Shows how little people know about game making company's.
While lead programmers and writers work on multiple tittles at a time the grunds do most of the actual work ,the nameless faces that code and design day in and out like a random canning food production company does.
EA is a big big company and there is no lack of funding toward SW:ToR and other "Ionic" bioware games. there are mutiple tittles in the works.
Do you honestly expect me to believe that the resources devoted to SWTOR wouldn't be making something else if SWTOR was never made ?
Sure, BW made other games, they made ME2, they made a horribly rushed DA2. But if they didn't make SWTOR the resources doing it would have very likely made KOTOR3. Heck, it would probably even have an expansion or two as this point. DA2 also probably wouldn't have been terrible.
Yes, companies have lots of resources, but those resources are FINITE. Talented resources are also pretty rare. BW is not just some infinite pool of resources that you put money in and churns out games. There are only so many talented people to go around.
Yes. Mainly because they founded Bioware Austin, which they never would have done if they weren't developing an MMO, and they had to sell the company to EA to fund SWTOR which they never would have done if they never made an MMO.
DA2 was rushed, but I think that had absolutely nothing to do with TOR and instead had to do with them simply not giving themselves enough time to make it. They seem to have learned their lesson as they delayed ME3 by six months.
And as someone pointed out, they made ME 1 and 2 and DA 1 and 2 in the time they were making TOR so they haven't decreased their output of single player games at all.
Heheh so you're saying that if BW didn't start making SWTOR, they never would have had to sell the company to EA? Yeah I would have taken that in a hot second .
It doesn't always happen, but oftentimes when business merge together, something just goes wrong and they fail. In fact, the failure rate of business mergers/acquisitions has been estimated somewhere between 50% - 80%(http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=532857 ).
For some reason, businesses just have a hard time of holding on to what made them successful after they merge or are acquired. I hope this doesn't happen to BW, but it's a real possibility. BW has already got a lot of flack for dumbing their games down to try to make them appeal to a larger audience. I definitely saw this with DA2. I can't say that it was EA's influence that caused the issues with DA2, but they were definitely there.
Also, expansion is another thing that some business don't survive well. Some business are able to expand their operations brilliantly and keep up their standard of quality, whereas the products of other businesses start to lack in quality after the business expands.
Remember that all "Bioware" is, is a brand name. There is no magic power in that name other than consumer perception. If Bioware decides to expand into another location and call it "Bioware Austin" then it is up to the management of Bioware to actually instill the corporate culture and values that make Bioware successful into its new location. This site has some good info on the problems typically encountered in business expansion: http://www.enotes.com/small-business-encyclopedia/business-expansion.
Basically what I'm saying is...a game developer is not an infinite font of games. If they make a decision to start a big project it will have an impact. Either they can do their big project and not do other projects they were planning or they can expand.
Expanding has risks associated with it, and requires a lot of capital. Capital that must often be obtained through selling equity, incurring debt, or being acquired. All of these have risks associated with them as well.
Nothing is free.
What does that have to do with what I said? The founders of Bioware confirmed that they sold their company to EA to fund TOR, they also became senior vice-presidents of EA. If TOR turns out to be huge it could potentially make the Bioware division of EA the most profitable part of the company, which means even more corporate power for Bioware's CEOs. This could very well turn out to be a Pixar buying Disney type acquisition. (For those too lazy to read, Disney bought Pixar, but it then turned out that Pixar's largest shareholder, Steve Jobs, became the largest single shareholder of Disney stock. Key Pixar personelle were put in charge of Disney's main operations, and Steve Jobs and other Pixar higher ups got seats on Disney's board of directors. Thus while Disney bought Pixar, Pixar took over Disney.)
Also, there seems to be a lot of cross pollination between Bioware Edmonton and Bioware Austin (and Bioware Mythic for that matter,) the higher ups at Bioware are assured their positions at Bioware and are in powerful positions at EA, they even control and make all the decisions for EA's RPG/MMORPG division.
I also thought ME2 was way better than ME1 in almost every way. I didn't appreciate the game as much the first playthrough, but on the second I appreciated it a lot more. Dragon Age: Origins blew me away. It was such an amazing game. Both those games were made after the EA acquisition.
Yes, but let's say they kept the same budget they have had and same number of people working on it and realeased it all at once and it launched in let's say 2016... that would still probably be about the same pace as SWTOR launching in 2011 or 2012 with its budget and staff. But again you miss the point of this discussion because for some reason you want to argue about Blizzard vs. BW when that doesn't seem to have anything to do with the OP's point or mine for that matter.
My point is that Bioware, WHILE working on a massive MMORPG, is STILL making single player games FAR faster than Blizzard is. So the OP's point is moot when Bioware is compared to the next leading competitor.
You point that Starcraft 2 taking AS LONG AS Bioware is with their massive MMORPG PROVES my point.
But what about the quality of those games. Another poster stated that BW was acquired by EA basically because SWTOR was costing too much. And yet another poster confirmed that EA was behind DA2 being a rush job (http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/988966-/58405733 ).
So right there, it looks like SWTOR is ultimately behind the drop in quality of one of BW's big titles. SWTOR caused the EA buyout...EA caused the DA2 rush-job.
So yeah, they are still coming out with SPRPGS because it is profitable for EA to produce SPRPGS which have the Bioware name and are Bioware's IPs. Does this mean that those SPRPGs will be of the same quality and have the same features that we have come to know and love from Bioware? I'm not sure, I hope so, but DA2 has definitely given me doubts.
I actually plan on this game being the biggest thing since sliced bread.
Maybe I'm dellusional, maybe I'm a prophet.
As long as ME3 is also amazing and a fitting end to the epic trilogy, then no, I don't care that they made TOR instead of KOTOR 3 as long TOR is good and ME3 is good and DA3 is good.
Yes I believe they should have just stuck to what they are good at. I do not see this being a run away hit other than at launch and maybe the first 6 months after. I think year over yearr numbers will be disappointing.
Well maybe they're good at making mmoRPG's, guess we'll just have to wait and see
Okay, so I really do not mean to rile up anyone with this thread, I just want to see how people feel about this.
I love Bioware and I love many of their games. I spent I don't know how long on BG2, NWN, and KOTOR; I really regard these games as some of the greatest RPGs ever.
I'm looking forward to SWTOR as well, but I can't help but wish that BW would have made more single player games instead of devoting so much time and resources to an MMORPG. The thing I'm looking forward to the most in SWTOR is the single player aspect of the game, the story. The MMORPG aspect of the game doesn't really excite me that much.
I worry a bit that the story for SWTOR may not be as "epic" and fleshed out as the story of a single player game simply because you can't really be the center of the universe in an MMORPG. Instead of playing as "Commander Shepard" or the son of Bhaal, you're going to be playing as "Smuggler" or "Jedi."
So in conclusion, I'm probably going to enjoy SWTOR, but I think I would have enjoyed the "I don't know how many" SPRPGs that BW would have made if they didn't do SWTOR much more.
Thoughts? Opinions?
I right there with you man. When Bioware first announced that they were working on an Old Republic MMORPG, which would be story-based, with full voice-over, and 3 KOTOR games worth of content, I was hyped. But then I started seeing gameplay videos and it's the same old MMORPG combat, with a watered down story. I'd of rather had KOTOR quality story telling in a spRPG, than a MMORPG with watered down content, and the same old same old formula we've been playing for almost a decade.
The problem is, judging by Biowares trend of dumbing down their games and snipping away at exploration, I doubt their single player RPG's would be that good. I think Mass Effect was their last great game. Dragon Age's story and etc. wasn't bad, but exploration wasn't great either. The story and exploration sucked in Dragon Age 2. There was less exploration in DA2 than in 1 if that was even possible.
Where are you getting information to support that the story is "watered down"?? I certainly havn't seen anything to support this at all.
In fact, Drew Karpyshan is one of the people working on the stories for this game....this would seem to shoot several LARGE holes in your "watered down" story theory, eh?
From the gameplay vids. Compare the story from KOTOR to SWTOR. KOTOR felt epic every step of the way, whereas the vids I've seen so far of SWTOR aren't that epic.
Ah, ok.....so you're basing your opinion off from videos posted by people who are trying REALLY hard to avoid releasing spoilers before release.....gotcha.
Well.....all I can really say without breaking the NDA is......you're gonna have to wait and see
Well the only way to truly "know" is to play it for myself and I most certainly will. I definitely hope I'm wrong. I'm still disgruntled over the gameplay though. Not necessarily the combat system, since it isn't that different from KoToR, but in KOTOR you were a badass, killing groups of enemies in 2 shots. I'd Force Stasis them, and then Force Lightning and they'd all die. That made sense, since I was a Sith Lord, whereas I feel the power players wield in SWTOR is pretty weak, which I understand is done for balancing reasons, but if SWTOR was instead a KOTOR 3 game, they wouldn't have had to worry about balance.
I honestly think you will be pleasantly surprised once you get your hands on it.
I am a major fan of KOTOR and it's sequel, and (I can say this without breaking NDA) I friggin LOVE SWTOR.
Yes, but let's say they kept the same budget they have had and same number of people working on it and realeased it all at once and it launched in let's say 2016... that would still probably be about the same pace as SWTOR launching in 2011 or 2012 with its budget and staff. But again you miss the point of this discussion because for some reason you want to argue about Blizzard vs. BW when that doesn't seem to have anything to do with the OP's point or mine for that matter.
My point is that Bioware, WHILE working on a massive MMORPG, is STILL making single player games FAR faster than Blizzard is. So the OP's point is moot when Bioware is compared to the next leading competitor.
You point that Starcraft 2 taking AS LONG AS Bioware is with their massive MMORPG PROVES my point.
But what about the quality of those games. Another poster stated that BW was acquired by EA basically because SWTOR was costing too much. And yet another poster confirmed that EA was behind DA2 being a rush job (http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/988966-/58405733 ).
So right there, it looks like SWTOR is ultimately behind the drop in quality of one of BW's big titles. SWTOR caused the EA buyout...EA caused the DA2 rush-job.
So yeah, they are still coming out with SPRPGS because it is profitable for EA to produce SPRPGS which have the Bioware name and are Bioware's IPs. Does this mean that those SPRPGs will be of the same quality and have the same features that we have come to know and love from Bioware? I'm not sure, I hope so, but DA2 has definitely given me doubts.
Wait a post about the score being rushed means the entire game was rushed? I didn't take you to be this kind of poster, I guess everyone shows their true colors in the end.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Yes, but let's say they kept the same budget they have had and same number of people working on it and realeased it all at once and it launched in let's say 2016... that would still probably be about the same pace as SWTOR launching in 2011 or 2012 with its budget and staff. But again you miss the point of this discussion because for some reason you want to argue about Blizzard vs. BW when that doesn't seem to have anything to do with the OP's point or mine for that matter.
My point is that Bioware, WHILE working on a massive MMORPG, is STILL making single player games FAR faster than Blizzard is. So the OP's point is moot when Bioware is compared to the next leading competitor.
You point that Starcraft 2 taking AS LONG AS Bioware is with their massive MMORPG PROVES my point.
But what about the quality of those games. Another poster stated that BW was acquired by EA basically because SWTOR was costing too much. And yet another poster confirmed that EA was behind DA2 being a rush job (http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/988966-/58405733 ).
So right there, it looks like SWTOR is ultimately behind the drop in quality of one of BW's big titles. SWTOR caused the EA buyout...EA caused the DA2 rush-job.
So yeah, they are still coming out with SPRPGS because it is profitable for EA to produce SPRPGS which have the Bioware name and are Bioware's IPs. Does this mean that those SPRPGs will be of the same quality and have the same features that we have come to know and love from Bioware? I'm not sure, I hope so, but DA2 has definitely given me doubts.
No one has a flawless record. For a reputable and beloved company like Bioware to suddenly lose so much of it's vaunted status in the industry over a single disappointing game (DA2) seems ludicrous at best and even more far fetched in equating it to a potential MMO flop. EA has a bad reputation and yet they're the ones, right along with Bioware, who have been delaying TOR's release in order to get it right. That speaks volumes about their commitment and sheds a dirty light on all of the haters of both the game and the companies making the game and footing the bill.
I can only be honest and admit that I never played a Bioware game yet*
But I really look forward to playing Swtor, so the answer = no. Happy that they are developing Swtor.
*Was too damn busy playing EVE, WOW, GW, AOC, WAR, LOTRO, Fallen Earth, Gran Tourismo, GTA's, Diablo II, Titan Quest, X3 Reunion, Fallouts and Elder Scrolls in the past 13 years or so. I just didn't have the time to play anything else. I'm really very sorry.
I do love single player games. My favorite game of all time is Mass Effect 2. I am concerned about SWTOR, but I think it's because I'm not a huge Star Wars fan. Time will tell.....
Having not played any MMO for a while, I am really looking towards TOR to get back in the scene and play with friends/family. I haven't played completely through a Bioware game since Jade Empire and thats 2005. Never gave Mass Effect a chance (may get around to that), and I wasn't impressed enough with Dragon Age to continue playing.
Yes, but let's say they kept the same budget they have had and same number of people working on it and realeased it all at once and it launched in let's say 2016... that would still probably be about the same pace as SWTOR launching in 2011 or 2012 with its budget and staff. But again you miss the point of this discussion because for some reason you want to argue about Blizzard vs. BW when that doesn't seem to have anything to do with the OP's point or mine for that matter.
My point is that Bioware, WHILE working on a massive MMORPG, is STILL making single player games FAR faster than Blizzard is. So the OP's point is moot when Bioware is compared to the next leading competitor.
You point that Starcraft 2 taking AS LONG AS Bioware is with their massive MMORPG PROVES my point.
But what about the quality of those games. Another poster stated that BW was acquired by EA basically because SWTOR was costing too much. And yet another poster confirmed that EA was behind DA2 being a rush job (http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/988966-/58405733 ).
So right there, it looks like SWTOR is ultimately behind the drop in quality of one of BW's big titles. SWTOR caused the EA buyout...EA caused the DA2 rush-job.
So yeah, they are still coming out with SPRPGS because it is profitable for EA to produce SPRPGS which have the Bioware name and are Bioware's IPs. Does this mean that those SPRPGs will be of the same quality and have the same features that we have come to know and love from Bioware? I'm not sure, I hope so, but DA2 has definitely given me doubts.
Wait a post about the score being rushed means the entire game was rushed? I didn't take you to be this kind of poster, I guess everyone shows their true colors in the end.
Yeah the guy posting was talking about the score, but they also said that EA wanted to get DA2 out as fast as possible to capitalize off of Origins. So yeah, this sounds like they rushed it to me. EA had a deadline they wanted to make, they pushed the game out then.
Regardless of who rushed it though, DA2 was obviously rushed. Using the same map for like 20 different dungeons? Come on, that's not something we should expect from Bioware.
Before BW was acquired by EA, I never knew them to push any games out that cut corners like DA2 did.
Oh and if you want even more corruption? PC Gamer gets an "exclusive" review of the game that gets published first before other reviews get a chance to review the game. And they heap praise on the game, giving it a 94%, when its metascore actually wound up being 79% after a few weeks. Coincidence? Maybe, but I doubt it.
I bought the game partially based on this review and basically felt lied too. They didn't cover any of the negative things about the game at all.
Yes, but let's say they kept the same budget they have had and same number of people working on it and realeased it all at once and it launched in let's say 2016... that would still probably be about the same pace as SWTOR launching in 2011 or 2012 with its budget and staff. But again you miss the point of this discussion because for some reason you want to argue about Blizzard vs. BW when that doesn't seem to have anything to do with the OP's point or mine for that matter.
My point is that Bioware, WHILE working on a massive MMORPG, is STILL making single player games FAR faster than Blizzard is. So the OP's point is moot when Bioware is compared to the next leading competitor.
You point that Starcraft 2 taking AS LONG AS Bioware is with their massive MMORPG PROVES my point.
But what about the quality of those games. Another poster stated that BW was acquired by EA basically because SWTOR was costing too much. And yet another poster confirmed that EA was behind DA2 being a rush job (http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/988966-/58405733 ).
So right there, it looks like SWTOR is ultimately behind the drop in quality of one of BW's big titles. SWTOR caused the EA buyout...EA caused the DA2 rush-job.
So yeah, they are still coming out with SPRPGS because it is profitable for EA to produce SPRPGS which have the Bioware name and are Bioware's IPs. Does this mean that those SPRPGs will be of the same quality and have the same features that we have come to know and love from Bioware? I'm not sure, I hope so, but DA2 has definitely given me doubts.
No one has a flawless record. For a reputable and beloved company like Bioware to suddenly lose so much of it's vaunted status in the industry over a single disappointing game (DA2) seems ludicrous at best and even more far fetched in equating it to a potential MMO flop. EA has a bad reputation and yet they're the ones, right along with Bioware, who have been delaying TOR's release in order to get it right. That speaks volumes about their commitment and sheds a dirty light on all of the haters of both the game and the companies making the game and footing the bill.
That's the thing about reality though. You do 1000 good things and people love you. You do a SINGLE bad thing, and you're hated.
Reputations are very hard to build and very easy to destroy. If BW games with light and dark side points wanted to be more like reality, it would be very hard to get a lot of light side points, but you could get max dark side points in like 5 minutes.
It works like this is almost anything you do. If a teacher loses it once and slaps an unruly student, they will be fired and probably never work again (depending on the neighborhood of course ). It doesn't matter how many students they guided, mentored, or inspired. How many hours they worked extra to help students excel. One F' up and you're gone.
So yeah, I think DA2 damaged BW's reputation. Not to an unrecoverable level by any means, but it caused a lot of people to lose absolute faith in them. I used to buy almost every BW game just because it was BW. Now I will be more cautious and wait for more (unbought) reviews to pile in.
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?"
You've given some of the reasons by yourself already
inventory = RPG feature removing it is more fpslike dumbed down RPG
don't tell me you didn't like upgrading your weapons? It was somewhat cool and brought some depth into your armory
what about persuade points instead of using your light/dark or grey side
how about the level design Bioware just can't get away from their "level on rails philosophy" but ME 2 topped that.
compare ME 2 with KOTOR in terms of customization and freedom its another level even ME 1 had at least some RPG features you'd expect from a game labeled as one.
So yes in my mind ME 2 is not a RPG its a dumbe down RPG shooter made for a wider audience (pissing off the fans) cause of EA pressure.
The inventory in ME1 was annoying! Too much crap to sort through and no good way to do it, but yes they shouldn't have just completely gutted it.
ME3 looks to have much better weapon/armor customization then both ME1 and ME2 combined!
I think Bioware is a company that is not afraid to try new things and learn from them.
I don't think they intentionally "dumb down" anything, they however try to eliminate the unneccessary bits that are really just annoyances.
Problem is, sometimes they axe something that maybe they felt was annoying but the fans loved, so then the NEXT time they learn from that and make it better.
I did like all the exploration and side-quests in ME 1 though, hopefully they bring more of that back for ME3 because yeah, two was a bit lacking for side content - but I feel there was a lot more there for the "main" story in ME1.
I always feel people overvalue the inventory systems relevence to an rpg. I find games, like ME1, that have tons of inventory options and vendor trash to be a little annoying, but I respect that others think it adds layers to the game. However, there are players like my wife who love playing bioware games for the characters and the story and who could not stand the inventory system in ME1. In fact she made me go through all the junk and upgrade and sell it after a few missions. The system in ME2 was perfectly suited for players like her and her sister who arn't interested in spending tons of time looking through inventory lists figuring out if one of the 25 guns you picked up is an upgrade. So, bioware has to figure out to which type of player they will tailor their inventory system. And it seems their philosophy seems to be story>gameplay>everything else, so they chose to go with a more simple system which appeals to a lot of players, but clearly not all.
I also prefered the side quests in ME2 since they were all unique, as opposed to those in ME1 and DA2. In the latter games the story of the quest may have been unique but the map was typically recycled as were the enemies. ME2 didn't break the emersion by making you think "hey, this place looks just like the last two side missions I did." Recycling maps isn't the worst thing in the world but I prefer the ME2 approach.
In response to some comments a few pages back; I liked Elder Scrolls, but I never felt it was clearly superior to either ME game or DA1. ES has a slightly different style that I don't find as appealing as the Bioware games. I did think The Witcher 2 was on par with any Bioware game, particularly after the last patch.
Disclaimer: This is my opinon. I don't expect others to except my opinion as the 'truth' about rpgs.
Nope, I enjoy multiplayer games more than singleplayer games.
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast, And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed: And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill, And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!" ~Lord George Gordon Byron
No way am I reading all the previous posts, but I will say I really could not care what they did. In my opinion, BW's last decent game was Dragon Age: Origins. Mass Effect 2 while a pretty 'ok' game (of course every critic loved it $$$$), was pretty bland to me for some reason and Dragon Age II was just not as fun for me as the first one. Seems like there has been a decline in the quality and replayability of their games for a bit now. As to why this has happened, I don't know, maybe EA's influence is just too strong. I am really not looking forwared to ME3 or DA3 in the least. I used to be rather gung ho about SWTOR as well, but over the last six months or soI have almost completely lost interest.
Comments
What does that have to do with what I said? The founders of Bioware confirmed that they sold their company to EA to fund TOR, they also became senior vice-presidents of EA. If TOR turns out to be huge it could potentially make the Bioware division of EA the most profitable part of the company, which means even more corporate power for Bioware's CEOs. This could very well turn out to be a Pixar buying Disney type acquisition. (For those too lazy to read, Disney bought Pixar, but it then turned out that Pixar's largest shareholder, Steve Jobs, became the largest single shareholder of Disney stock. Key Pixar personelle were put in charge of Disney's main operations, and Steve Jobs and other Pixar higher ups got seats on Disney's board of directors. Thus while Disney bought Pixar, Pixar took over Disney.)
Also, there seems to be a lot of cross pollination between Bioware Edmonton and Bioware Austin (and Bioware Mythic for that matter,) the higher ups at Bioware are assured their positions at Bioware and are in powerful positions at EA, they even control and make all the decisions for EA's RPG/MMORPG division.
I also thought ME2 was way better than ME1 in almost every way. I didn't appreciate the game as much the first playthrough, but on the second I appreciated it a lot more. Dragon Age: Origins blew me away. It was such an amazing game. Both those games were made after the EA acquisition.
I'm still waiting for Jade Empire 2 however.
But what about the quality of those games. Another poster stated that BW was acquired by EA basically because SWTOR was costing too much. And yet another poster confirmed that EA was behind DA2 being a rush job (http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/988966-/58405733 ).
So right there, it looks like SWTOR is ultimately behind the drop in quality of one of BW's big titles. SWTOR caused the EA buyout...EA caused the DA2 rush-job.
So yeah, they are still coming out with SPRPGS because it is profitable for EA to produce SPRPGS which have the Bioware name and are Bioware's IPs. Does this mean that those SPRPGs will be of the same quality and have the same features that we have come to know and love from Bioware? I'm not sure, I hope so, but DA2 has definitely given me doubts.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I actually plan on this game being the biggest thing since sliced bread.
Maybe I'm dellusional, maybe I'm a prophet.
As long as ME3 is also amazing and a fitting end to the epic trilogy, then no, I don't care that they made TOR instead of KOTOR 3 as long TOR is good and ME3 is good and DA3 is good.
Well maybe they're good at making mmoRPG's, guess we'll just have to wait and see
think = squat
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I honestly think you will be pleasantly surprised once you get your hands on it.
I am a major fan of KOTOR and it's sequel, and (I can say this without breaking NDA) I friggin LOVE SWTOR.
Wait a post about the score being rushed means the entire game was rushed? I didn't take you to be this kind of poster, I guess everyone shows their true colors in the end.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
No one has a flawless record. For a reputable and beloved company like Bioware to suddenly lose so much of it's vaunted status in the industry over a single disappointing game (DA2) seems ludicrous at best and even more far fetched in equating it to a potential MMO flop. EA has a bad reputation and yet they're the ones, right along with Bioware, who have been delaying TOR's release in order to get it right. That speaks volumes about their commitment and sheds a dirty light on all of the haters of both the game and the companies making the game and footing the bill.
I can only be honest and admit that I never played a Bioware game yet*
But I really look forward to playing Swtor, so the answer = no. Happy that they are developing Swtor.
*Was too damn busy playing EVE, WOW, GW, AOC, WAR, LOTRO, Fallen Earth, Gran Tourismo, GTA's, Diablo II, Titan Quest, X3 Reunion, Fallouts and Elder Scrolls in the past 13 years or so. I just didn't have the time to play anything else. I'm really very sorry.
My brand new bloggity blog.
I do love single player games. My favorite game of all time is Mass Effect 2. I am concerned about SWTOR, but I think it's because I'm not a huge Star Wars fan. Time will tell.....
Life is Short, Read a Book.
Having not played any MMO for a while, I am really looking towards TOR to get back in the scene and play with friends/family. I haven't played completely through a Bioware game since Jade Empire and thats 2005. Never gave Mass Effect a chance (may get around to that), and I wasn't impressed enough with Dragon Age to continue playing.
Yeah the guy posting was talking about the score, but they also said that EA wanted to get DA2 out as fast as possible to capitalize off of Origins. So yeah, this sounds like they rushed it to me. EA had a deadline they wanted to make, they pushed the game out then.
Regardless of who rushed it though, DA2 was obviously rushed. Using the same map for like 20 different dungeons? Come on, that's not something we should expect from Bioware.
Before BW was acquired by EA, I never knew them to push any games out that cut corners like DA2 did.
Oh and if you want even more corruption? PC Gamer gets an "exclusive" review of the game that gets published first before other reviews get a chance to review the game. And they heap praise on the game, giving it a 94%, when its metascore actually wound up being 79% after a few weeks. Coincidence? Maybe, but I doubt it.
I bought the game partially based on this review and basically felt lied too. They didn't cover any of the negative things about the game at all.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
That's the thing about reality though. You do 1000 good things and people love you. You do a SINGLE bad thing, and you're hated.
Reputations are very hard to build and very easy to destroy. If BW games with light and dark side points wanted to be more like reality, it would be very hard to get a lot of light side points, but you could get max dark side points in like 5 minutes.
It works like this is almost anything you do. If a teacher loses it once and slaps an unruly student, they will be fired and probably never work again (depending on the neighborhood of course
). It doesn't matter how many students they guided, mentored, or inspired. How many hours they worked extra to help students excel. One F' up and you're gone.
So yeah, I think DA2 damaged BW's reputation. Not to an unrecoverable level by any means, but it caused a lot of people to lose absolute faith in them. I used to buy almost every BW game just because it was BW. Now I will be more cautious and wait for more (unbought) reviews to pile in.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Hope the plaster isn't made from what the monkey's normally throw!
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?"
I always feel people overvalue the inventory systems relevence to an rpg. I find games, like ME1, that have tons of inventory options and vendor trash to be a little annoying, but I respect that others think it adds layers to the game. However, there are players like my wife who love playing bioware games for the characters and the story and who could not stand the inventory system in ME1. In fact she made me go through all the junk and upgrade and sell it after a few missions. The system in ME2 was perfectly suited for players like her and her sister who arn't interested in spending tons of time looking through inventory lists figuring out if one of the 25 guns you picked up is an upgrade. So, bioware has to figure out to which type of player they will tailor their inventory system. And it seems their philosophy seems to be story>gameplay>everything else, so they chose to go with a more simple system which appeals to a lot of players, but clearly not all.
I also prefered the side quests in ME2 since they were all unique, as opposed to those in ME1 and DA2. In the latter games the story of the quest may have been unique but the map was typically recycled as were the enemies. ME2 didn't break the emersion by making you think "hey, this place looks just like the last two side missions I did." Recycling maps isn't the worst thing in the world but I prefer the ME2 approach.
In response to some comments a few pages back; I liked Elder Scrolls, but I never felt it was clearly superior to either ME game or DA1. ES has a slightly different style that I don't find as appealing as the Bioware games. I did think The Witcher 2 was on par with any Bioware game, particularly after the last patch.
Disclaimer: This is my opinon. I don't expect others to except my opinion as the 'truth' about rpgs.
Nope, I love the fact that I can play a BIOWARE game and it be multiplayer as well. Best of both worlds, I can do my own thing, or join everyone else.
(-_-)
No, I would not.
Nope, I enjoy multiplayer games more than singleplayer games.
"For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed:
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!"
~Lord George Gordon Byron
No way am I reading all the previous posts, but I will say I really could not care what they did. In my opinion, BW's last decent game was Dragon Age: Origins. Mass Effect 2 while a pretty 'ok' game (of course every critic loved it $$$$), was pretty bland to me for some reason and Dragon Age II was just not as fun for me as the first one. Seems like there has been a decline in the quality and replayability of their games for a bit now. As to why this has happened, I don't know, maybe EA's influence is just too strong. I am really not looking forwared to ME3 or DA3 in the least. I used to be rather gung ho about SWTOR as well, but over the last six months or soI have almost completely lost interest.
From someone in beta, yes.... well as long as it wasn't anything like DA2 but I doubt that.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.