Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
TOR multiplayer focus VS GW2
nomss
Member UncommonPosts: 1,468
So lately I've been feeling that TOR is heavily focused on instances rather than open world. And I got this PM from a nice guy, I hope he does not mind me bringing this to forms. The discussion was going on on GW2 forums and we did not want to involve mods.
This is what I had said:
Another thing is, I just don't see myself playing with other people whole lot in TOR right? I mean you'll be following your story line and you probably won't get to play with others (party) other then flash points.
But in GW2 you could be out traveling and you'd be called out for DE and will get to play with others. TOR does not have this kind of atmosphere.
"While i'm sure some people will stick to their story lines you do have several things you will be doing in the open world
Naturally you have the flashpoints, similar to GW2 dungeons.
You also have world quests (similar to most MMOs)
You have world arcs. Much longer forms of world quests.
You have heroic quests, basically hard group quests.
You have open world PvP
You have Instance PvP
You have exploration, though this might not force you to group it might be a good idea, never know what you will encounter.
Think of the story quest (the one only about your character) in the same regards as GW2 personal story. Same basic deal.
It's apart of the game but you don't have to do it beyond say level 7-10 once you get your ship. Now you do get certain rewards for continuing to do the class story, ala companions mostly, but to do your class quests your going to have to go in and out of instances continuously and while your out of an instance you can run into mobs, other players and any other things in the world.
Actually your more likely to run into other players as there isn't any teleportation in ToR. You either have to run, use a mount or take a trasnport to another location.
In the open world there are quests, mobs, other players, cities (big ones like Coruscant), possibly some PvP going on if your in the right areas. You can grind mobs, go looking for datacrons or rare bosses, or just see the sights. Walk around town, Do some crafting, talk to other players, do some raids, do a quest with another person (you get social points if you do this which you can use to buy social clothing which can up your persuasion stat thus giving you a slighly better chance and getting your say in group events.
Granted you don't get DE but there is still plenty to do. In fact there seems to be (per the devs) more to do in the open world then the personal story."
1. Agreed.
2. I think the world quests are similar to your give MMO. You see an NPC with ! on his head and you do the chores. In GW2 we've got DE. In quest there is problem of being on the same quest. Not with DE.
3. World arcs; I take it they're not instanced? But the issue presist that someone might be on different chain. So I don't think I'm likely to meet random people sharing same goal here either.
4. IDK if this is instanced. I'm personally burnt out of "Looking for hearler..." thing myself. IDK if this can be done with companion healer. Basically IDK much about this. No comment.
5. Open world PVP is good... but its locked to certain areas. You'd have to go out of your way for this? Can I argue it'd be similar to WvWvW of GW2?
6. Instance is instance. Not a big fan of this in MMO.
7. Exploring is good. TOR & GW2 seem very heavy focused on this.
Hmmm.... I still don't see where I'm out there, running into random people sharing same goals in TOR. I tried to do this in DCUO, did not work out well, maybe UI, who knows? Rift's rifts weren't really fun either, maybe too much of same over and over? Loved how there were massive people up for the giagantic boos. But that did not last too long.
Guild Wars 2's 50 minutes game play video:
http://n4g.com/news/592585/guild-wars-2-50-minutes-of-pure-gameplay
Everything We Know about GW2:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/287180/page/1
Comments
I am not sure these games should even be being compared ; One will have no depth or longevity the Other will and they cater for different demographics.
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
You're feelings are wrong, TOR will not be heavily instanced. Develolpers have said that it is roughly 95% open world. Instances will include class specific areas in which your class quest givers are found, but these will be very small; and flashpoints and there doesn't appear to be a huge number of those.
I Don't think the games really should be compared, they have their own strenghts and weaknesses.
For stuff like larger scale PvP I just don't see TR have much of a chance. TORs strenght will be one or a small party of players, that have always been what Bioware does best.
Of course, Bioware have stated that TOR will have raids while GW2 wont, it will have large open world bosses that scale instead. Which is better is up to the player.
The thing that really seems to set the games apart however is the fact that items play a big role in TOr and little in GW2. I think that will be what attract most players to one or the other game.
But no, I have my doubts on how massive TOR will feel when you play it. GW2s mechanics makes it easier to jump in a large battle, PvP or PvE and help out. The question is if that matters, or if the main point is to have fun while you play?
We do have to realize that both Bioware and Arenanet have many fans, and they are companies making the games for their fans. I think their fans want different things and therefore will the games differ. *This is actually what those 2 companies have in common with Blizzard but few of the other MMO companies (CCP comes to mind as well).
Well, I'd love to give my thoughts, but I can't on most things that are mentioned in this thread.
You do mention you don't like instance PvP. That's all that GW1/2 has.
For the above posters, fine don't compare. But stilll I don't see how TOR is focusing on community. Devs can say whatever, what have we seen so far? How does the quests bring in multiplayer interaction?
Guild Wars 2's 50 minutes game play video:
http://n4g.com/news/592585/guild-wars-2-50-minutes-of-pure-gameplay
Everything We Know about GW2:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/287180/page/1
TOR will be a hand held walk in the theme park with raids experience while GW2 will feature dynamic events and a personal story that plays like a single player rpg. In GW2's world you can always sidekick your friends so you guys can go where ever you like while TOR you will be restricted to where you go. Both games will be good!
as long as the instances are designed like wow and not aoc i'll be fine
I want to own property too
Well, yeah. But GW2 have small instances with just a few players in. GW2 will have a huge instance with hundreds of players, mines, fotresses and so on.
Both are of course instances but you can spend the entire game in it in GW2 and still have a lot to do so it is kinda like saying that both a shaft and a mansion is a house. They are but most people prefer the large place.
I'm going to say this once again about Dynamic Events:
Based on EVERYTHING I have seen about them they are BARELY different than Public Quests. From what I've seen, the primary distinction comes in with certain mobs spawning out of certain locations. Those 'environmental weapons' are nothing new. I've seen them before and I'm not impressed by seeing them again.
TOR, on the other hand, is NOT claiming that anything they're doing is new except for their space combat. It's somewhat limited, but nobody else has had space combat in that form before. Some might argue that SWG space combat was better, but I'm not entirely convinced. It was open, but the system itself was very clunky.
ANet is in a REALLY bad habit right now of talking about their game features as if everything is unique and new and innovative. Sure, they don't come out and say that all the time, but they ALWAYS imply it. The fact of the matter is that nothing Anet is doing in GW 2 is new or unique and they are fools if they believe otherwise. I think a LOT of people are going to get into the game, realize about a month in that nothing is new about the game, then rage about it. Oh it won't be a bad game, don't get me wrong. Nothing is new or unique though.
So let me put it this way:
Are you going to blindly trust ANet even though you -know- they're lying through their teeth?
Or would you rather pull a wait and see with TOR? Bioware has been around for 20+ years and they aren't making any outlandish claims about anything they're doing.
If you want an honest assessment of either game then you need to go find gameplay footage and if it has any voiceovers from a producer telling you what's going on, then mute it. If it's just music and battle sounds you can leave it on. Don't let a producer sit there and lather up what you're seeing. Just watch the gameplay and REALLY pay attention to everything that is going on.
Look at skill bars, health/mana pools, animations and so on.
I honestly don't think either game will really create much of an atmosphere for community- even with GW2's dynamic events. We've gotten to a point where players just don't type to talk that much anymore due to players being used to ventrilo and teamspeak (or other such programs). I see it every day in Rift; I'll do an invasion or just warfronts and no one will say a thing (except possibly to criticize).
Even in the guild of RL friends I've been playing games with for years guild chat has pretty much gone away since we started paying for our own vent server. I think this is one of the reasons players are advised to look toward a guild if they seek community or socializing. It's not an issue with the games or whether they foster an atmosphere, it's a problem with players that have just grown lazy.
For some odd reason DE's remind me of instance dungeons without the dungeons.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
i dont think GW2 has any weaknesses. and GW2 does have raids...theyre called dynamic events. both are MMO's, so why cant they be compared?
Correct me if im wrong, but wont the personal story be instanced in GW2 like in AOC?
My son. The day you were born the very staff of Blizzard whispered the name, profit.
Everything has a weakness. Even Superman, everybody and their grandma was packing kryptonite. As we should all know by now that even strength and weakness can be subjective, so they should be taken with a grain of salt.
Doesn't this apply also to ANet and GW2? Devs can say anything, who knows if it'll be as good as they claim some features are. It's just that you've allowed yourself to be convinced by the ANet devs because you think it'll be a fun game for you, and you are sceptic when BW devs say things because you have trouble believing it'll be fun for you. Simply psychology.
But that doesn't change the fact that if you want to doubt devs' words, then you should dismiss everything devs say no matter if it's from a company/game you like or not.
Regarding the OP, we won't know how much features in an MMO game will have effect until they're live and see it in action. Many things can look great, but not be so much when we play it, and vice versa, things can look bland or seem to have little effect until we start playing and it all gels together.
Regarding the DE's, it can be like the casual grouping in Rift where it was thought useful and very handy, but often times only end up in grouping with strangers that after the job was done left without saying a word, just as they hadn't said a word before. A good feature doesn't mean that it automatically evokes community sense. People are what they are.
Regarding SWTOR, it has Heroic Quests in the open, it provides multiplayer dialogue for people to interact in a group even when doing questing, and so far all the people that grouped up playing together seem to have had a great experience, it all worked easily because of the many little things BW added to facilitate it (you'll remote distance be present via hologram if you went ahead to the merchant while another of your group engages the quest NPC for the reward, 1 of those little examples).
On a sidenote, it's interesting to see how much more GW2 fans keep popping up in SWTOR threads with those 'SWTOR vs GW2' comparison threads and posts, a lot more than SWTOR fans are doing this in the GW2 section. Seems to me that SWTOR fans are more respectful towards other people's choice and taste in the games they like than vice versa GW2 fans (or sandbox fans for that matter) are wont to do. Food for thought?
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I dont really see how either game is a community focused mmo. They are action/rpg games and that is fine. But both lack features like non instanced housing, player cities, and non combat crafting hardly makes them community focused games. These games severely lack diversity, which is the cornerstone of a vibrant community. Unless of course you think that playing an online game where everyone you meet pretty much has the exact same agenda as yourself is appealing.
Personally, I prefer my mmos to attract as many different types of people as possible. It makes for a much more rewarding and interesting experience. Its refreshing to meet someone in an mmo that is playing the game completely different than you.
I was commenting on your specific statement that TOR will be heavily instanced, not on group content. Loki666 is likely right, TOR will focus more on small groups until end game at which point you'll likely see raids take place. How big the raids will be nobody knows yet. In terms of pvp raids like what occurred in WoW when a faction raided the others capitol, there's no information on that except that if it takes place it won't be against the capitols since those are off limits to the opposing faction...at least at launch. I suspect that the player base will find open world pvp hot spots not unlike the Southshore/Terren MIll area in WoW.
I agree that ArenaNet is taking from public quesys in WAR but War's public quests sytem is so flawed upon disbelief. Not to mention WAR is a failed mmo. ArenaNet takes it to a whole new level and beyond. TOR on the other hand is really doing noting new whatsoever besides how their crafting works. Yes and we all play Star Wars just to craft right ?
List them.
I want to see bad previews of the game itself.
I have seen only one bad preview, which it complains how GW2 isn't a LOTRO clone.
Not really. The only thought that is really required is the realization that its the same person/people over and over.
I don't know what you are really asking for from the devs about community beyond some kind of forced grouping. Communities are formed by players and if you can't find like minded players to group with you either pug, solo or quit.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Two things:
1. What are you basing this off of OTHER than what Anet has claimed they are doing?
2. You DO realize that a single-player RPG experience that takes you from one town to another IS a themepark, right?
Example:
Ok, so you know the Witcher 2? It's a single-player epic rpg. It's also a themepark with a bit of sandbox.
You start off in one place and that has a bunch of quests you can grab and go out and do. It's also got these story line quests that require a choice that will affect where you end up next. You're just going from one themepark (a jungle) to another one (a battlefield camp).
Right now we don't know how the class stories in TOR will work. Similarly, we have no idea what these 'personal stories' in GW 2 actually are. We have vague idea given to us by producers, but producers often tell a fluffed-up version of the truth. It's not a lie, but it's not -exactly- the truth either.
As for Dynamic Events, read my post. And then go on youtube and find the Dynamic Event video. It looks and plays exactly like a Public Quest out of Warhammer. Perhaps more refined, but it's the same thing. I'm basic this off of actual gameplay footage that Anet has put out, not what they've claimed they're doing.
your everything is nothing really. DE's scale and are spawned randomly. once the chain of one event begins, it links into other chains. did i mention they scale?
I was speaking generally. There is no game that doesn't have something someone can say is wrong with it. Like I said, these things can be subjective as well. Such as I am probably going to prefer TOR over GW2 because I like Star Wars, BioWare, like the art style and like what I see as I've been following the game since it was announced, was even enticed when I heard the rumors of it being worked on in 2006. That's subjective, as it pertains to my interests and tastes.
That being said, I shouldn't have to make a list of strengths or weaknesses. I think it's up to the individual to decide which game tickles their fancy.
How do they scale?
More mobs? Tougher mobs? Better rewards?
Guess what?
WAR's PQ's do that too.
Anything else?
And just so I'm clear - I don't play WAR, but I'm smart enough to realize the similarities between systems here.
As for the whole 'spawning randomly' thing....wat? No they don't, at least not all of them. Go on youtube and find the DE video. The producer talking even says, 'You can tell from the smoke and flames here that they failed the first stage'. And he talks about how this SPECIFIC DE is about a pirate raiding a village. How would he know that if it's random?