The problem is the quests themselves - the MMO genre needs to be DONE with this style of content - static quests need to GO, completely, from the genre.
Bingo!!!
I will second that.
I disagree, I think quests are fine, the problem is (IMO) they don't offer alternatives. Nor do they focus on worldy things, it's all artificial replication of life, in a very static manner, no ecology, no environment, all game... Look at archeage that's the perfect combination IMO (on paper), a world and a game in one package.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The problem is the quests themselves - the MMO genre needs to be DONE with this style of content - static quests need to GO, completely, from the genre.
Bingo!!!
I will second that.
I disagree, I think quests are fine, the problem is (IMO) they don't offer alternatives. Nor do they focus on worldy things, it's all artificial replication of life, in a very static manner, no ecology, no environment, all game... Look at archeage that's the perfect combination IMO (on paper), a world and a game in one package.
And I think you are both wrong. Quests need context. Tasks (quests) will always exist in one form or another.
By context i do not mean quest-text, cinematics, exposition, lore, but context in the sense of gameplay.
In WoW:
Q: Why am I doing this quest?
A: Because I get XP and Loot to advance my character towards endgame.
In TSW:
Q: Why am I doing this quest?
A: Because its interesting.
Now to top this one off, imagine a game that lets you and -others- set up your own quests, that have actual context to what you want to achieve.
Imagine a game in which a player sets up a quest to kill 20 boars to bring him 20 boar-asses, because he -needs- the boar-asses to craft boar-ass armor that he will sell. You as a player will then do a quest that has context and influences the game. You might yourself set up a quest for yourself where you need to chop 20 wood to increase your strenght to wear the boar-ass armor.
This feature should be in every MMO ever. Right now i don't know of a game that does this (EVE with contracts?).
Even Themeparks would massively benefit from such a system, it would foster community and social interaction. Right now, i have to spam Trade-chat, why can't i have a player-driven quest-board in Stormwind instead?
Isn't that more a matter of opinion though? I mean I don't care for the majority of the quests in this game, but I'm sure there are those that do enjoy them and the story lines surrounding them. I think unless it really is a simplistic constant recycle of a quest giver saying, "I need x amount of y", that far as something being interesting varies pending on the player.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I gotta be honest there. It is but frankly it has led to some interesting points and discussions from all parties.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
The game being enjoyable and fun is all a matter of perception really.
The thing is see as a huge disappointment is BW played it safe- with overall design, char. development, UI, Questing, world design, combat ect. They banked on the WoW formula if you will, in a time when many are tired of gear treadmill design.
They did put in VO which overall was nice. But thats about it ( IMO )
The game being enjoyable and fun is all a matter of perception really.
The thing is see as a huge disappointment is BW played it safe- with overall design, char. development, UI, Questing, world design, combat ect. They banked on the WoW formula if you will, in a time when many are tired of gear treadmill design.
They did put in VO which overall was nice. But thats about it ( IMO )
^^ This.
What I want to start seeing:
Developers who have the sense to stop creating instanced BGs and 2 faction blue vs red team copy paste mirrored classes. Why is it too much to ask a dev that my enemy be different than me? That sort of lazy ethic might work for Korean mmorpgs who create a 5 class 3 race 0-2 factions title once a month, but this is getting old.
Waiting on Dark Age of Camelot 2. Oh, and Jesus returning. Both have about as much chance of occuring.
Isn't that more a matter of opinion though? I mean I don't care for the majority of the quests in this game, but I'm sure there are those that do enjoy them and the story lines surrounding them. I think unless it really is a simplistic constant recycle of a quest giver saying, "I need x amount of y", that far as something being interesting varies pending on the player.
Yes exactly.
Because of the unique system how the game is set up, thinking that you -need- to do all quests in a zone is false, you just pick the ones that you genuinely -care- about.
If you only care about the main story quest, do that, if you rather stay a while in the zone and learn all there is to know, thats also fine, no restriction there. You won't be missing out on any progression XP or loot-wise as long as you don't plan on trying to unlock -every single skill- in the game (400+) immediately. There is no "lvl" that you need to have to progress nor any "gear" that you absolutely need.
Adding to this that you can only have 3 quests active at any given time, it forces you to pick and choose quests that are interesting -for you-
It makes re-visiting zones fun, it makes questing fun, because you do what -you- want.
Unless of course you will find out that absolutely -none- of the quests interest you (which is hard to believe).
1. When I first got into beta I quickly noticed there was an overwhlemoing amount of dissaproval of the game on the beta forums. Quite a bit more than I would ever have expected.
2. Almost no interaction between Bioware and beta tester on the forums.
3. I quickly noticed that even though I liked the game I had little to no desire to log in to beta.
4. The complete lack of endgame testing before release was alarming.
5. Sometime after getting inot beta Bioware took the servers down for over 2 weeks for a new build. That in itself was alarming but their communication was the kicker. They gave no word when the servers would be back up other than soon. So we had beta testers checking the website every 5 minutes for 2 weeks. It showed to me that have no thought or care for their beta testers. Now contrats that beta to Rift's beta which Trion called Alpha. There was ton of dev interaction and the servers never went down longer than a day. Devs not only interacted with the testers they would group and guild with us and get our opinions. Complete different worlds in terms of communication.
The problem is the quests themselves - the MMO genre needs to be DONE with this style of content - static quests need to GO, completely, from the genre.
Bingo!!!
I will second that.
I disagree, I think quests are fine, the problem is (IMO) they don't offer alternatives. Nor do they focus on worldy things, it's all artificial replication of life, in a very static manner, no ecology, no environment, all game... Look at archeage that's the perfect combination IMO (on paper), a world and a game in one package.
And I think you are both wrong. Quests need context. Tasks (quests) will always exist in one form or another.
By context i do not mean quest-text, cinematics, exposition, lore, but context in the sense of gameplay.
In WoW:
Q: Why am I doing this quest?
A: Because I get XP and Loot to advance my character towards endgame.
In TSW:
Q: Why am I doing this quest?
A: Because its interesting.
Now to top this one off, imagine a game that lets you and -others- set up your own quests, that have actual context to what you want to achieve.
Imagine a game in which a player sets up a quest to kill 20 boars to bring him 20 boar-asses, because he -needs- the boar-asses to craft boar-ass armor that he will sell. You as a player will then do a quest that has context and influences the game. You might yourself set up a quest for yourself where you need to chop 20 wood to increase your strenght to wear the boar-ass armor.
This feature should be in every MMO ever. Right now i don't know of a game that does this (EVE with contracts?).
Even Themeparks would massively benefit from such a system, it would foster community and social interaction. Right now, i have to spam Trade-chat, why can't i have a player-driven quest-board in Stormwind instead?
Player driven quests is neat.
Also I figured when he meant static quest he meant quest with no alternatives in doing them...lol
"We're under attack and the village is on fire!!!!" "Wait so you mean I can't put out that fire, an those orcs are just standing there doing nothing?"
Oh it was said well and did look great.
Personally I like Archage, Tsw, and GW 2's take on quest.
All three are involved with discovering stuff, maybe archage has the most text book style but in doing things it's different, I'd like a conformation on this, but any way I do know you discover and ish happen, I like the tiers in TSW and the progress bar in GW 2, no numbers(funny enough they do work better than numbers IMO) and what's being told is literally happening.
I hoep those attempts are successful only time will tell..
I swear it's funny because in a sense we're all agreeing.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
I had no idea while leveling that the story would end so mediocre - because I hadn't got to the ending yet..
I had no idea the choices I was making wouldn't have any effect later on.. because I hadn't gotten to the later on yet..
I didn't know how grind heavy and repetitive the PvP would be, because I didn't PvP much at all.
I had no idea Illum and open world PvP was so bad, because it took me a long while to get to that level...
So again, I'm sorry I'm not psychic?
What did you do to make people so butthurt.
Honestly individuals who are hating..... who cares what he said before? He basically agrees with you now. In RvR games, my group was always gracious to those we bested. Why? Because todays foe was tomorrows reroll.
Who cares what they said earlier? ever hear of forum pvp?
My apologies in advanced for sticking on topic and ignoring the forum pvp here..
Well im not themepark fan, though i do enjoy them sometimes. With that said, of course this game has flaws...every game has flaws. Even older games have flaws that have had much more investment over the years than this game.
The question relating to flaws is how does it effect you? This game does have some big ones, however it does do one major aspec of mmorpgs right and that the leveling jouney to endgame. The cutscenes and voice overs are very high quality. The stories are interesting for those who care. The questing and classes are interesting, a bit easy for my likings, but well done aside from pvp balance woes.
I find the pvp in warzones is well done, huttball is great for those who like more than just a deathmatch...which seems to be few people. Takes a bit of strategy and teamwork and most just run around looking for solo medals and could care less who wins. Either way, its diffrent.
Endgame is where the game takes its biggest hit. Bugged endgame is common with new mmorpgs. ilum pvp has potential and is quite exciting at first. You then realize it has warhammer syndrome. One side camps their base other camps outside little combat takes place. There are occasion of small group pvp. Problem with ilum is the lag...theres no option to turn off others animations and custimizing the graphics for "seige" settings isnt an option. It lags like hell on good machines the second things get good.
PVE endgame is plagued with questlogs jammed with uncompletable and undeletable quests. Raids and hard mode flashpoints are difficult to get for DPS and people looking to join a quick group and jump in. Even in guilds it can be difficult to get into a group and enjoy them. Some of the instances are bugged as well.
Other than that, the game does have potenial, which is a saying that is applied to every game. This game just needs polishing and server merges.
Its great to see bioware getting into the mmorpg business. Im glad a ton of lucas money was dumped into giving bioware the ability to create this game, i hope it serves as a template for future games from them with diffrent IP's.
Not a bad game just isnt satisfying people who mad dash to endgame...good by themepark standards imo, non high-fantasy settings decent leveling and an entertaining story. I dont think people realize how long its been since an actual decent storline was in a mmorpg.
I agree with Crunchy....but im still tired of themeparks regardless...i played 1 month...then thought to myself...hey this is just like world of warcraft....but with voiceovers....and its scifi......and then i let my sub die.
I want more in a mmo....like freedom and creativity, 2 things that build off each other....quite oppostie from todays themepark mmo standards which promote rules and stagnate, entropic conformity.
I agree with Crunchy....but im still tired of themeparks regardless...i played 1 month...then thought to myself...hey this is just like world of warcraft....but with voiceovers....and its scifi......and then i let my sub die.
I want more in a mmo....like freedom and creativity, 2 things that build off each other....quite oppostie from todays themepark mmo standards which promote rules and stagnate, entropic conformity.
I agree with this. For someone who has started playing MMOs with Ultima Online, virtually every single MMO released since then has been a complete disappointment. UO was released in 1997 and it offered to this day it is one of the only MMOs to allow total freedom in not only building your character but also in how you spend your time playing it. EVE sort of does the same thing but it is incredibly guild/corp oriented and sometimes feels like a second job.
EVE and UO are virtual worlds, where you live how you like and any playstyle is perfectly viable. Otherwise, virtually every single MMO released since then holds your hand and tells you how to play. You quest from level 1-max and then do raids, endgame instances or PvP in instanced battlegrounds.
I disagree, I think quests are fine, the problem is (IMO) they don't offer alternatives. Nor do they focus on worldy things, it's all artificial replication of life, in a very static manner, no ecology, no environment, all game... Look at archeage that's the perfect combination IMO (on paper), a world and a game in one package.
And I think you are both wrong. Quests need context. Tasks (quests) will always exist in one form or another.
Well I agree, however questing will always be partially static, as the story will have a beginning and an end, which is all I was thinking about in terms of "static quests need to go"..
By context i do not mean quest-text, cinematics, exposition, lore, but context in the sense of gameplay.
Of course, a quest that doesn't compliment game-play is a pointless one.
Now to top this one off, imagine a game that lets you and -others- set up your own quests, that have actual context to what you want to achieve.
Bad experiences on my end with user genrated quests. Too much disparity of quality.
Imagine a game in which a player sets up a quest to kill 20 boars to bring him 20 boar-asses, because he -needs- the boar-asses to craft boar-ass armor that he will sell. You as a player will then do a quest that has context and influences the game. You might yourself set up a quest for yourself where you need to chop 20 wood to increase your strenght to wear the boar-ass armor.
You don't need quests to have this, this was an everyday thing in a game like SWG. Games like SWG and UO were built around this idea as well as EVE.
This feature should be in every MMO ever. Right now i don't know of a game that does this (EVE with contracts?).
Well it should be in any game that wants to have a real long term community.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The game just isnt addictive like swg was. Theres no community as everyone is playimg with thier heads buried in the quests and you cant even look for a guild in game like eq2.
If you goto biowares career webpage they have an new opening for some kind of social engineer lol.. A little late for that bioware when that guy should of been in the loop from day one. If this game even had a little bit of what Rap Koster did in swg it would of been good. They needed to mix sandbox elememts with themepark not just make it ome big theme park with boring rides.
I disagree, I think quests are fine, the problem is (IMO) they don't offer alternatives. Nor do they focus on worldy things, it's all artificial replication of life, in a very static manner, no ecology, no environment, all game... Look at archeage that's the perfect combination IMO (on paper), a world and a game in one package.
And I think you are both wrong. Quests need context. Tasks (quests) will always exist in one form or another.
Well I agree, however questing will always be partially static, as the story will have a beginning and an end, which is all I was thinking about in terms of "static quests need to go"..
You are still thinking of quests and story in the terms of current MMORPGs, see yellow exclamation mark, click, experience premade content, end.
I think of them as tasks in a player-driven narrative that creates story. All you really need from the developer is the tools to create this narrative instead of the developer creating the narrative. That way the adventure never ends and the game becomes truly open-ended.
By context i do not mean quest-text, cinematics, exposition, lore, but context in the sense of gameplay.
Of course, a quest that doesn't compliment game-play is a pointless one.
Now to top this one off, imagine a game that lets you and -others- set up your own quests, that have actual context to what you want to achieve.
Bad experiences on my end with user genrated quests. Too much disparity of quality.
In which game? Like I said I'm not sure I know of a game that did it "right". For user-genereated quests you need the right tools in the game. Not just a database with hundreds of contracts (EVE) about mining, skinning, fetch-quests, etc.
Joining a guild could be a quest(chain).
Hunting down a PVP-target could be a quest.
Stealing could be a quest.
etc.
Imagine a game in which a player sets up a quest to kill 20 boars to bring him 20 boar-asses, because he -needs- the boar-asses to craft boar-ass armor that he will sell. You as a player will then do a quest that has context and influences the game. You might yourself set up a quest for yourself where you need to chop 20 wood to increase your strenght to wear the boar-ass armor.
You don't need quests to have this, this was an everyday thing in a game like SWG. Games like SWG and UO were built around this idea as well as EVE.
I didn't get to try SWG, so did it have the -tools- to do this?
Its about convenience and accessbility really. As we all know socializing in a game doesn't come naturally to people, most people only talk to you if they -have- to. A good toolset would go a long way to make this easier. Essentially give peope a "nudge" to interact with another person.
Themepark design seems to think that this nudge can only come from the developers with -more- group content designed by the developer.
This feature should be in every MMO ever. Right now i don't know of a game that does this (EVE with contracts?).
Well it should be in any game that wants to have a real long term community.
@AdamTM: what you describe sounds more like a Foundry system like used in STO, where players create quests. CoX also had something like that, but it got heavily abused. The best example so far might be not an MMO but Bioware's Neverwinter Nights, where whole player created environments incl quests were created by other players.
As for MMO quests as seen so far, I think that VO/cutscene dialogue and choices are a better medium to deliver content and immersion than the standard textbased system as seen in most MMO's. Personally I'm glad that I see this used extensively in TOR, GW2 as well as TSW.
Of course, a mechanic like Dynamic Events is an even better alternative, while TSW's Investigation Missions is a wholly different tangent in its approach to quests. I blame Tornquist in a positive way with this introduction of puzzle mechanics similar to adventure games into questing. Definitely a nice variation on the standard kill-fetch-collect quest mechanics.
edit: meh, was hard to read which comment came from whom in the multicolor post. I see now that you merely meant quests in the sense of player given tasks, nothing more than that. Shrug. Also a nice idea, but nothing that special.
@AdamTM: what you describe sounds more like a Foundry system like used in STO, where players create quests. CoX also had something like that, but it got heavily abused. The best example so far might be not an MMO but Bioware's Neverwinter Nights, where whole player created environments incl quests were created by other players.
As for MMO quests as seen so far, I think that VO/cutscene dialogue and choices are a better medium to deliver content and immersion than the standard textbased system as seen in most MMO's. Personally I'm glad that I see this used extensively in TOR, GW2 as well as TSW.
Of course, a mechanic like Dynamic Events is an even better alternative, while TSW's Investigation Missions is a wholly different tangent in its approach to quests. I blame Tornquist in a positive way with this introduction of puzzle mechanics similar to adventure games into questing. Definitely a nice variation on the standard kill-fetch-collect quest mechanics.
edit: meh, was hard to read which comment came from whom in the multicolor post. I see now that you merely meant quests in the sense of player given tasks, nothing more than that. Shrug. Also a nice idea, but nothing that special.
Its but -one- of the ways to make questing more fun by giving them context, at relatively no cost whatsoever for developers and easily implemented into -any- game be it WoW or SWTOR.
Its not a panacea, panaceas by definition don't exist.
PS: The problem with STOs Foundry and similar systems is that the "missions" are disconected from the game-world. They are lacking any context -inside- the game.
The game just isnt addictive like swg was. Theres no community as everyone is playimg with thier heads buried in the quests and you cant even look for a guild in game like eq2.
If you goto biowares career webpage they have an new opening for some kind of social engineer lol.. A little late for that bioware when that guy should of been in the loop from day one. If this game even had a little bit of what Rap Koster did in swg it would of been good. They needed to mix sandbox elememts with themepark not just make it ome big theme park with boring rides.
how'd it get thru the entire beta process with no one ever mentioning the social aspect was missing...not trying to be rhetorical here at all, I mean seriously how can such a thing happen ?
For me, it was something very simple. I arrived on Hutta and saw the incredibly detailed if lifeless scenery. That wasn't a problem, I expected that from EQ2. I didn't even mind the fact that it wasn't really scenery at all, just a series of pathways; I knew this was going to be a very limited themepark game anyway. No, what got me was that when I returned to the cantina to hand in my mission, I couldn't sit down on a chair. Now, I don't know how difficult that would be to programme or animate but I do recognise that somewhere along the line, someone in Bioware or EA said: 'Siting? Too expensive to develop. Fuck them if they want to sit down, they can squat on the floor. I don't remember Han and Chewie sitting down, do you?'. And it was then I realised this game was bad.
What the first indication to you - either in a statement or press release issued before the game or in your own personal experience during beta or post-launch - that this game was deeply flawed?
Seriously this is really getting on my nerves. Why do you need to do a post to ask people to confirm your own beliefs about the game.
You call it seriously flawed! For me seriously flawed = the forgot to add NPC, or Quest. It's a new game, few few months out, give it a chance damn it.
You are (not only you but a bunch of people) the first one to say that the MMO industrie is heading to a dead end but you (and your group) are the one killing it.
I'm feeling better now, because knowing you judge a game by can you sit on a chair or can you see a cockroach move in a desert, you make MY standards go up!
Comments
I disagree, I think quests are fine, the problem is (IMO) they don't offer alternatives. Nor do they focus on worldy things, it's all artificial replication of life, in a very static manner, no ecology, no environment, all game... Look at archeage that's the perfect combination IMO (on paper), a world and a game in one package.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Stay on topic please. This is not about labeling other users - it is about the topic outlined in the original post. Thanks.
And I think you are both wrong. Quests need context. Tasks (quests) will always exist in one form or another.
By context i do not mean quest-text, cinematics, exposition, lore, but context in the sense of gameplay.
In WoW:
Q: Why am I doing this quest?
A: Because I get XP and Loot to advance my character towards endgame.
In TSW:
Q: Why am I doing this quest?
A: Because its interesting.
Now to top this one off, imagine a game that lets you and -others- set up your own quests, that have actual context to what you want to achieve.
Imagine a game in which a player sets up a quest to kill 20 boars to bring him 20 boar-asses, because he -needs- the boar-asses to craft boar-ass armor that he will sell. You as a player will then do a quest that has context and influences the game. You might yourself set up a quest for yourself where you need to chop 20 wood to increase your strenght to wear the boar-ass armor.
This feature should be in every MMO ever. Right now i don't know of a game that does this (EVE with contracts?).
Even Themeparks would massively benefit from such a system, it would foster community and social interaction. Right now, i have to spam Trade-chat, why can't i have a player-driven quest-board in Stormwind instead?
Isn't that more a matter of opinion though? I mean I don't care for the majority of the quests in this game, but I'm sure there are those that do enjoy them and the story lines surrounding them. I think unless it really is a simplistic constant recycle of a quest giver saying, "I need x amount of y", that far as something being interesting varies pending on the player.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Well this post is just one large loaded question. The games not flawed OP, your ways of thinking are.
I gotta be honest there. It is but frankly it has led to some interesting points and discussions from all parties.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I don't think the question is supposed to be answered by people who think the game isn't flawed.
You didn't need to post here.
Much like the post entitled "Now that SWTOR is obviously a success"...
They're yet to make a dime lol.
The game being enjoyable and fun is all a matter of perception really.
The thing is see as a huge disappointment is BW played it safe- with overall design, char. development, UI, Questing, world design, combat ect. They banked on the WoW formula if you will, in a time when many are tired of gear treadmill design.
They did put in VO which overall was nice. But thats about it ( IMO )
^^ This.
What I want to start seeing:
Developers who have the sense to stop creating instanced BGs and 2 faction blue vs red team copy paste mirrored classes. Why is it too much to ask a dev that my enemy be different than me? That sort of lazy ethic might work for Korean mmorpgs who create a 5 class 3 race 0-2 factions title once a month, but this is getting old.
Waiting on Dark Age of Camelot 2. Oh, and Jesus returning. Both have about as much chance of occuring.
Yes exactly.
Because of the unique system how the game is set up, thinking that you -need- to do all quests in a zone is false, you just pick the ones that you genuinely -care- about.
If you only care about the main story quest, do that, if you rather stay a while in the zone and learn all there is to know, thats also fine, no restriction there. You won't be missing out on any progression XP or loot-wise as long as you don't plan on trying to unlock -every single skill- in the game (400+) immediately. There is no "lvl" that you need to have to progress nor any "gear" that you absolutely need.
Adding to this that you can only have 3 quests active at any given time, it forces you to pick and choose quests that are interesting -for you-
It makes re-visiting zones fun, it makes questing fun, because you do what -you- want.
Unless of course you will find out that absolutely -none- of the quests interest you (which is hard to believe).
There were a number of signals to me:
1. When I first got into beta I quickly noticed there was an overwhlemoing amount of dissaproval of the game on the beta forums. Quite a bit more than I would ever have expected.
2. Almost no interaction between Bioware and beta tester on the forums.
3. I quickly noticed that even though I liked the game I had little to no desire to log in to beta.
4. The complete lack of endgame testing before release was alarming.
5. Sometime after getting inot beta Bioware took the servers down for over 2 weeks for a new build. That in itself was alarming but their communication was the kicker. They gave no word when the servers would be back up other than soon. So we had beta testers checking the website every 5 minutes for 2 weeks. It showed to me that have no thought or care for their beta testers. Now contrats that beta to Rift's beta which Trion called Alpha. There was ton of dev interaction and the servers never went down longer than a day. Devs not only interacted with the testers they would group and guild with us and get our opinions. Complete different worlds in terms of communication.
Player driven quests is neat.
Also I figured when he meant static quest he meant quest with no alternatives in doing them...lol
"We're under attack and the village is on fire!!!!" "Wait so you mean I can't put out that fire, an those orcs are just standing there doing nothing?"
Oh it was said well and did look great.
Personally I like Archage, Tsw, and GW 2's take on quest.
All three are involved with discovering stuff, maybe archage has the most text book style but in doing things it's different, I'd like a conformation on this, but any way I do know you discover and ish happen, I like the tiers in TSW and the progress bar in GW 2, no numbers(funny enough they do work better than numbers IMO) and what's being told is literally happening.
I hoep those attempts are successful only time will tell..
I swear it's funny because in a sense we're all agreeing.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
For me, it was the linear gameplay . I liked Hutta alot but the next zone didn't do it for me (Drummond Kaas?) and I got bored with the game quickly.
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
What did you do to make people so butthurt.
Honestly individuals who are hating..... who cares what he said before? He basically agrees with you now. In RvR games, my group was always gracious to those we bested. Why? Because todays foe was tomorrows reroll.
Who cares what they said earlier? ever hear of forum pvp?
My apologies in advanced for sticking on topic and ignoring the forum pvp here..
Well im not themepark fan, though i do enjoy them sometimes. With that said, of course this game has flaws...every game has flaws. Even older games have flaws that have had much more investment over the years than this game.
The question relating to flaws is how does it effect you? This game does have some big ones, however it does do one major aspec of mmorpgs right and that the leveling jouney to endgame. The cutscenes and voice overs are very high quality. The stories are interesting for those who care. The questing and classes are interesting, a bit easy for my likings, but well done aside from pvp balance woes.
I find the pvp in warzones is well done, huttball is great for those who like more than just a deathmatch...which seems to be few people. Takes a bit of strategy and teamwork and most just run around looking for solo medals and could care less who wins. Either way, its diffrent.
Endgame is where the game takes its biggest hit. Bugged endgame is common with new mmorpgs. ilum pvp has potential and is quite exciting at first. You then realize it has warhammer syndrome. One side camps their base other camps outside little combat takes place. There are occasion of small group pvp. Problem with ilum is the lag...theres no option to turn off others animations and custimizing the graphics for "seige" settings isnt an option. It lags like hell on good machines the second things get good.
PVE endgame is plagued with questlogs jammed with uncompletable and undeletable quests. Raids and hard mode flashpoints are difficult to get for DPS and people looking to join a quick group and jump in. Even in guilds it can be difficult to get into a group and enjoy them. Some of the instances are bugged as well.
Other than that, the game does have potenial, which is a saying that is applied to every game. This game just needs polishing and server merges.
Its great to see bioware getting into the mmorpg business. Im glad a ton of lucas money was dumped into giving bioware the ability to create this game, i hope it serves as a template for future games from them with diffrent IP's.
Not a bad game just isnt satisfying people who mad dash to endgame...good by themepark standards imo, non high-fantasy settings decent leveling and an entertaining story. I dont think people realize how long its been since an actual decent storline was in a mmorpg.
I agree with Crunchy....but im still tired of themeparks regardless...i played 1 month...then thought to myself...hey this is just like world of warcraft....but with voiceovers....and its scifi......and then i let my sub die.
I want more in a mmo....like freedom and creativity, 2 things that build off each other....quite oppostie from todays themepark mmo standards which promote rules and stagnate, entropic conformity.
I agree with this. For someone who has started playing MMOs with Ultima Online, virtually every single MMO released since then has been a complete disappointment. UO was released in 1997 and it offered to this day it is one of the only MMOs to allow total freedom in not only building your character but also in how you spend your time playing it. EVE sort of does the same thing but it is incredibly guild/corp oriented and sometimes feels like a second job.
EVE and UO are virtual worlds, where you live how you like and any playstyle is perfectly viable. Otherwise, virtually every single MMO released since then holds your hand and tells you how to play. You quest from level 1-max and then do raids, endgame instances or PvP in instanced battlegrounds.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
If you goto biowares career webpage they have an new opening for some kind of social engineer lol.. A little late for that bioware when that guy should of been in the loop from day one. If this game even had a little bit of what Rap Koster did in swg it would of been good. They needed to mix sandbox elememts with themepark not just make it ome big theme park with boring rides.
As for MMO quests as seen so far, I think that VO/cutscene dialogue and choices are a better medium to deliver content and immersion than the standard textbased system as seen in most MMO's. Personally I'm glad that I see this used extensively in TOR, GW2 as well as TSW.
Of course, a mechanic like Dynamic Events is an even better alternative, while TSW's Investigation Missions is a wholly different tangent in its approach to quests. I blame Tornquist in a positive way with this introduction of puzzle mechanics similar to adventure games into questing. Definitely a nice variation on the standard kill-fetch-collect quest mechanics.edit: meh, was hard to read which comment came from whom in the multicolor post. I see now that you merely meant quests in the sense of player given tasks, nothing more than that. Shrug. Also a nice idea, but nothing that special.
Its but -one- of the ways to make questing more fun by giving them context, at relatively no cost whatsoever for developers and easily implemented into -any- game be it WoW or SWTOR.
Its not a panacea, panaceas by definition don't exist.
PS: The problem with STOs Foundry and similar systems is that the "missions" are disconected from the game-world. They are lacking any context -inside- the game.
how'd it get thru the entire beta process with no one ever mentioning the social aspect was missing...not trying to be rhetorical here at all, I mean seriously how can such a thing happen ?
Seriously this is really getting on my nerves. Why do you need to do a post to ask people to confirm your own beliefs about the game.
You call it seriously flawed! For me seriously flawed = the forgot to add NPC, or Quest. It's a new game, few few months out, give it a chance damn it.
You are (not only you but a bunch of people) the first one to say that the MMO industrie is heading to a dead end but you (and your group) are the one killing it.
I'm feeling better now, because knowing you judge a game by can you sit on a chair or can you see a cockroach move in a desert, you make MY standards go up!