The graphics "style" won't be to everyones taste. Some people focus more on the gameplay than the graphics.
Great games usually have both
Nice snapp ycomment but great MMOs generally don't.
The current crop of MMOs are not great just mediocre, gameplay and content is what is important in this genre if you think otherwise thats fine , but it is a deluded view and is what is killing the genre. With respect to MMO-RPGs....
I don't really understand why shouldn't a game have both great graphics and gameplay. Why choose between them. You can make a big world, full of cities, forests, dungeons but if those look like crap then all that content doesn't really appeal me.
If I'm gonna call a game great then I expect to have great gameplay + great graphics. In the case of SW tor is a bit early to judge. The game will be out after 1 year.
It is very difficult to do both one normally restricts the other. Very difficult to get a balance. Solid graphics and great immersive gameplay will do me any day. I like the style of SWTOR, I am no more interested in the content.
If I am fighting a square block and it has inteligent attacks then good AI then great. A pretty arrior with decent graphics who just take it and dies doesn't appeal. Both great but i'd prefer the solid graphics approach and lots of decent gameplay and content ... really a priority thing.
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
I don't really understand why shouldn't a game have both great graphics and gameplay.
Because then the company making the game will generate less profit. That would be a disaster for EA.
Last I checked companies where in the business of making money if they where not why make games? Even your avatar and sig are of a company that has for past 10years has not made anything I would call note worthy or innovative, and I have been a fan of Square since Final Fantasy (1).
Last I checked companies where in the business of making money if they where not why make games? Even your avatar and sig are of a company that has for past 10years has not made anything I would call note worthy or innovative, and I have been a fan of Square since Final Fantasy (1).
Do you think I care about their intentions?
Also, I don't see that company aiming for the lowest common dominator. No PvP, no jumping, no fast paced combat, hardware intensive graphics, lot of resources not being used for marketing...
EA marketing experts would be horrified! That's like, so not the best way to generate 342% profits.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
You're referring to PVP combat, this is PVE combat. The two can be different in how they are executed. What I mean is that in PVE, you aren't necessarily "kiting" mobs around, especially if you want to remain within range of the healer and ranged dps classes.
Now, its difficult to see just whether movement actually cancels a combat action (like in WoW) or whether the combat action continues (like in AOC). But given that the players seem to be able to swing with their sabers whilst on the move, I'd say the general mechanic is possibly more like the latter than the former, and therefore the only reason why the players didn't move whilst firing / swinging was purely out of choice rather than restricted by mechanics. I could be wrong though.
Movement in WoW doesn't cancel combat actions. What are you talking about?
The only things that cancels on movement are casts and channels, just like any other game.
Having a graphics like this does help with large PvE/PvP battles. Having graphics like AoC does not. You need a real computer capable of handling it. I'll venture a guess that the people that frequent these forums can do that. But the bulk of subs do not.
I would enjoy to see at least 2 classes able to heal equally. And I mean, they both spent most of their points in their healing tree. It would also be great, if each class can do what the smuggler did. Throw out something in times of need. This way you can have the healers not just playing whack-a-green bar during an instance/raid/pvp.
Hopefully over the next few weeks we get to see more little "bonus" bits of info like the video had.
Can somebody tell me what the difference between the two games is? I saw a bunch of NPC's helping her, and the objectives were better structured and more interesting..
But I'd say WoW actually looks better than this game. And I know many will disagree. But goddamn, if we can have an ARGUMENT about this it's quite damn pathetic. 2004 vs. 2011, FINAL SHOWDOWN! And let's not go into the combat mechanics...
Aw come on now Hyanmen, you can do better than to throw in "what's the difference" questions just for the sake of being vague. Of course, opinions are subjective, but lets not resort to such "I see no difference" rubbish.
The graphics are "stylised" for a reason. If you think they look just like WoW in that sense, then you really are generalising a little too much.
If SWTOR didn't have stylised graphics, then what would you prefer? Line graphics like in the original Elite or Asteroids? Or perhaps the more "realistic" graphics like in AOC which kick the crap out of even the higher grade machines? And lets not go into the whole Single Player vs MMO graphics comparison argument.
Fact is that stylised graphics lower the system requirements. Realistic graphics demand a higher minimum spec requirement and thus have the potential to turn away a sizeable portion of the playerbase just for the sake of looking "realistic". And even then you'd have people screaming how the "realistic" graphics look like plastic dolls (just like people did when EQ2 and AOC was launched).
Because of this, graphics focus should ALWAYS be secondary to gameplay.
QFT
The best games are the ones with the shity graphics; because, the developers spent more time focusing on making the game play fun, rather than they did making it look pretty. I love the stupidity in comments that say the graphics look like WoW's, the two games look absolutely nothing alike; they are just making a shallow remark, as a sloppy way to reject the game they haven't played yet.
Honestly, i don't understand what people are expecting to find in these new MMORPG's, there will not be any revolutionary MMORPGs that totally redefine all MMO's. They all borrow what works from other MMO's, then just tweek it to make it their own style. Why? Because, that's how business works. It's like expecting Nike to come out with some new shoe that doesn't look like any other shoe. People need to pull their heads out of their asses, really.
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
Last I checked companies where in the business of making money if they where not why make games? Even your avatar and sig are of a company that has for past 10years has not made anything I would call note worthy or innovative, and I have been a fan of Square since Final Fantasy (1).
Do you think I care about their intentions?
Also, I don't see that company aiming for the lowest common dominator. No PvP, no jumping, no fast paced combat, hardware intensive graphics, lot of resources not being used for marketing...
EA marketing experts would be horrified! That's like, so not the best way to generate 342% profits.
I spoke nothing of intentions rather simple economics; companies want to make money. When there is no profit in making a game, there will be no games to play.
Square Enix has not the resources any more to do major marketing.
Why shouldn't a game market with its features? Those hardware intensive graphics fail 99% of the time in MMOs, its a mass market. You may need an economics course video game market does not generate such incredible profits if it did wouldn't it have a much higher share in the world economy?
If SWTOR didn't have stylised graphics, then what would you prefer? Line graphics like in the original Elite or Asteroids? Or perhaps the more "realistic" graphics like in AOC which kick the crap out of even the higher grade machines? And lets not go into the whole Single Player vs MMO graphics comparison argument.
Lotro has quite realistic graphics, but still runs on low end machines.
The combat aside as its up to personal expectations as to whether seeing the JC strike at the droid a couple of times is revolutionary from a healing class or seen in ever MMO. Personally I don't think seeing the hit the droid or use force push shows overly difference from say the disciple of Khaine in WAR, though I do think your party will wipe and never get an invite back if you play a JC who doesn't heal.
But the area looked really bland, just a big area with a few crates for the smuggler to hide behind. Early on we saw a video of a guy who was placing urns and statues and making the world look good. The we see this video and its just a big open space where the players surround the boss and blast away or draw agro or heal their friends. It feels like we have gone back to the days of EQ or using STO's horrible random content generator which had big open halls with a few box shapes dotted around. Now I know its only alpha/beta (depends if you believe the invites that supposedly went out) but as a show case for E3 you would think they would make sure it was as polished as the game is likely to be give or take a few changes during testing.
I spoke nothing of intentions rather simple economics; companies want to make money. When there is no profit in making a game, there will be no games to play.
Square Enix has not the resources any more to do major marketing.
Why shouldn't a game market with its features? Those hardware intensive graphics fail 99% of the time in MMOs, its a mass market. You may need an economics course video game market does not generate such incredible profits if it did wouldn't it have a much higher share in the world economy?
The marketing money can be used to make the game better instead. This is especially true with MMO's. Word of mouth goes a long way. Not long enough according to marketing experts though, obviously. Instead of ironing the game's features out, it is much more "efficient" to spend money on marketing and other out-of-game stuff.
Graphics are not the reason why game fail. The game fails because it is shit. Good graphics do not make the game shit.
Of course bad graphics mean more income, that's completely true. Do you think i care how much money the company makes? I care about what is good for me as a customer, and that unfortunately often clashes with how much income the game can generate. See: DLC market. Bad for me as a customer, good for companies as far as profit goes.
I don't really care about the share of the video game industry as far as the world economy goes, but whatever the profit is it has allowed companies to grow larger and larger. Nowadays more-so because of the marketing experts who have decided that "fixing a game with glitches isn't worth it; it's better to focus on releasing some DLC instead." See: Dragon Age.
And I'm sure it is nice for them that their methods are defended by folk like you. Keep it up.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Aw come on now Hyanmen, you can do better than to throw in "what's the difference" questions just for the sake of being vague. Of course, opinions are subjective, but lets not resort to such "I see no difference" rubbish.
The graphics are "stylised" for a reason. If you think they look just like WoW in that sense, then you really are generalising a little too much.
If SWTOR didn't have stylised graphics, then what would you prefer? Line graphics like in the original Elite or Asteroids? Or perhaps the more "realistic" graphics like in AOC which kick the crap out of even the higher grade machines? And lets not go into the whole Single Player vs MMO graphics comparison argument.
Fact is that stylised graphics lower the system requirements. Realistic graphics demand a higher minimum spec requirement and thus have the potential to turn away a sizeable portion of the playerbase just for the sake of looking "realistic". And even then you'd have people screaming how the "realistic" graphics look like plastic dolls (just like people did when EQ2 and AOC was launched).
Well you can call it rubbish, but I honestly do not see a difference. But I'm not really That familiar with WoW style combat in the first place, I haven't played any of these games for more than few months (WoW included) but I can spot the general similarities and that said, I don't see any differences in that regard. That's why I'd like someone to tell me exactly what is different, even if it's just a gimmick.
I know that the "style" is there to hide the shortcomings of the technical side (must get the game to run on 2004 machines!) but I don't think they're really succeeding at it. It looks painfully dated.
What would I prefer? I would prefer for a PC game to set the standards for the industry, or at least come on par with the graphics CONSOLES put out today. Catering to the lowest common dominator for the sake of profit over and over again is just pathetic, but understandable (EA wants it).
That said, I understand why they went with stylized graphics, but I don't agree that they succeeded at it. I also don't think that EQ2 or AoC succeeded, in fact the character models there look worse than in TOR (imo).
In fact, I can't recall any western artist getting it "right" for a long time, be it realistic or stylized. It all looks simply horrible. I think WoW looks horrible too. But they can somehow hide it behind the overdone art and make it seem "justified".
But in the end, if gameplay rocks these things don't matter as much. But well... I echo my statements from the first paragraph.
Hyanmen, we get it mate. We really do. You are a hopeless Final Fantasy fanboy. You think that Final Fantasy is the height of MMO gaming (although God only knows why). But to come out with the graphical argument is weak. Especially since you go on to trash AoC's graphics. I'm sorry mate, but from a technical standpoint (and personally from an artstyle standpoint) AoC blows Final Fantasy XIV graphics right out the water, and AoC is a 2 year old game. And, no I am not an AoC fanboy. I'm not even playing the game currently.
As for trashing ToR's combat. REALLY? Final Fantasy has some of the most boring looking combat to ever be seen in any MMO ever. FFS, take off your Square Enix rose-coloured glasses for once! ToR will absolutely destroy FFXIV in the west. Is that why you are such a rabid ToR hater on these forums? Do you see me trolling the Final Fantasy forum? No. Even though from everything I have seen of it I think it is a dreadful game I don't resort to bashing and trolling it on its forums. I know that I wont play it, so I don't bother about it and leave it alone. Maybe you should do the same with regards to SW:ToR...
MMORPG History: Playing - EVE Online. Played (Retired) - AO, SWG, MxO, WoW, RFO, SoR, CoX, EQ2, GW, L2, Vanguard, LotRO, AoC, TCoS, Aion. Favourite MMO - Pre-CU SWG, 3 Years, 4 Accounts, 2 Pre-CU Jedi (1 Pre-9). Awaiting - Star Wars: The Old Republic, The Secret World, Earthrise.
Aw come on now Hyanmen, you can do better than to throw in "what's the difference" questions just for the sake of being vague. Of course, opinions are subjective, but lets not resort to such "I see no difference" rubbish.
The graphics are "stylised" for a reason. If you think they look just like WoW in that sense, then you really are generalising a little too much.
If SWTOR didn't have stylised graphics, then what would you prefer? Line graphics like in the original Elite or Asteroids? Or perhaps the more "realistic" graphics like in AOC which kick the crap out of even the higher grade machines? And lets not go into the whole Single Player vs MMO graphics comparison argument.
Fact is that stylised graphics lower the system requirements. Realistic graphics demand a higher minimum spec requirement and thus have the potential to turn away a sizeable portion of the playerbase just for the sake of looking "realistic". And even then you'd have people screaming how the "realistic" graphics look like plastic dolls (just like people did when EQ2 and AOC was launched).
Well you can call it rubbish, but I honestly do not see a difference. But I'm not really That familiar with WoW style combat in the first place, I haven't played any of these games for more than few months (WoW included) but I can spot the general similarities and that said, I don't see any differences in that regard. That's why I'd like someone to tell me exactly what is different, even if it's just a gimmick.
I know that the "style" is there to hide the shortcomings of the technical side (must get the game to run on 2004 machines!) but I don't think they're really succeeding at it. It looks painfully dated.
What would I prefer? I would prefer for a PC game to set the standards for the industry, or at least come on par with the graphics CONSOLES put out today. Catering to the lowest common dominator for the sake of profit over and over again is just pathetic, but understandable (EA wants it).
That said, I understand why they went with stylized graphics, but I don't agree that they succeeded at it. I also don't think that EQ2 or AoC succeeded, in fact the character models there look worse than in TOR (imo).
In fact, I can't recall any western artist getting it "right" for a long time, be it realistic or stylized. It all looks simply horrible. I think WoW looks horrible too. But they can somehow hide it behind the overdone art and make it seem "justified".
But in the end, if gameplay rocks these things don't matter as much. But well... I echo my statements from the first paragraph.
Hyanmen, we get it mate. We really do. You are a hopeless Final Fantasy fanboy. You think that Final Fantasy is the height of MMO gaming (although God only knows why). But to come out with the graphical argument is weak. Especially since you go on to trash AoC's graphics. I'm sorry mate, but from a technical standpoint (and personally from an artstyle standpoint) AoC blows Final Fantasy XIV graphics right out the water, and AoC is a 2 year old game. And, no I am not an AoC fanboy. I'm not even playing the game currently.
As for trashing ToR's combat. REALLY? Final Fantasy has some of the most boring looking combat to ever be seen in any MMO ever. FFS, take off your Square Enix rose-coloured glasses for once! ToR will absolutely destroy FFXIV in the west. Is that why you are such a rabid ToR hater on these forums? Do you see me trolling the Final Fantasy forum? No. Even though from everything I have seen of it I think it is a dreadful game I don't resort to bashing and trolling it on its forums. I know that I wont play it, so I don't bother about it and leave it alone. Maybe you should do the same with regards to SW:ToR...
Every single TOR thread Hyanmen provide some type of hate. Do you have anything positive to say about TOR? If someone says one thing about FF he's the first to defend it lol. Trashing TOR's combat will not make FF's combat look any better.
The combat aside as its up to personal expectations as to whether seeing the JC strike at the droid a couple of times is revolutionary from a healing class or seen in ever MMO. Personally I don't think seeing the hit the droid or use force push shows overly difference from say the disciple of Khaine in WAR, though I do think your party will wipe and never get an invite back if you play a JC who doesn't heal.
But the area looked really bland, just a big area with a few crates for the smuggler to hide behind. Early on we saw a video of a guy who was placing urns and statues and making the world look good. The we see this video and its just a big open space where the players surround the boss and blast away or draw agro or heal their friends. It feels like we have gone back to the days of EQ or using STO's horrible random content generator which had big open halls with a few box shapes dotted around. Now I know its only alpha/beta (depends if you believe the invites that supposedly went out) but as a show case for E3 you would think they would make sure it was as polished as the game is likely to be give or take a few changes during testing.
2 things I do want to point out.
1. They were on a Space/StarShip so you cant really ask for too much environmental complexity.
2. If i`m not mistaken , were they not like lvl 4 or 5. I think that looks pretty impressive for such low level action.
I spoke nothing of intentions rather simple economics; companies want to make money. When there is no profit in making a game, there will be no games to play.
Square Enix has not the resources any more to do major marketing.
Why shouldn't a game market with its features? Those hardware intensive graphics fail 99% of the time in MMOs, its a mass market. You may need an economics course video game market does not generate such incredible profits if it did wouldn't it have a much higher share in the world economy?
The marketing money can be used to make the game better instead. This is especially true with MMO's. Word of mouth goes a long way. Not long enough according to marketing experts though, obviously. Instead of ironing the game's features out, it is much more "efficient" to spend money on marketing and other out-of-game stuff.
Graphics are not the reason why game fail. The game fails because it is shit. Good graphics do not make the game shit.
Of course bad graphics mean more income, that's completely true. Do you think i care how much money the company makes? I care about what is good for me as a customer, and that unfortunately often clashes with how much income the game can generate. See: DLC market. Bad for me as a customer, good for companies as far as profit goes.
I don't really care about the share of the video game industry as far as the world economy goes, but whatever the profit is it has allowed companies to grow larger and larger. Nowadays more-so because of the marketing experts who have decided that "fixing a game with glitches isn't worth it; it's better to focus on releasing some DLC instead." See: Dragon Age.
And I'm sure it is nice for them that their methods are defended by folk like you. Keep it up.
Just a thought but I never defended Bioware or EA, I made general statements. You, yourself have made all the major absolutes. I think you miss the entire point, your eyes are not rose-coloer for FFXIV rather you have red filled eyes for a game which MAY cause FFXIV to in your words "fail" in the west.
You should care about a share of industry its reason video game market is in the current state its in fad games like guitar hero and ddr have done to video games what disco started and pop has done to music. I however think you only care to make a febble arguement against a game that is months away.
Im a capitalist pure and simple, these methods you speak of are how a company stays afloat patches and bug fixes happen when possible but rarely do these things create additional capital. Dragon Age has fixed many of the bugs and glitches its launched with, minus the memory leak.
Every single TOR thread Hyanmen provide some type of hate. Do you have anything positive to say about TOR? If someone says one thing about FF he's the first to defend it lol. Trashing TOR's combat will not make FF's combat look any better.
If you looked a bit further, you would have noticed that I have posted quite many positive comments about this game; give credit when credit is due and so on. I like the way the quest system is set up in this game, for example (if it works like I'm envisioning).
In fact, I have also defended this game on more than few occasions, especially when people started criticizing Bioware for not implementing space combat from the start. Good move, in my opinion.
But if it helps you sleep at night, I won't stop you from giving in to delusions. It's always easy to resort to fanboyism when nothing else works.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Im a capitalist pure and simple, these methods you speak of are how a company stays afloat patches and bug fixes happen when possible but rarely do these things create additional capital. Dragon Age has fixed many of the bugs and glitches its launched with, minus the memory leak.
Hey, if it floats your boat I can only envy you. There are some questionable trends going on that I don't particularly -mind-, but I won't actually go and defend them either.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Im a capitalist pure and simple, these methods you speak of are how a company stays afloat patches and bug fixes happen when possible but rarely do these things create additional capital. Dragon Age has fixed many of the bugs and glitches its launched with, minus the memory leak.
Hey, if it floats your boat I can only envy you. There are some questionable trends going on that I don't particularly -mind-, but I won't actually go and defend them either.
We do agree on questionable trends, but we differ in that they may or may not be with good intentions (one being to keep the company in business).
please explain the larger company doing things differently then the trends?
From what I have seen, SE does not have any marketing experts as far as their MMO's go.
Of course they do operate to make profit, but they do not also bend over with every single thing for the sake of even more profit.
I would say that Valve is another company like that, although I am upset about their left 4 dead 2 rip-off move.
Don't fool yourself. SE does everything they can to make as much profit as possible. So does Valve, and Bioware, and Activision... and every game company out there.
I think Bioware's market expert told them: Don't do anything. Trust in the force.
Now they just sit back and let everyone else do all of the hype for them. Great plan, and it's working.
It looked like fun, and for low level content I was impressed. I think the graphics are fine, but the animations and character models are not to my liking. By that I mean they look horrifyingly terrible to me.
Don't fool yourself. SE does everything they can to make as much profit as possible. So does Valve, and Bioware, and Activision... and every game company out there.
I think Bioware's market expert told them: Don't do anything. Trust in the force.
Now they just sit back and let everyone else do all of the hype for them. Great plan, and it's working.
Why do the graphics of XIV not suck then? Why is there no PvP?
For all of these things, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to realize that more profit would be a given were both of these features implemented. Yet they choose not to.
Releasing the game on the PS3 is obviously a move to make lotsa profit. But a lot more could be done, which they choose not to do.
It's too bad not every move is for the customer's benefit, but hell, I'll take what I can get.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
The combat aside as its up to personal expectations as to whether seeing the JC strike at the droid a couple of times is revolutionary from a healing class or seen in ever MMO. Personally I don't think seeing the hit the droid or use force push shows overly difference from say the disciple of Khaine in WAR, though I do think your party will wipe and never get an invite back if you play a JC who doesn't heal.
But the area looked really bland, just a big area with a few crates for the smuggler to hide behind. Early on we saw a video of a guy who was placing urns and statues and making the world look good. The we see this video and its just a big open space where the players surround the boss and blast away or draw agro or heal their friends. It feels like we have gone back to the days of EQ or using STO's horrible random content generator which had big open halls with a few box shapes dotted around. Now I know its only alpha/beta (depends if you believe the invites that supposedly went out) but as a show case for E3 you would think they would make sure it was as polished as the game is likely to be give or take a few changes during testing.
2 things I do want to point out.
1. They were on a Space/StarShip so you cant really ask for too much environmental complexity.
2. If i`m not mistaken , were they not like lvl 4 or 5. I think that looks pretty impressive for such low level action.
1. A space ship gives a lot of opportunity for a good enviromnent for a fight, far more than say a rocky caven or a desert setting. You could have land or space attack vehicles, supplies, machinery. The force unleashed not the best example of such due to the FPS nature of the game but gives an idea of what you can have in a space ship or station where there are tie fighters hanging from the roof ready for deployment.
2. They were 8th to 10th level, the Smuggler used an advance class skill that is only available at 10th level and the rest were 8th. This is a quarter of the way through the leveling process and I can't think of many games that have a vastly different look from 10th level up. Aion to a degree with the option of flght but it looked very similar.
Don't fool yourself. SE does everything they can to make as much profit as possible. So does Valve, and Bioware, and Activision... and every game company out there.
I think Bioware's market expert told them: Don't do anything. Trust in the force.
Now they just sit back and let everyone else do all of the hype for them. Great plan, and it's working.
Why do the graphics of XIV not suck then? Why is there no PvP?
For all of these things, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to realize that more profit would be a given were both of these features implemented. Yet they choose not to.
Releasing the game on the PS3 is obviously a move to make lotsa profit. But a lot more could be done, which they choose not to do.
It's too bad not every move is for the customer's benefit, but hell, I'll take what I can get.
But apparantly you DO need to be a rocket scientist to understand risk management and ROI (Return On Investment). Improving the graphics and adding PvP would require time, resources, and cash. They have made a business decision, weighing out the possible losses and profits, and have decided to spend LESS money. Making the game prettier and letting players kill each other wouldn't guarantee them more money than it would cost to implement them. So to maximize profit and minimize risk, the game is what it is.
Comments
It is very difficult to do both one normally restricts the other. Very difficult to get a balance. Solid graphics and great immersive gameplay will do me any day. I like the style of SWTOR, I am no more interested in the content.
If I am fighting a square block and it has inteligent attacks then good AI then great. A pretty arrior with decent graphics who just take it and dies doesn't appeal. Both great but i'd prefer the solid graphics approach and lots of decent gameplay and content ... really a priority thing.
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
Last I checked companies where in the business of making money if they where not why make games? Even your avatar and sig are of a company that has for past 10years has not made anything I would call note worthy or innovative, and I have been a fan of Square since Final Fantasy (1).
Do you think I care about their intentions?
Also, I don't see that company aiming for the lowest common dominator. No PvP, no jumping, no fast paced combat, hardware intensive graphics, lot of resources not being used for marketing...
EA marketing experts would be horrified! That's like, so not the best way to generate 342% profits.
Movement in WoW doesn't cancel combat actions. What are you talking about?
The only things that cancels on movement are casts and channels, just like any other game.
Having a graphics like this does help with large PvE/PvP battles. Having graphics like AoC does not. You need a real computer capable of handling it. I'll venture a guess that the people that frequent these forums can do that. But the bulk of subs do not.
I would enjoy to see at least 2 classes able to heal equally. And I mean, they both spent most of their points in their healing tree. It would also be great, if each class can do what the smuggler did. Throw out something in times of need. This way you can have the healers not just playing whack-a-green bar during an instance/raid/pvp.
Hopefully over the next few weeks we get to see more little "bonus" bits of info like the video had.
QFT
The best games are the ones with the shity graphics; because, the developers spent more time focusing on making the game play fun, rather than they did making it look pretty. I love the stupidity in comments that say the graphics look like WoW's, the two games look absolutely nothing alike; they are just making a shallow remark, as a sloppy way to reject the game they haven't played yet.
Honestly, i don't understand what people are expecting to find in these new MMORPG's, there will not be any revolutionary MMORPGs that totally redefine all MMO's. They all borrow what works from other MMO's, then just tweek it to make it their own style. Why? Because, that's how business works. It's like expecting Nike to come out with some new shoe that doesn't look like any other shoe. People need to pull their heads out of their asses, really.
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
I spoke nothing of intentions rather simple economics; companies want to make money. When there is no profit in making a game, there will be no games to play.
Square Enix has not the resources any more to do major marketing.
Why shouldn't a game market with its features? Those hardware intensive graphics fail 99% of the time in MMOs, its a mass market. You may need an economics course video game market does not generate such incredible profits if it did wouldn't it have a much higher share in the world economy?
Lotro has quite realistic graphics, but still runs on low end machines.
The combat aside as its up to personal expectations as to whether seeing the JC strike at the droid a couple of times is revolutionary from a healing class or seen in ever MMO. Personally I don't think seeing the hit the droid or use force push shows overly difference from say the disciple of Khaine in WAR, though I do think your party will wipe and never get an invite back if you play a JC who doesn't heal.
But the area looked really bland, just a big area with a few crates for the smuggler to hide behind. Early on we saw a video of a guy who was placing urns and statues and making the world look good. The we see this video and its just a big open space where the players surround the boss and blast away or draw agro or heal their friends. It feels like we have gone back to the days of EQ or using STO's horrible random content generator which had big open halls with a few box shapes dotted around. Now I know its only alpha/beta (depends if you believe the invites that supposedly went out) but as a show case for E3 you would think they would make sure it was as polished as the game is likely to be give or take a few changes during testing.
The marketing money can be used to make the game better instead. This is especially true with MMO's. Word of mouth goes a long way. Not long enough according to marketing experts though, obviously. Instead of ironing the game's features out, it is much more "efficient" to spend money on marketing and other out-of-game stuff.
Graphics are not the reason why game fail. The game fails because it is shit. Good graphics do not make the game shit.
Of course bad graphics mean more income, that's completely true. Do you think i care how much money the company makes? I care about what is good for me as a customer, and that unfortunately often clashes with how much income the game can generate. See: DLC market. Bad for me as a customer, good for companies as far as profit goes.
I don't really care about the share of the video game industry as far as the world economy goes, but whatever the profit is it has allowed companies to grow larger and larger. Nowadays more-so because of the marketing experts who have decided that "fixing a game with glitches isn't worth it; it's better to focus on releasing some DLC instead." See: Dragon Age.
And I'm sure it is nice for them that their methods are defended by folk like you. Keep it up.
Hyanmen, we get it mate. We really do. You are a hopeless Final Fantasy fanboy. You think that Final Fantasy is the height of MMO gaming (although God only knows why). But to come out with the graphical argument is weak. Especially since you go on to trash AoC's graphics. I'm sorry mate, but from a technical standpoint (and personally from an artstyle standpoint) AoC blows Final Fantasy XIV graphics right out the water, and AoC is a 2 year old game. And, no I am not an AoC fanboy. I'm not even playing the game currently.
As for trashing ToR's combat. REALLY? Final Fantasy has some of the most boring looking combat to ever be seen in any MMO ever. FFS, take off your Square Enix rose-coloured glasses for once! ToR will absolutely destroy FFXIV in the west. Is that why you are such a rabid ToR hater on these forums? Do you see me trolling the Final Fantasy forum? No. Even though from everything I have seen of it I think it is a dreadful game I don't resort to bashing and trolling it on its forums. I know that I wont play it, so I don't bother about it and leave it alone. Maybe you should do the same with regards to SW:ToR...
MMORPG History:
Playing - EVE Online.
Played (Retired) - AO, SWG, MxO, WoW, RFO, SoR, CoX, EQ2, GW, L2, Vanguard, LotRO, AoC, TCoS, Aion.
Favourite MMO - Pre-CU SWG, 3 Years, 4 Accounts, 2 Pre-CU Jedi (1 Pre-9).
Awaiting - Star Wars: The Old Republic, The Secret World, Earthrise.
Every single TOR thread Hyanmen provide some type of hate. Do you have anything positive to say about TOR? If someone says one thing about FF he's the first to defend it lol. Trashing TOR's combat will not make FF's combat look any better.
2 things I do want to point out.
1. They were on a Space/StarShip so you cant really ask for too much environmental complexity.
2. If i`m not mistaken , were they not like lvl 4 or 5. I think that looks pretty impressive for such low level action.
Just a thought but I never defended Bioware or EA, I made general statements. You, yourself have made all the major absolutes. I think you miss the entire point, your eyes are not rose-coloer for FFXIV rather you have red filled eyes for a game which MAY cause FFXIV to in your words "fail" in the west.
You should care about a share of industry its reason video game market is in the current state its in fad games like guitar hero and ddr have done to video games what disco started and pop has done to music. I however think you only care to make a febble arguement against a game that is months away.
Im a capitalist pure and simple, these methods you speak of are how a company stays afloat patches and bug fixes happen when possible but rarely do these things create additional capital. Dragon Age has fixed many of the bugs and glitches its launched with, minus the memory leak.
If you looked a bit further, you would have noticed that I have posted quite many positive comments about this game; give credit when credit is due and so on. I like the way the quest system is set up in this game, for example (if it works like I'm envisioning).
In fact, I have also defended this game on more than few occasions, especially when people started criticizing Bioware for not implementing space combat from the start. Good move, in my opinion.
But if it helps you sleep at night, I won't stop you from giving in to delusions. It's always easy to resort to fanboyism when nothing else works.
Hey, if it floats your boat I can only envy you. There are some questionable trends going on that I don't particularly -mind-, but I won't actually go and defend them either.
We do agree on questionable trends, but we differ in that they may or may not be with good intentions (one being to keep the company in business).
I guess. Is it necessary to keep the company in business? Will they be overrun by the competition if they -don't- do it? Can't say for sure.
But as long as some larger company out there keeps doing things differently and doesn't go bankrupt because of it, I'm not too convinced
.
please explain the larger company doing things differently then the trends?
From what I have seen, SE does not have any marketing experts as far as their MMO's go.
Of course they do operate to make profit, but they do not also bend over with every single thing for the sake of even more profit.
I would say that Valve is another company like that, although I am upset about their left 4 dead 2 rip-off move.
Don't fool yourself. SE does everything they can to make as much profit as possible. So does Valve, and Bioware, and Activision... and every game company out there.
I think Bioware's market expert told them: Don't do anything. Trust in the force.
Now they just sit back and let everyone else do all of the hype for them. Great plan, and it's working.
It looked like fun, and for low level content I was impressed. I think the graphics are fine, but the animations and character models are not to my liking. By that I mean they look horrifyingly terrible to me.
Why do the graphics of XIV not suck then? Why is there no PvP?
For all of these things, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to realize that more profit would be a given were both of these features implemented. Yet they choose not to.
Releasing the game on the PS3 is obviously a move to make lotsa profit. But a lot more could be done, which they choose not to do.
It's too bad not every move is for the customer's benefit, but hell, I'll take what I can get.
1. A space ship gives a lot of opportunity for a good enviromnent for a fight, far more than say a rocky caven or a desert setting. You could have land or space attack vehicles, supplies, machinery. The force unleashed not the best example of such due to the FPS nature of the game but gives an idea of what you can have in a space ship or station where there are tie fighters hanging from the roof ready for deployment.
2. They were 8th to 10th level, the Smuggler used an advance class skill that is only available at 10th level and the rest were 8th. This is a quarter of the way through the leveling process and I can't think of many games that have a vastly different look from 10th level up. Aion to a degree with the option of flght but it looked very similar.
But apparantly you DO need to be a rocket scientist to understand risk management and ROI (Return On Investment). Improving the graphics and adding PvP would require time, resources, and cash. They have made a business decision, weighing out the possible losses and profits, and have decided to spend LESS money. Making the game prettier and letting players kill each other wouldn't guarantee them more money than it would cost to implement them. So to maximize profit and minimize risk, the game is what it is.
NO move is for the customer's benefit. Not one.