If Bethesda did TOR we'd have hundreds of full explorable planets with one quest giver on each planet.
What?
I know that Oblivion and Fallout 3 were BIG hits but neither appealed to me. The "open world" feeling that they are praised for is a pox in my opinion. The worlds felt empty, drab and boring. I don't neccessarly need questgivers every 5 feet like some games but at a point 100s of miles of emptiness just is lame to me.
Bethesda games have never felt empty to me. There are always tons of little details at every bend. An area I was CERTAIN to finally be void of anything worth my time in Fallout 3 had me fighting a team of cannibals trying to pawn human flesh off on me. As I cleaned up from that fight I was immediately hounded by a Behemoth, and the fight with it sprawled half the map. Before I was even done, I found myself in a village of ghouls I had never seen in the 5 playthroughs I've done. I spent nearly 2 hours just picking through that area and fighting them, and the Robobrains near them, off. 2 locations out of 100's, and I was busy busy busy.
Lots of Bethesda games have mobile encounters. An area may be empty now...but a return trip will find you facing bandits and demons that pathed through the area later. Or abducted by aliens and having to fight your way home. Whatever.
To complete the OP, however....
If Bethesda made ToR...it would be massive and involved, and single player. Because they haven't even allowed us to multiplayer an Elder Scrolls game yet. Not even through a lobby set up. I'd kill for that. I'd probably never play an MMO again, actually, if they'd do such a thing. I'd rather just jam out Elder Scrolls with buddies.
I think the next Elder Scrolls game (The Elder Scrolls VI) should be an MMORPG with all of Tamriel, every square inch, in the game. The next Elder Scrolls game after that (TES VII) could then be single player again. Kinda like what Square did with FFXI.
I don't think that following the Square business model is a good ideal. Their quarterly reports suggest they make bad choices.
If Bethesda did TOR we'd have hundreds of full explorable planets with one quest giver on each planet.
What?
I know that Oblivion and Fallout 3 were BIG hits but neither appealed to me. The "open world" feeling that they are praised for is a pox in my opinion. The worlds felt empty, drab and boring. I don't neccessarly need questgivers every 5 feet like some games but at a point 100s of miles of emptiness just is lame to me.
Bethesda games have never felt empty to me. There are always tons of little details at every bend. An area I was CERTAIN to finally be void of anything worth my time in Fallout 3 had me fighting a team of cannibals trying to pawn human flesh off on me. As I cleaned up from that fight I was immediately hounded by a Behemoth, and the fight with it sprawled half the map. Before I was even done, I found myself in a village of ghouls I had never seen in the 5 playthroughs I've done. I spent nearly 2 hours just picking through that area and fighting them, and the Robobrains near them, off. 2 locations out of 100's, and I was busy busy busy.
Lots of Bethesda games have mobile encounters. An area may be empty now...but a return trip will find you facing bandits and demons that pathed through the area later. Or abducted by aliens and having to fight your way home. Whatever.
To complete the OP, however....
If Bethesda made ToR...it would be massive and involved, and single player. Because they haven't even allowed us to multiplayer an Elder Scrolls game yet. Not even through a lobby set up. I'd kill for that. I'd probably never play an MMO again, actually, if they'd do such a thing. I'd rather just jam out Elder Scrolls with buddies.
I think the next Elder Scrolls game (The Elder Scrolls VI) should be an MMORPG with all of Tamriel, every square inch, in the game. The next Elder Scrolls game after that (TES VII) could then be single player again. Kinda like what Square did with FFXI.
I don't think that following the Square business model is a good ideal. Their quarterly reports suggest they make bad choices.
Bad design choices, like not putting content in an MMO and including a mandatory 24-hour on-rails introduction on their single-player offering.
If Bethesda did TOR we'd have hundreds of full explorable planets with one quest giver on each planet.
What?
I know that Oblivion and Fallout 3 were BIG hits but neither appealed to me. The "open world" feeling that they are praised for is a pox in my opinion. The worlds felt empty, drab and boring. I don't neccessarly need questgivers every 5 feet like some games but at a point 100s of miles of emptiness just is lame to me.
Bethesda games have never felt empty to me. There are always tons of little details at every bend. An area I was CERTAIN to finally be void of anything worth my time in Fallout 3 had me fighting a team of cannibals trying to pawn human flesh off on me. As I cleaned up from that fight I was immediately hounded by a Behemoth, and the fight with it sprawled half the map. Before I was even done, I found myself in a village of ghouls I had never seen in the 5 playthroughs I've done. I spent nearly 2 hours just picking through that area and fighting them, and the Robobrains near them, off. 2 locations out of 100's, and I was busy busy busy.
Lots of Bethesda games have mobile encounters. An area may be empty now...but a return trip will find you facing bandits and demons that pathed through the area later. Or abducted by aliens and having to fight your way home. Whatever.
To complete the OP, however....
If Bethesda made ToR...it would be massive and involved, and single player. Because they haven't even allowed us to multiplayer an Elder Scrolls game yet. Not even through a lobby set up. I'd kill for that. I'd probably never play an MMO again, actually, if they'd do such a thing. I'd rather just jam out Elder Scrolls with buddies.
I think the next Elder Scrolls game (The Elder Scrolls VI) should be an MMORPG with all of Tamriel, every square inch, in the game. The next Elder Scrolls game after that (TES VII) could then be single player again. Kinda like what Square did with FFXI.
I don't think that following the Square business model is a good ideal. Their quarterly reports suggest they make bad choices.
The trick to avoid Square's recent mistakes is to NOT MAKE A BAD GAME. I think Square's losses are more attributable to FFXIV being a horrible game than a flawed business model. After all, FFXI wouldn't still be around after more than five years if it was a flawed business model.
If Bethesda did TOR we'd have hundreds of full explorable planets with one quest giver on each planet.
What?
I know that Oblivion and Fallout 3 were BIG hits but neither appealed to me. The "open world" feeling that they are praised for is a pox in my opinion. The worlds felt empty, drab and boring. I don't neccessarly need questgivers every 5 feet like some games but at a point 100s of miles of emptiness just is lame to me.
Bethesda games have never felt empty to me. There are always tons of little details at every bend. An area I was CERTAIN to finally be void of anything worth my time in Fallout 3 had me fighting a team of cannibals trying to pawn human flesh off on me. As I cleaned up from that fight I was immediately hounded by a Behemoth, and the fight with it sprawled half the map. Before I was even done, I found myself in a village of ghouls I had never seen in the 5 playthroughs I've done. I spent nearly 2 hours just picking through that area and fighting them, and the Robobrains near them, off. 2 locations out of 100's, and I was busy busy busy.
Lots of Bethesda games have mobile encounters. An area may be empty now...but a return trip will find you facing bandits and demons that pathed through the area later. Or abducted by aliens and having to fight your way home. Whatever.
To complete the OP, however....
If Bethesda made ToR...it would be massive and involved, and single player. Because they haven't even allowed us to multiplayer an Elder Scrolls game yet. Not even through a lobby set up. I'd kill for that. I'd probably never play an MMO again, actually, if they'd do such a thing. I'd rather just jam out Elder Scrolls with buddies.
I think the next Elder Scrolls game (The Elder Scrolls VI) should be an MMORPG with all of Tamriel, every square inch, in the game. The next Elder Scrolls game after that (TES VII) could then be single player again. Kinda like what Square did with FFXI.
And yea because they did so well with FF14 also, I dont think alot of you realize how hard it is to make an MMO but theres a reason why they have risk factors in the game industry and this is one of them. Why mess somthing up that doesnt need to be changed?
If Bethesda had their go at this IP, it would have made history and changed the way mmos are developed and played. Bioware will make a great game but it will be far from legendary. Story is great but freedom and "adventure" is even better. Being able to tell a story and give a sense of "freedom" is what Bioware lacks in all of their titles. Most of their games are very fun to play all the way through but only once. They always try to make up for their linear design by adding side quests that have multiple solutions, dialog or story, but the end content always ends up being the same. This is a big problem when you create a linear game. You can in many ways make it seem as if you have control of the direction of your path but at the end of the day it is very hard to create multiple end stories. Bethesda games have countless hours of reply value because even though there are story based objectives, the entire experience feels adventurous and gives the player a true sense that they have a little control over their destiny.
I believe Bethesda could have made a better game based upon their ability to "improve" their game design with each title. Bioware is using the same format that has seemingly worked for their linear RPGs. Tor is an mmorpg not an rpg. If you honestly believe story alone is going to provide longevity for this title, I highly disagree. Bioware needs to focus on creating a world that is engaging enough to want to play over and over again based upon unpredictable events and adventurous opportunities, not assuming their pre-determined paths will be enough to make us want to run the same scenario but with different answers or story direction.
Tor will be fun, it may even become the mmo of choice (for a while) but stop deceiving yourselves into believing that it will be revolutionary. They have your money now, feeding us mediocrity and everyone screams "hell yah" because it is Star Wars. I am very excited to see a polished Star Wars mmo being produced in our modern day, but this one has not utilized the full opportunity for greatness. Oh, well...
Or you could have just said, "I want Galaxies part two...".
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
If Bethesda did TOR we'd have hundreds of full explorable planets with one quest giver on each planet.
What?
I know that Oblivion and Fallout 3 were BIG hits but neither appealed to me. The "open world" feeling that they are praised for is a pox in my opinion. The worlds felt empty, drab and boring. I don't neccessarly need questgivers every 5 feet like some games but at a point 100s of miles of emptiness just is lame to me.
Bethesda games have never felt empty to me. There are always tons of little details at every bend. An area I was CERTAIN to finally be void of anything worth my time in Fallout 3 had me fighting a team of cannibals trying to pawn human flesh off on me. As I cleaned up from that fight I was immediately hounded by a Behemoth, and the fight with it sprawled half the map. Before I was even done, I found myself in a village of ghouls I had never seen in the 5 playthroughs I've done. I spent nearly 2 hours just picking through that area and fighting them, and the Robobrains near them, off. 2 locations out of 100's, and I was busy busy busy.
Lots of Bethesda games have mobile encounters. An area may be empty now...but a return trip will find you facing bandits and demons that pathed through the area later. Or abducted by aliens and having to fight your way home. Whatever.
To complete the OP, however....
If Bethesda made ToR...it would be massive and involved, and single player. Because they haven't even allowed us to multiplayer an Elder Scrolls game yet. Not even through a lobby set up. I'd kill for that. I'd probably never play an MMO again, actually, if they'd do such a thing. I'd rather just jam out Elder Scrolls with buddies.
I think the next Elder Scrolls game (The Elder Scrolls VI) should be an MMORPG with all of Tamriel, every square inch, in the game. The next Elder Scrolls game after that (TES VII) could then be single player again. Kinda like what Square did with FFXI.
And yea because they did so well with FF14 also, I dont think alot of you realize how hard it is to make an MMO but theres a reason why they have risk factors in the game industry and this is one of them. Why mess somthing up that doesnt need to be changed?
I have supreme confidence that an MMO made by Bethesda would truly be epic. I imagine a TES MMO would be like a more sandboxy SWTOR (but set in Tamriel of course.) I also want Bioware to make a Mass Effect MMO.
Just because Square crapped out in their latest MMO offering doesn't mean everyone will. I also think that FFXI was and is a great game. I had the most fun in FFXI than any MMO I've ever played.
If Bethesda did TOR we'd have hundreds of full explorable planets with one quest giver on each planet.
What?
I know that Oblivion and Fallout 3 were BIG hits but neither appealed to me. The "open world" feeling that they are praised for is a pox in my opinion. The worlds felt empty, drab and boring. I don't neccessarly need questgivers every 5 feet like some games but at a point 100s of miles of emptiness just is lame to me.
You're exaggerating a bit there, there was plenty to find in the way of questing in those worlds, far more than you find in a Bioware title. The main story and guild systems of Oblivion/morrowind alone, make up for far more gameplay/questing/story telling, than say what you find in ME1 or 2. In many cases quantity is lesser than quality. However, there isn't that far of a quality difference between the two. If you take into account how much more fleshed out Bethesda lore is in regard to the TES series; as well as the people/organizations within are typically given much more focus on making them non static beings. I think FO games are great, but I feel they are weak attempts at using the TEs forumla, which IMO FO deserves more effrort than that..
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
I think Bethesda is capable of pulling off a good story. They probably can't do it as well as BioWare, but for sure Bethesda would be more innovative, even if just slightly.
I tend to find BioWare games as tradional RPG's with incredible stories. Bethesda games tend to be more innovative, but not really clean or polished. TES has a lot features that no other games had until recently. Brink has a mini-parkour like style that most FPS don't have. Bethesda just like to do different. The problem is, their story was either generic or VERY short, as with Brink.
I think Bethesda is capable of pulling off a good story. They probably can't do it as well as BioWare, but for sure Bethesda would be more innovative, even if just slightly.
I tend to find BioWare games as tradional RPG's with incredible stories. Bethesda games tend to be more innovative, but not really clean or polished. TES has a lot features that no other games had until recently. Brink has a mini-parkour like style that most FPS don't have. Bethesda just like to do different. The problem is, their story was either generic or VERY short, as with Brink.
BRINK is developed by Splash damage, published by Bethesda, so Bethesda haven't had much innovation credit in that one.
As for Elder Scrolls, and fallout, while I praised their giant world and sandbox feel to the game, I don't really like the two games, sure you can say Skyrim has much better graphics and all that, I will still have to wait till it comes out to give that one a judgement, just like how people should wait till SWTOR to at least come out to make a judgment on that game. Looking at Fallout and Oblivion, I can't say Bethesda is any more innovative than Bioware, at least Mass Effect 2 tried to bring more shooter elements to their game. (pls don't say Oblivion and Fallout has Shooter controls, their 'shooting' is so horrible than I would just rather play point and click as a shooter)
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW? As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
Biggest issue would be that Bethesda won't be able to do what they do best in an MMO game, which is to create a sandbox that a player can have a large impact on.
In an MMO where you expect to play in the same 'sever/shard/instance' with thousands of other people, the impact a single player can do in the game world has to be small.
I'm trying to imagine one of the Elder Scrolls series where the player doesn't have much impact in the game world and just shake my head at the absolute bore-fest it'll be.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Biggest issue would be that Bethesda won't be able to do what they do best in an MMO game, which is to create a sandbox that a player can have a large impact on.
Are you saying that Bethesda couldn't do with Star Wars what Arenanet is doing with GW2? I'm not sure I agree that they "couldn't" do that. They may not have the money and experience to do it though.
Biggest issue would be that Bethesda won't be able to do what they do best in an MMO game, which is to create a sandbox that a player can have a large impact on.
Are you saying that Bethesda couldn't do with Star Wars what Arenanet is doing with GW2? I'm not sure I agree that they "couldn't" do that. They may not have the money and experience to do it though.
If we take an extreme example, if I kill an NPC in the ES series, that NPC is dead and not coming back.
Should that happen in an MMO?
What if that NPC is one of the tutorial guys?
Did I just screw up every new player that is going to play this game?
I'm not saying they can't do it, I'm saying the 'sandboxy' MMO doesn't adhere to their strenghts at all.
The fact that the ES series is absolutely attrocious in terms of char/plot doesn't help either.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Don't get me wrong, I love Bethesda. I'm the first in line for every game they put outt. They design some outstanding and unique sandbox games... But the fact that the modding community pretty much had to completely gut nearly every game system in Oblivion to fix the absolute dumb game design decisions should tell you a little something about Bethesda. They aren't all peaches and cream.
They do some things well. And they do some things absolutely atrociously. Maybe they've learned, but we'll have to wait til Skyrim to find out.
They also routinely release single player games with tons of bug issues... I can't imagine how bad a multiplayer game would end up.
I don't think i care much for opinion of random people here who never even worked in a gaming industry and doesn't qualify them in any manner to tell a well established company like Bethesda what they can or can not do. But that is the fun part of internet. Anyone with a keyboard and mouse is an expert.
Biggest issue would be that Bethesda won't be able to do what they do best in an MMO game, which is to create a sandbox that a player can have a large impact on.
Are you saying that Bethesda couldn't do with Star Wars what Arenanet is doing with GW2? I'm not sure I agree that they "couldn't" do that. They may not have the money and experience to do it though.
I'm not saying they can't do it, I'm saying the 'sandboxy' MMO doesn't adhere to their strenghts at all.
The fact that the ES series is absolutely attrocious in terms of char/plot doesn't help either.
But that's not the argument that you made before... nevermind. I don't care enough to continue this conversation.
UM actually ToR is a LucasArts Game. Bio are only the producers for say along with EA. So any grief about it not being up to Par should be directed at LucasArts not Bio.
TY
ya, dont direct any wuality isseus towards the company that actually makes teh game....great logic there.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling" Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
While i agree that Bethesda would make the world bigger and more "open", it'd fail in the story and chracter development.
I don't recall any characters worth mentioning from both Oblivion and Fallout 3. The plot in both games seemed pretty bland too, even though the concept was nice.
Mass Effect, KOTOR and Dragon Age series however- they have amazing characters and brilliant storytelling. There's also a whole lot of plot twists, so in the end you never know what to expect.
With that being said, i love Bethesda games. Ironically though, their vast and huge worlds seem lifeless at times.
I don't think i care much for opinion of random people here who never even worked in a gaming industry and doesn't qualify them in any manner to tell a well established company like Bethesda what they can or can not do. But that is the fun part of internet. Anyone with a keyboard and mouse is an expert.
Do you need to be a cook to be able to judge food? But if anyone that can provide a sustaniable cause and effect argument, I don't see why their opinion shouldn't be valued. And yes, most of the internet doesn't have that.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW? As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
I don't think i care much for opinion of random people here who never even worked in a gaming industry and doesn't qualify them in any manner to tell a well established company like Bethesda what they can or can not do. But that is the fun part of internet. Anyone with a keyboard and mouse is an expert.
Nobody is more fit to judge a company than it's customers.
Nothing in their gaming history tells me they could make a out of the box revolutionary game.
I have to honestly ask myself if a lot of people here even have experience with RPGs. Bethesda is considered by many one of the leading developers for RPGs. Just look at the success of Skyrim not to mention their success with Oblivion and Fall Out 3.
Bioware may have done a decent job with SWTOR but Bethesda would have accomplished "revolutionary" feats. Too bad they do not do mmos.
UM actually ToR is a LucasArts Game. Bio are only the producers for say along with EA. So any grief about it not being up to Par should be directed at LucasArts not Bio.
TY
Bioware are the developers, Bioware made the game. If lucasarts developed the game, you should be very worried.
Comments
I don't think that following the Square business model is a good ideal. Their quarterly reports suggest they make bad choices.
Bad design choices, like not putting content in an MMO and including a mandatory 24-hour on-rails introduction on their single-player offering.
The trick to avoid Square's recent mistakes is to NOT MAKE A BAD GAME. I think Square's losses are more attributable to FFXIV being a horrible game than a flawed business model. After all, FFXI wouldn't still be around after more than five years if it was a flawed business model.
Edit: Yeah, what skeaser said.
And yea because they did so well with FF14 also, I dont think alot of you realize how hard it is to make an MMO but theres a reason why they have risk factors in the game industry and this is one of them. Why mess somthing up that doesnt need to be changed?
Or you could have just said, "I want Galaxies part two...".
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
I have supreme confidence that an MMO made by Bethesda would truly be epic. I imagine a TES MMO would be like a more sandboxy SWTOR (but set in Tamriel of course.) I also want Bioware to make a Mass Effect MMO.
Just because Square crapped out in their latest MMO offering doesn't mean everyone will. I also think that FFXI was and is a great game. I had the most fun in FFXI than any MMO I've ever played.
You're exaggerating a bit there, there was plenty to find in the way of questing in those worlds, far more than you find in a Bioware title. The main story and guild systems of Oblivion/morrowind alone, make up for far more gameplay/questing/story telling, than say what you find in ME1 or 2. In many cases quantity is lesser than quality. However, there isn't that far of a quality difference between the two. If you take into account how much more fleshed out Bethesda lore is in regard to the TES series; as well as the people/organizations within are typically given much more focus on making them non static beings. I think FO games are great, but I feel they are weak attempts at using the TEs forumla, which IMO FO deserves more effrort than that..
To SB fans, please stop making our demographic look bad.Stop invading threads that have nothing to do with sandboxes.
SW:TOR Graphics Evolution and Comparison
SW:TOR Compare MMO Quests, Combat and More...
I think Bethesda is capable of pulling off a good story. They probably can't do it as well as BioWare, but for sure Bethesda would be more innovative, even if just slightly.
I tend to find BioWare games as tradional RPG's with incredible stories. Bethesda games tend to be more innovative, but not really clean or polished. TES has a lot features that no other games had until recently. Brink has a mini-parkour like style that most FPS don't have. Bethesda just like to do different. The problem is, their story was either generic or VERY short, as with Brink.
BRINK is developed by Splash damage, published by Bethesda, so Bethesda haven't had much innovation credit in that one.
As for Elder Scrolls, and fallout, while I praised their giant world and sandbox feel to the game, I don't really like the two games, sure you can say Skyrim has much better graphics and all that, I will still have to wait till it comes out to give that one a judgement, just like how people should wait till SWTOR to at least come out to make a judgment on that game. Looking at Fallout and Oblivion, I can't say Bethesda is any more innovative than Bioware, at least Mass Effect 2 tried to bring more shooter elements to their game. (pls don't say Oblivion and Fallout has Shooter controls, their 'shooting' is so horrible than I would just rather play point and click as a shooter)
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
Biggest issue would be that Bethesda won't be able to do what they do best in an MMO game, which is to create a sandbox that a player can have a large impact on.
In an MMO where you expect to play in the same 'sever/shard/instance' with thousands of other people, the impact a single player can do in the game world has to be small.
I'm trying to imagine one of the Elder Scrolls series where the player doesn't have much impact in the game world and just shake my head at the absolute bore-fest it'll be.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Are you saying that Bethesda couldn't do with Star Wars what Arenanet is doing with GW2? I'm not sure I agree that they "couldn't" do that. They may not have the money and experience to do it though.
If we take an extreme example, if I kill an NPC in the ES series, that NPC is dead and not coming back.
Should that happen in an MMO?
What if that NPC is one of the tutorial guys?
Did I just screw up every new player that is going to play this game?
I'm not saying they can't do it, I'm saying the 'sandboxy' MMO doesn't adhere to their strenghts at all.
The fact that the ES series is absolutely attrocious in terms of char/plot doesn't help either.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Don't get me wrong, I love Bethesda. I'm the first in line for every game they put outt. They design some outstanding and unique sandbox games... But the fact that the modding community pretty much had to completely gut nearly every game system in Oblivion to fix the absolute dumb game design decisions should tell you a little something about Bethesda. They aren't all peaches and cream.
They do some things well. And they do some things absolutely atrociously. Maybe they've learned, but we'll have to wait til Skyrim to find out.
They also routinely release single player games with tons of bug issues... I can't imagine how bad a multiplayer game would end up.
I don't think i care much for opinion of random people here who never even worked in a gaming industry and doesn't qualify them in any manner to tell a well established company like Bethesda what they can or can not do. But that is the fun part of internet. Anyone with a keyboard and mouse is an expert.
But that's not the argument that you made before... nevermind. I don't care enough to continue this conversation.
ya, dont direct any wuality isseus towards the company that actually makes teh game....great logic there.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling"
Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
While i agree that Bethesda would make the world bigger and more "open", it'd fail in the story and chracter development.
I don't recall any characters worth mentioning from both Oblivion and Fallout 3. The plot in both games seemed pretty bland too, even though the concept was nice.
Mass Effect, KOTOR and Dragon Age series however- they have amazing characters and brilliant storytelling. There's also a whole lot of plot twists, so in the end you never know what to expect.
With that being said, i love Bethesda games. Ironically though, their vast and huge worlds seem lifeless at times.
I'm a dude. I do stuff.
Nothing in their gaming history tells me they could make a out of the box revolutionary game.
Do you need to be a cook to be able to judge food? But if anyone that can provide a sustaniable cause and effect argument, I don't see why their opinion shouldn't be valued. And yes, most of the internet doesn't have that.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
Nobody is more fit to judge a company than it's customers.I have to honestly ask myself if a lot of people here even have experience with RPGs. Bethesda is considered by many one of the leading developers for RPGs. Just look at the success of Skyrim not to mention their success with Oblivion and Fall Out 3.
Bioware may have done a decent job with SWTOR but Bethesda would have accomplished "revolutionary" feats. Too bad they do not do mmos.
this thread is pointless, just another TOR bashing thread
If Bethesda did TOR it would have more bugs than Starship troopers.
Bioware are the developers, Bioware made the game. If lucasarts developed the game, you should be very worried.
If Bethesda did SWTOR ...
I'd roll an Operative and backstab people for 30 x weapon damage.
My brand new bloggity blog.