOs I have played from startup was worse than Vanguard and even AOC.(Both of which are vastly improved maybe the Warhammer crew will see the light and add some sigle player storyline)
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
WoW didn't improve anything. Improve implies it added and expanded the features.
It didn't. It gutted them, pulling them down to the simplest core mechanics. They lack any sort of depth, innovation, or expansion.
Taking the EverQuest class/level/gear based advancement system, then just making it easier all around, does not make it better. It makes it more accessible to the type of people who were daunted by deep and complex game mechanics, but that doesn't mean it's a better system.
Dumbed down does not equal better.
Yes, having multiple specs for different classes and different roles a single class could play was a "dumbed down" version of having a class with no room for variation or customization...
Yes, having more ways to level up like quests a "dumbed down" version of earlier mechanics, as it was SO fun to do nothing but party up and grind mobs...
Yes, using instances to negate the problem of camping and kill stealing was "dumbing down" the absolutely brilliant practice of.. sitting around and waiting.
Do you people even read what you write?
Anyone who thinks accessibility is bad is retarded. Like, your IQ is less then 60.
Accessibility does not = no depth. Accessibility = good design.
You know nothing about good game design do you?
Everquest had incredible room for variation and customization, e.g. Atlernate Advancement System "AA" not limited and not handed out as a cookie like so many newer games doing it.
Quest-driven gameplay in Wow, Lotro, Warhammer, Aion or AoC's way = dumbed down yes
Accessibility = limit the things you can do progress in order to avoid "failures" because it could frustrate "joe low denominator"
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."
All you armchair developers need to go get jobs in the gaming industry and watch your idealistic bullshit get shattered by the real world.
There are some people that tried your "old school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
Darkfall, Mortal Online, Earthrise, Vanguard... Not a single quality game among them.
There are some people that tried the "new school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
WAR, AoC, Aion, Tabula Rasa... Not a single quality game among them.
Logic says, let's try something.. else! Let's see what we can add / change to make things better because neither the new nor the old is working out all too well.
Question still remains will SWTOR be different enough? Almost every game has its USP:
Lotro: story and easy going RP world
AoC: violent, brutal with great graphics
Aion: you can fly high and marvelous fighting animations
Warhammer: RvR
.
.
.
SWTOR: story, fully voiced + x + x + x + x ?
If they really I mean, really want to be that different they have to do more. Thats why I wrote "shut up and show what you have instead of beeing cocky".
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."
All you armchair developers need to go get jobs in the gaming industry and watch your idealistic bullshit get shattered by the real world.
There are some people that tried your "old school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
Darkfall, Mortal Online, Earthrise, Vanguard... Not a single quality game among them.
There are some people that tried the "new school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
WAR, AoC, Aion, Tabula Rasa... Not a single quality game among them.
Logic says, let's try something.. else! Let's see what we can add / change to make things better because neither the new nor the old is working out all too well.
Let's see, most MMO's these past 5 years have been trying to make things just like WoW. They spend tons of money on marketing towards the WoW crowd instead of making something unique/oldschool.
They failed miserably. AoC had to shut down a sister company because they lost so much money, and many people lost their jobs over at Funcom.
WAR didn't fare too much better, Mythic is almost nonexistant now.
So that's two MAJOR MMO companies that tried to be WoW and lost tons of money and are pretty much dead now.
As for games that tried to be "oldschool" game design is NOT why they "failed". The reason Vanguard is dead is because of a) Sony rushed the launch releasing an insanely buggy product that, despite how unstable it was, still sold 300,000 copies on launch day, yeah, the oldschool niche is so tiny, and b) because SoE doesn't want to spend money supporting a game that'll just steal subscribers from EverQuest 1 and 2.
Darkfall is doing very well for itself. The devs have released 2 expansions with another one on the way next month, they've moved into a bigger office building, hired more developers, and have launched a second server. Doesn't sound too bad to me. And no, Darkfall wasn't purely "oldschool", it mixed oldschool philosophy with innovation. The real time combat/physics/monster AI, naval combat. All things that hadn't been done in a massive seamless world in real time before.
MO isn't out, but the design has nothing to do with the bad press. It's the fact that the team can't code to save their lives and the game just doesn't run. People LOVE the concept, but it isn't executed because they're not a company with millions to throw around.
Earthrise, as far as I heard, wasn't even out yet.
So yeah "not a single quality game". And you say we're the biased ones.
Bioware isn't doing anything new. They're taking a single player game, and adding some basic multiplayer functionality to it. All signs point to a Diablo/WoW styled game with a Bioware story.
All you armchair developers need to go get jobs in the gaming industry and watch your idealistic bullshit get shattered by the real world.
There are some people that tried your "old school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
Darkfall, Mortal Online, Earthrise, Vanguard... Not a single quality game among them.
There are some people that tried the "new school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
WAR, AoC, Aion, Tabula Rasa... Not a single quality game among them.
Logic says, let's try something.. else! Let's see what we can add / change to make things better because neither the new nor the old is working out all too well.
In defense of... whoever, quality in the sense you're applying it is a matter of opinion. Artistic quality is subject to something different then a pass or fail of a physical item. Though I don't enjoy playing Darkfall and Mortal Online has presented its own problems, there are plenty that feel they contain at least some standard of quality they deem as acceptable. Vanguard I wouldn't say is a total wash. I don't think Earthrise has been released yet.
The same is said for the "new school" games you presented, though not every game needs to be a smash hit to be considered quality. Doing something different, if even in the slightest fundamental way to bridge a play style they think would enhance the genre in some way is the only way we move forward. It is doubtful a developer will one day just happen upon a feature they found buried under some blankets in a closet somewhere that will be completely new and revolutionary.
To bring logic into it, from BioWares standpoint, it would only be logical that a feature that millions of people enjoy in their single player games would also be enjoyable in an MMO setting if they could combine it in a way that wouldn't ostracize the fanbase.
To bring logic into it, from BioWares standpoint, it would only be logical that a feature that millions of people enjoy in their single player games would also be enjoyable in an MMO setting if they could combine it in a way that wouldn't ostracize the fanbase.
Only took us 341 posts, but someone eventually stated it right.
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
To bring logic into it, from BioWares standpoint, it would only be logical that a feature that millions of people enjoy in their single player games would also be enjoyable in an MMO setting if they could combine it in a way that wouldn't ostracize the fanbase.
Only took us 341 posts, but someone eventually stated it right.
So can we close the thread now? Oh wait, there is another one on the News discussion forums...
To bring logic into it, from BioWares standpoint, it would only be logical that a feature that millions of people enjoy in their single player games would also be enjoyable in an MMO setting if they could combine it in a way that wouldn't ostracize the fanbase.
Only took us 341 posts, but someone eventually stated it right.
I think that's been the underlying point all along for some of us to be honest. And it's pretty evident from the fact that Daniel basically states as much in the interview.
It requires "Reading Comprehension Skill Level 5: Middle School" trained up to maximum to be able to "get the point" without having to wade through 341 posts of pure idiocy.
All you armchair developers need to go get jobs in the gaming industry and watch your idealistic bullshit get shattered by the real world.
There are some people that tried your "old school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
Darkfall, Mortal Online, Earthrise, Vanguard... Not a single quality game among them.
There are some people that tried the "new school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
WAR, AoC, Aion, Tabula Rasa... Not a single quality game among them.
Logic says, let's try something.. else! Let's see what we can add / change to make things better because neither the new nor the old is working out all too well.
Let's see, most MMO's these past 5 years have been trying to make things just like WoW. They spend tons of money on marketing towards the WoW crowd instead of making something unique/oldschool.
They failed miserably. AoC had to shut down a sister company because they lost so much money, and many people lost their jobs over at Funcom.
WAR didn't fare too much better, Mythic is almost nonexistant now.
So that's two MAJOR MMO companies that tried to be WoW and lost tons of money and are pretty much dead now.
This is true. Yet both of these games have higher populations than the recent titles which have attempted an old-school approach. From a business perspective it seems pretty clear which one is more viable in today's marketplace.
As for games that tried to be "oldschool" game design is NOT why they "failed". The reason Vanguard is dead is because of a) Sony rushed the launch releasing an insanely buggy product that, despite how unstable it was, still sold 300,000 copies on launch day, yeah, the oldschool niche is so tiny, and b) because SoE doesn't want to spend money supporting a game that'll just steal subscribers from EverQuest 1 and 2.
Regardless of whether or not these are actually the reasons for Vanguard's problems, the fact remains that the game never appealed to players on a scale anywhere close to AOC/WAR/Aion, etc. All of those three games sold 750k copies around launch. And they still have higher populations now...
Darkfall is doing very well for itself. The devs have released 2 expansions with another one on the way next month, they've moved into a bigger office building, hired more developers, and have launched a second server. Doesn't sound too bad to me. And no, Darkfall wasn't purely "oldschool", it mixed oldschool philosophy with innovation. The real time combat/physics/monster AI, naval combat. All things that hadn't been done in a massive seamless world in real time before.
Darkfall is your worst example yet. Subscriptions to that game have been steadily declining for months and the game is so anti-new player it isn't even funny. Virtually every system in the game alienates all but the most hardcore grinders from the old-school style games. The developers obviously have no idea what it takes to succeed in today's marketplace and I would not be surprised in the least if Darkfall is shut down in the next year or two. That's not to say that I hate the game. I actually am a big fan of FFA full-loot PvP games, so Darkfall really appealed to me in many ways. I can't say I'm a fan of the 'old-school' grind though...
MO isn't out, but the design has nothing to do with the bad press. It's the fact that the team can't code to save their lives and the game just doesn't run. People LOVE the concept, but it isn't executed because they're not a company with millions to throw around.
Earthrise, as far as I heard, wasn't even out yet.
The verdict is still out on both MO and Earthrise as they are still in development.
So yeah "not a single quality game". And you say we're the biased ones.
Bioware isn't doing anything new. They're taking a single player game, and adding some basic multiplayer functionality to it. All signs point to a Diablo/WoW styled game with a Bioware story.
Bioware is doing full voice-acting which has never been done before. They are also doing storylines that change based upon a player's actions. This has also never been done before to anywhere near the same extent. Bioware is also making a full storyline for EACH class... which has again never been done before. All of these things (even if you don't like them) DO equal innovation.
Maybe Bioware isn't doing anything incredibly revolutionary, but neither have any of the games you've mentioned. How does using REALLY outdated game mechanics from titles like EQ equal new or innovative? Most gamers today don't have the time or patience to enjoy games like these. Its no wonder that they all fail miserably in comparison to the more accessible games.
EDIT: Before anyone mentions EVE, please note that I consider that game to be the one exception to the rule. EVE is a game that manages to be hardcore, old-school AND accessible all at the same time.
They are right though, most MMOs have no point in playing them once you complete all the content. If Bioware thinks that throwing better content that can be eaten through at the same rate will save the game 3-4 months in, they need to take more notes.
The point of an MMO is to advance your character and progress with the most common of all human characteristics: greed and need.
Shaping it in a pleasant format and keeping it up is what makes an mmorpg.
We brag with a new car and pants in real life. Just like we want to show off a new mount or sword or achievement title.
That's the driving force of prolonged play, not the fixed scenario movie part.
In a good mmorpg you have the choice to arrive at those greedy parts.
A story is a back drop to acquire the greedy needs in a free undetermined way.
That's where this guy doesn't understand the meaning of "grind".
I like this post, right up to the last line. The real meaning of the "grind" is to keep people playing and PAYING that monthly sub. That is why grind was put into the games. They masked their greed for your money in titles, AA points, cool swords or armor, etc etc. Not to mention its easier to code a game for you killing stupid numbers of mob X than it is to code a reason to do so (a storyline, lore and such) other than titles, AA points, cools swords or armor, etc etc.
Keep in mind, these companies are in business to make money and its easier to have you grind than it is to develope new content at a rate that will keep those that still live with mom and dad and never do anything productive other than play a game. You know the types, the ones that race to the level cap and then cry that there's no content. This is what I think ToR is trying to avoid, but we will see when this game goes live.
Grind in the terms of MMO's is literally doing something overly repetative to achieve a goal. Leveling, gear, etc. That's no different then working a job in order to achieve a pay check at the end of the week. Or going through persay school so that in the end you achieve a high school diploma. But either way. Grind is everywhere. Deal with it.
When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?
It's this simple - I don't want to play a single-player game. The only thing that appeals to me about MMORPGs is that they are played with other people. Both co-operatively (PvE) and competitively (PvP).
"Single player" games have been doing that for years. One could argue that plenty of single player games allowed you to play through the PvE content cooperatively and PvP content competitively.
Multiplayer games in RPG's have had some serious issues bringing people together, issues not found in MMOs. NWN1 had problems with some of the official expansions allowing multiplayer gaming but not supporting it (couldn't get into the tower or only one copy of the needed item that is gone when the other person left). They also had problems if more than one person talked to the companions and rep only went up with that player, not the entire group. NWN2 has the most annoying pause issue ever, opening stores, talking to people all forced everyone to "puase" and then there was having to zone all at once. MMOs are one of the most clean, versatile ways to game with other people in an RPG type setting. The thing is, while a clean multiplayer Dragon Age type enviorement does appeal to me, I am not wililng to pay 15 dollars a month for that game. I need MMO content for the monthly fee. Anything else gets a box price from me and maybe some expansions, no ongoing fee.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
To bring logic into it, from BioWares standpoint, it would only be logical that a feature that millions of people enjoy in their single player games would also be enjoyable in an MMO setting if they could combine it in a way that wouldn't ostracize the fanbase.
Only took us 341 posts, but someone eventually stated it right.
Thats great but it wont retain subs .
Altho i will most likely try this game , i am hoping that as development rolls on that some serious changes are made ,the direction that Bioware is taking this game is not indicitive of a traditional MMO , the more i read the more it sounds like a MSORPG not an MMO, posssibly further testing will bring some changes..
From PC GAmer who recently got to play the current build "SWToR plays more like DA than it does WoW" fill in the Wow with any current mmo ... A companion pet system for everyone troubles me , from Bioware " The game can be completed without any interaction with another player" Huhhhhh!!
I really like the SW ip and want to see this game succeed BUT , when i read stuff like this from a recent interview with there devs at E3 it makes me cringe...
The Flash Point scene was a private, closed off area for only you and someone you brought along from the looks of it. no other players, so it is safe to assume this was a single player area. We saw some people on Hutta, but they were just going about their normal business.
As the devs told us, the majority of the game can be done without a single bit of help from another player. They said that the main appeal of MMOs is the experience single player with the option of being with other players. They confirmed that names, chat, and so on could all be turned off or ignored if you really, really wanted absolutely nothing to do with other people.
Names:
Naming filters have been confirmed. No numbers, special characters, or Star Wars names. They emphasized the strictness of this system, as they seemed to agree on the assumption it could be immersion, if not game breaking.
If they want to make KOTOR 3 thats great but dont rap it up with optional coop play and slap a monthly sub on it..
When every lvl 30 (insert class) is running around in the same exact gear and none needs any help to aquire anything... blehhh
There will be no sense of community , no need for community
And if this pans out the way it is going ........LMAO there will be no point to there erhmmmm "MMO" either
Comments
Dark Age of Camelot had multiple specs for classes since 2000.
Dark Age of Camelot had multiple ways of leveling up, from quests, to tasks, to grinding, to battlegrounds, to PvP missions.
EverQuest had instances, but good game design circumvents the need for instances. Kill stealing and camping was not an issue in Dark Age of Camelot ever in the 6 years that I played it, because the game wasn't a one dimensional grind fest, and more to do than just camp mobs and get gear.
Do you even read what you type? WoW didn't come up with any of these things.
So they came to their conclusions about what they felt was missing in MMO's, presented it in a way that doesn't single out any other MMO, said they want to fix the issue they feel is missing, and that is somehow arrogance?? Seems to me he is offering his companies perspective, while at the same time speaking of how they plan to solve this perceived shortcoming. OK, maybe you don't agree with the fact that stories are important; but that is your opinion. It doesn't make his statement arrogant, it just makes it not what you want to hear. Is it presented in such a way as to be "thought provoking".. YEAH, it's called marketting after all..
Personally, I agree with his statement; and at the same time I am extremely happy that they aren't releasing alot of information about other stuff, for many reasons, one of them is watching how the purists and self proclaimed hardcores get all emo and throw their keyboard around posting how they think the game is sacreligous. It reminds me of how pathetic my life might have been had I continued to be the uber geek I was in high school.
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
Taking the EverQuest class/level/gear based advancement system, then just making it easier all around, does not make it better. It makes it more accessible to the type of people who were daunted by deep and complex game mechanics, but that doesn't mean it's a better system.
Dumbed down does not equal better.
Sounds like DaoC just dumbed down Everquest to me. Right? I mean, they are your words.
lol.
I have the right to like what I want!
Dark Age of Camelot expanded the system, added layers and layers of depth, not to mention the entirety of the RvR system, one of the biggest leaps in MMORPG game design, something WoW hasn't even been able to slightly reproduce.
DAoC is a perfect example of taking something and BUILDING upon it. Not gutting it for the sake of selling it to people who don't like MMOs.
Low power machines= people too cheap to invest 400-500$ more into a mid range computer if you have low income coming in it's called saving. Getting a decent computer that runs high end graphics well these days can be picked up or custom built for around 700-1000$ these days. Polish is always good if you have the budget to delay and do that in it's not always going to be the case in any MMO in development.
I am interested to see how well Bioware can pull off the story driven MMO. SWToR looks to be quite a different MMO than what we have seen so far in other MMOs.
This is hard work , arguing for the sake of it becomes pointless after a while, especially when your point are out of context and fail , with the available evidence. So so amusing.
It is very clear that Bioware are delivering the MMO staples , it is also even clearer that they do not feel it necessary to highlight the basics as it is what can be easily done.
End game content is not an MMO staple it is something that comes with bad design.
Stated means everything, there is no reson to disbelieve what they have said.
WH Online was inovative but sadly very badly implemented and of all the MMOs I have played from startup was worse than Vanguard and even AOC.(Both of which are vastly improved maybe the Warhammer crew will see the light and add some sigle player storyline)
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
It's funny how often this quote applies to just about everything, but it rings an especially clear bell in the MMO scene..
"Had I asked people what they wanted, they would have asked for faster horses." - Henry Ford
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
You know nothing about good game design do you?
Everquest had incredible room for variation and customization, e.g. Atlernate Advancement System "AA" not limited and not handed out as a cookie like so many newer games doing it.
Quest-driven gameplay in Wow, Lotro, Warhammer, Aion or AoC's way = dumbed down yes
Accessibility = limit the things you can do progress in order to avoid "failures" because it could frustrate "joe low denominator"
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."
Dear God.
All you armchair developers need to go get jobs in the gaming industry and watch your idealistic bullshit get shattered by the real world.
There are some people that tried your "old school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
Darkfall, Mortal Online, Earthrise, Vanguard... Not a single quality game among them.
There are some people that tried the "new school" ways of making MMORPGs... let's name them shall we?
WAR, AoC, Aion, Tabula Rasa... Not a single quality game among them.
Logic says, let's try something.. else! Let's see what we can add / change to make things better because neither the new nor the old is working out all too well.
Question still remains will SWTOR be different enough? Almost every game has its USP:
Lotro: story and easy going RP world
AoC: violent, brutal with great graphics
Aion: you can fly high and marvelous fighting animations
Warhammer: RvR
.
.
.
SWTOR: story, fully voiced + x + x + x + x ?
If they really I mean, really want to be that different they have to do more. Thats why I wrote "shut up and show what you have instead of beeing cocky".
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."
Let's see, most MMO's these past 5 years have been trying to make things just like WoW. They spend tons of money on marketing towards the WoW crowd instead of making something unique/oldschool.
They failed miserably. AoC had to shut down a sister company because they lost so much money, and many people lost their jobs over at Funcom.
WAR didn't fare too much better, Mythic is almost nonexistant now.
So that's two MAJOR MMO companies that tried to be WoW and lost tons of money and are pretty much dead now.
As for games that tried to be "oldschool" game design is NOT why they "failed". The reason Vanguard is dead is because of a) Sony rushed the launch releasing an insanely buggy product that, despite how unstable it was, still sold 300,000 copies on launch day, yeah, the oldschool niche is so tiny, and b) because SoE doesn't want to spend money supporting a game that'll just steal subscribers from EverQuest 1 and 2.
Darkfall is doing very well for itself. The devs have released 2 expansions with another one on the way next month, they've moved into a bigger office building, hired more developers, and have launched a second server. Doesn't sound too bad to me. And no, Darkfall wasn't purely "oldschool", it mixed oldschool philosophy with innovation. The real time combat/physics/monster AI, naval combat. All things that hadn't been done in a massive seamless world in real time before.
MO isn't out, but the design has nothing to do with the bad press. It's the fact that the team can't code to save their lives and the game just doesn't run. People LOVE the concept, but it isn't executed because they're not a company with millions to throw around.
Earthrise, as far as I heard, wasn't even out yet.
So yeah "not a single quality game". And you say we're the biased ones.
Bioware isn't doing anything new. They're taking a single player game, and adding some basic multiplayer functionality to it. All signs point to a Diablo/WoW styled game with a Bioware story.
In defense of... whoever, quality in the sense you're applying it is a matter of opinion. Artistic quality is subject to something different then a pass or fail of a physical item. Though I don't enjoy playing Darkfall and Mortal Online has presented its own problems, there are plenty that feel they contain at least some standard of quality they deem as acceptable. Vanguard I wouldn't say is a total wash. I don't think Earthrise has been released yet.
The same is said for the "new school" games you presented, though not every game needs to be a smash hit to be considered quality. Doing something different, if even in the slightest fundamental way to bridge a play style they think would enhance the genre in some way is the only way we move forward. It is doubtful a developer will one day just happen upon a feature they found buried under some blankets in a closet somewhere that will be completely new and revolutionary.
To bring logic into it, from BioWares standpoint, it would only be logical that a feature that millions of people enjoy in their single player games would also be enjoyable in an MMO setting if they could combine it in a way that wouldn't ostracize the fanbase.
Only took us 341 posts, but someone eventually stated it right.
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
So can we close the thread now? Oh wait, there is another one on the News discussion forums...
I hate you all.
I think that's been the underlying point all along for some of us to be honest. And it's pretty evident from the fact that Daniel basically states as much in the interview.
http://www.themmoquest.com - MMO commentary from an overly angry brit. OFFICIALLY LAUNCHED!
It requires "Reading Comprehension Skill Level 5: Middle School" trained up to maximum to be able to "get the point" without having to wade through 341 posts of pure idiocy.
Maybe Bioware isn't doing anything incredibly revolutionary, but neither have any of the games you've mentioned. How does using REALLY outdated game mechanics from titles like EQ equal new or innovative? Most gamers today don't have the time or patience to enjoy games like these. Its no wonder that they all fail miserably in comparison to the more accessible games.
EDIT: Before anyone mentions EVE, please note that I consider that game to be the one exception to the rule. EVE is a game that manages to be hardcore, old-school AND accessible all at the same time.
I like this post, right up to the last line. The real meaning of the "grind" is to keep people playing and PAYING that monthly sub. That is why grind was put into the games. They masked their greed for your money in titles, AA points, cool swords or armor, etc etc. Not to mention its easier to code a game for you killing stupid numbers of mob X than it is to code a reason to do so (a storyline, lore and such) other than titles, AA points, cools swords or armor, etc etc.
Keep in mind, these companies are in business to make money and its easier to have you grind than it is to develope new content at a rate that will keep those that still live with mom and dad and never do anything productive other than play a game. You know the types, the ones that race to the level cap and then cry that there's no content. This is what I think ToR is trying to avoid, but we will see when this game goes live.
Grind in the terms of MMO's is literally doing something overly repetative to achieve a goal. Leveling, gear, etc. That's no different then working a job in order to achieve a pay check at the end of the week. Or going through persay school so that in the end you achieve a high school diploma. But either way. Grind is everywhere. Deal with it.
When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?
Bioware FTW baby! You have no Idea how they are gonna wtfpwnnn all mmos and overthrow WOW!!!!
Multiplayer games in RPG's have had some serious issues bringing people together, issues not found in MMOs. NWN1 had problems with some of the official expansions allowing multiplayer gaming but not supporting it (couldn't get into the tower or only one copy of the needed item that is gone when the other person left). They also had problems if more than one person talked to the companions and rep only went up with that player, not the entire group. NWN2 has the most annoying pause issue ever, opening stores, talking to people all forced everyone to "puase" and then there was having to zone all at once. MMOs are one of the most clean, versatile ways to game with other people in an RPG type setting. The thing is, while a clean multiplayer Dragon Age type enviorement does appeal to me, I am not wililng to pay 15 dollars a month for that game. I need MMO content for the monthly fee. Anything else gets a box price from me and maybe some expansions, no ongoing fee.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
Wow big words for a company who is making their first MMO. I see problems ahead.
Thats great but it wont retain subs .
Altho i will most likely try this game , i am hoping that as development rolls on that some serious changes are made ,the direction that Bioware is taking this game is not indicitive of a traditional MMO , the more i read the more it sounds like a MSORPG not an MMO, posssibly further testing will bring some changes..
From PC GAmer who recently got to play the current build "SWToR plays more like DA than it does WoW" fill in the Wow with any current mmo ... A companion pet system for everyone troubles me , from Bioware " The game can be completed without any interaction with another player" Huhhhhh!!
I really like the SW ip and want to see this game succeed BUT , when i read stuff like this from a recent interview with there devs at E3 it makes me cringe...
The Flash Point scene was a private, closed off area for only you and someone you brought along from the looks of it. no other players, so it is safe to assume this was a single player area. We saw some people on Hutta, but they were just going about their normal business.
As the devs told us, the majority of the game can be done without a single bit of help from another player. They said that the main appeal of MMOs is the experience single player with the option of being with other players. They confirmed that names, chat, and so on could all be turned off or ignored if you really, really wanted absolutely nothing to do with other people.
Names:
Naming filters have been confirmed. No numbers, special characters, or Star Wars names. They emphasized the strictness of this system, as they seemed to agree on the assumption it could be immersion, if not game breaking.
If they want to make KOTOR 3 thats great but dont rap it up with optional coop play and slap a monthly sub on it..
When every lvl 30 (insert class) is running around in the same exact gear and none needs any help to aquire anything... blehhh
There will be no sense of community , no need for community
And if this pans out the way it is going ........LMAO there will be no point to there erhmmmm "MMO" either