Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Star Wars Galaxies: Five Year Re-Review

1246

Comments

  • dalevi1dalevi1 Member Posts: 829
    Originally posted by Burntvet

    Originally posted by JestorRodo


    What the hell? Yesterday the one word comment to its 6.5 rating  was mediocre . Which I can agree but now it is this -
    Final Score

    6.5

    Acceptable
    The NGE is far cry from Acceptable, at least in the eyes of the over 200,000 fromer SOE customers who quickly made it part of their MMO gaming history.
    Did SOE squeeze hard after reading the word mediocre because this game is truly mediocre and that is being nice.
     
    Very lame of whoever  changed it and proves that SOE's reach to the forum is true.

     

    The other half of the equation, and, the part that should be considered when saying good/bad/mediocre about SWG is value (for the money). Is SWG good, for the sub fee of $15? Most would say no (and have said no, by canceling). If for some reason, a person played 3 or more other SOE titles, would it be worth 1/4 the price of station pass? For me, no, for others, maybe, but still probably not.

    $15/mo is currently the high price (in the US at least, sorry VAT tax folks) for an MMO sub. The premium price, as it were, for a very much non-premium game.

    When you go to Mcdonalds for a burger, you know damn well you are not going to get an excellent burger, you are going to get a average/mediocre/acceptable burger. But, you are getting that mediocre burger for a non-premium/average/mediocre price. For a excellent burger, you go to a pub/tavern/steakhouse and pay a higher price, but get the much better product you were expecting.

    SWG, which is a not very good/average/mediocre (or worse) game, should not be played, simply because it not worth it for the charged price, anymore. Would you pay $9 for that Big Mac? Most people wouldn't, all other factors aside.

    Where was that in the review?

     

    You free to play(ers) never quit do you?

    Played (more than a month): SWG, Second Life, Tabula Rasa, Lineage 2, Everquest 2, EvE, MxO, Ryzom.

    Tried: WoW, Shadowbane, Anarchy Online, Everquest, WWII Online, Planetside

    Beta: Lotro, Tabula Rasa, WAR.

  • dalevi1dalevi1 Member Posts: 829
    Originally posted by JestorRodo


    What the hell? Yesterday the one word comment to its 6.5 rating  was mediocre . Which I can agree but now it is this -
    Final Score

    6.5

    Acceptable
    The NGE is far cry from Acceptable, at least in the eyes of the over 200,000 fromer SOE customers who quickly made it part of their MMO gaming history.
    Did SOE squeeze hard after reading the word mediocre because this game is truly mediocre and that is being nice.
     
    Very lame of whoever  changed it and proves that SOE's reach to the forum is true.

    This was explained earlier in the thread.

    Played (more than a month): SWG, Second Life, Tabula Rasa, Lineage 2, Everquest 2, EvE, MxO, Ryzom.

    Tried: WoW, Shadowbane, Anarchy Online, Everquest, WWII Online, Planetside

    Beta: Lotro, Tabula Rasa, WAR.

  • summitussummitus Member UncommonPosts: 1,414

    I think 6.5 is a little unfair for what is basically still a very fun game , or maybe this is just mmorpg.com not wanting to upset their army of "Veteran Refuge" subscribers ?  7.5 is more like maybe ....

  • SoupgoblinSoupgoblin Member Posts: 324
    Originally posted by Burntvet

    Originally posted by JestorRodo


    What the hell? Yesterday the one word comment to its 6.5 rating  was mediocre . Which I can agree but now it is this -
    Final Score

    6.5

    Acceptable
    The NGE is far cry from Acceptable, at least in the eyes of the over 200,000 fromer SOE customers who quickly made it part of their MMO gaming history.
    Did SOE squeeze hard after reading the word mediocre because this game is truly mediocre and that is being nice.
     
    Very lame of whoever  changed it and proves that SOE's reach to the forum is true.

     

    The other half of the equation, and, the part that should be considered when saying good/bad/mediocre about SWG is value (for the money). Is SWG good, for the sub fee of $15? Most would say no (and have said no, by canceling). If for some reason, a person played 3 or more other SOE titles, would it be worth 1/4 the price of station pass? For me, no, for others, maybe, but still probably not.

    $15/mo is currently the high price (in the US at least, sorry VAT tax folks) for an MMO sub. The premium price, as it were, for a very much non-premium game.

    When you go to Mcdonalds for a burger, you know damn well you are not going to get an excellent burger, you are going to get a average/mediocre/acceptable burger. But, you are getting that mediocre burger for a non-premium/average/mediocre price. For a excellent burger, you go to a pub/tavern/steakhouse and pay a higher price, but get the much better product you were expecting.

    SWG, which is a not very good/average/mediocre (or worse) game, should not be played, simply because it not worth it for the charged price, anymore. Would you pay $9 for that Big Mac? Most people wouldn't, all other factors aside.

    Where was that in the review?



     

    I think you hit the nail on the head, there.

    SWG belongs on the value menu with the biggie fries and those fake nugget things.

    Or quite possibly it is like pigs feet, hogs jowels and pork intestines. You know that stuff is edible, folks ate it when they couldn't afford better food, but most people won't touch it because they consider them as scraps only fit for consumption by dogs.

    SWG (as it stands today) is scraps, most people don't want anything to do with it, they have left to go find something better tasting and more nutrishious.

  • StraddenStradden Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
    Originally posted by Burntvet


    And now that you mention it, I would like to see one of the MMORPG.com editors answer this simple question: Is SOE a paid advertiser on this site?
    I am not wearing a tin-foil hat, but in the interestes of full disclosure, it is a fair question.

     

    They have been. I don't think they are right now, but they have bought ad space from us in the past, just like pretty much every other MMO company out there. Our content office and our business office are not only separate in terms of one not informing the other of its business, but we are also separated by a continent. Content = Nova Scotia Canada, Business = Hawaii.

    So, since you can clearly see the ads on the site, if you're asking me if they are a secret advertiser, the answer is no. If SOE is paying us for AD SPACE, you'll know because you'll see an AD.

    When a company purchases ad space from us, that's exactly what they get. They get a certain amount of space on the site to advertise their product, they don't get any input at all into content or editorial workings of the site.

    I explained, quite rationally, the reason for the change in the words. I know there are a lot of people out there who would love for this to be some giant conspiracy, but it's not. Go back and look through older reviews and see what a 6.5 is worth. That's probably a more worthwile approach than insulting me and everyone else who works for MMORPG.com with these accusations.

    Also, while we're at it... In what world is a 6.5 a score worth buying? I mean seriously. 6.5 is NOT A GOOD SCORE, nor is "Acceptable" a good descriptor. I suspect you won't see "Acceptable" - MMORPG.com on any boxes.

    If I seem upset about this, it's because I am. Every time something like this comes up, it bothers me just a little bit more. I don't know why people feel like it's ok to insult someone else's integrity without a)any kind of evidence or b) knowing them at all.

    Hope that clears things up for you.

    Cheers,
    Jon Wood
    Managing Editor
    MMORPG.com

  • KarahandrasKarahandras Member UncommonPosts: 1,703

    and would do well to invest a bit of marketing effort in promoting itself they really need to fix the many, many problems before even thinking abou promotion as a thinking man's game not what SOE wants rather than a clone of the combat-only orgies that are being churned out by virtually every development studio in the business exactly what SOE wants. With deep customization options, unparalleled immersion and roleplay tools, and a PvE game that is built on player interaction and choice again not what SOE wants, Star Wars Galaxies is currently a decent alternative I would strongly disagree with 'decent alternative' for those seeking a place to call virtual home, and is worth a look due to an array of unique features such as? that set it apart from the newer, simpler games crowding the market. and again not what SOE wants

     

    good article parts i agree with and disagree with, but that's life, but i think some of the problems that people find gamebreaking should have had a more of a mention for anyone that hasn't tried SWG yet and are thinking of doing so

    Will the player ratings also be getting a 're-start' to give that a more up-to-date review of current game?

  • puffmousepuffmouse Member UncommonPosts: 44

    <quote>

    You must have being playing a different game...

     

    Oh come off it from the amount of games SWG sold I bet by the time the CU came out that only 1/4 of the people who originally bought it were still playing. Most people quit way before the CU because the game had a horrible launch and just sucked. Anyone remember all the reviews saying how much of a disatser launch was and how everyone was moaning that there was nothing to do and the game was missing half the features. It was only until the CU that did everyone stop complaining about Pre CU and start preaising it and saying how amazing it was.

    I mean I',m all for getting the old game back but all these crazy ideas of the game losing 80% of the people are stupid. Like LA said that they saw a handful of players leave but most of them all came back anyways.

    Don't forget the game is 5 years old so most people naturally leave anyways and the people on the forums only make up a tiny amount of actual players.

    </quote>

     

     

    The numbers show a steady subscription rate from launch until 2005. A sharp decline occured from 2005-2008 from 300,000 to just about 100,000. The guild I was in on Intrepid was thriving through this period up until the end of 2005. The discussions about the coming CU started a few months in advance and people were beyond pissed about the changes that were to come. The guild forum was on fire with posts showing the coming change and the ways in which it would break the game. Most of these people had been there and were happy from launch. With the coming cu they threatened to quit and go to wow. The CU hit, and they left... lamenting what a great game swg had once been.

    Then with very little warning the NGE swept through. The guild leaders tried to remain optimistic but were forced to arrange a mass exodus to another game everyone could agree on. This guild in particular went to everquest 2, where it seems to be doing quite strong in membership. I didnt follow them. I stayed put for awhile. After a few months I gave up and moved on. I can guarantee you nobody from that guild came back to the game.

    Those left behind could only sit and watch as entire cities slowly went up in flames. The people who built and then abandoned these sprawling cities did not do this shortly after launch, they did it during the era in which swg showed real promise. They built all these cities up just before the CU, they struggled to maintain them prior to the NGE, and then they all left.

    Your version of this story appears to be based on barely a passing involvement in the game. Everyone else who was there for the duration tells a tale not far different from the one above. Do you suppose somehow your version is actually correct?

  • PapaLazarouPapaLazarou Member Posts: 502

    Well one thing I've learnt is not to trust reviews because everything is down to personal taste and some games I loved in the past have had bad scores and some that have had amazing scores I've found to be very meh like Halo.

  • BurntvetBurntvet Member RarePosts: 3,465
    Originally posted by Stradden

    Originally posted by Burntvet


    And now that you mention it, I would like to see one of the MMORPG.com editors answer this simple question: Is SOE a paid advertiser on this site?
    I am not wearing a tin-foil hat, but in the interestes of full disclosure, it is a fair question.

     

    They have been. I don't think they are right now, but they have bought ad space from us in the past, just like pretty much every other MMO company out there. Our content office and our business office are not only separate in terms of one not informing the other of its business, but we are also separated by a continent. Content = Nova Scotia Canada, Business = Hawaii.

    So, since you can clearly see the ads on the site, if you're asking me if they are a secret advertiser, the answer is no. If SOE is paying us for AD SPACE, you'll know because you'll see an AD.

    When a company purchases ad space from us, that's exactly what they get. They get a certain amount of space on the site to advertise their product, they don't get any input at all into content or editorial workings of the site.

    I explained, quite rationally, the reason for the change in the words. I know there are a lot of people out there who would love for this to be some giant conspiracy, but it's not. Go back and look through older reviews and see what a 6.5 is worth. That's probably a more worthwile approach than insulting me and everyone else who works for MMORPG.com with these accusations.

    Also, while we're at it... In what world is a 6.5 a score worth buying? I mean seriously. 6.5 is NOT A GOOD SCORE, nor is "Acceptable" a good descriptor. I suspect you won't see "Acceptable" - MMORPG.com on any boxes.

    If I seem upset about this, it's because I am. Every time something like this comes up, it bothers me just a little bit more. I don't know why people feel like it's ok to insult someone else's integrity without a)any kind of evidence or b) knowing them at all.

    Hope that clears things up for you.

     

    Don't know if you were responding specifically to me, but I might have missed the part where I insulted you.

    It was as a simple question, the answer to which reviewers in other media outlets routinely disclose. Especially, where a commerical relationship exists separate from products/services being analyzed or reviewed.

    Consumer Reports (tm) has a very high degree of credibility, for example, because they take NO money, advertising or otherwise, from the companies whose products they review. It completely removes any perception of bias. You answered truthfully that SOE has been a paid advertiser in the past and may be in the future. That's fine, no one is saying different.

    I can accept that reviews and advertising departments may be separate, and that one may not influence the other here, but the same can not be said for other sites (we remember that Gamespot deal, and others).

    So, I think a bit of skepticism is both warranted and useful when such information is not disclaimed.

     

  • PapaLazarouPapaLazarou Member Posts: 502
    Originally posted by demolishIX

    Originally posted by PapaLazarou

    Originally posted by demolishIX

    Originally posted by Ozmodan


    As to a roleplay environment, yep I agree, I have never seen a better one, except that there is no one to roleplay with now.
    To this comment:
    "Instead of fixing bugs and then adding content,SOE introduced CU wich caused about 40-50% of the current player base to bail after the first 2 weeks,NGE killed off the 85% of what was left of the CU population."


    That is untrue, sure a few left after CU patch, but the game was very alive and vibrant just prior to NGE.  My guess was that less than 10% of the populace left after CU and many of those came back for the expansion pack that was out a week before NGE was implemented.  CU did very little to the number of players playing,  



     

     You must have being playing a different game...



     

    Oh come off it from the amount of games SWG sold I bet by the time the CU came out that only 1/4 of the people who originally bought it were still playing. Most people quit way before the CU because the game had a horrible launch and just sucked. Anyone remember all the reviews saying how much of a disatser launch was and how everyone was moaning that there was nothing to do and the game was missing half the features. It was only until the CU that did everyone stop complaining about Pre CU and start preaising it and saying how amazing it was.

    I mean I',m all for getting the old game back but all these crazy ideas of the game losing 80% of the people are stupid. Like LA said that they saw a handful of players leave but most of them all came back anyways.



    Don't forget the game is 5 years old so most people naturally leave anyways and the people on the forums only make up a tiny amount of actual players.



     

     Yes everyone quit way before CU,that's why corolag (coronet) had 100 people+ everyday at almost any hour (except after downtime)



     

    The game had no content back then so everyone stood in the towns and because you needed buffs or you couldn't play the game it's no suprise everyone was there healing wounds, BF and getting buffed. At launch there was no player cities so you saw even more people in one place. Now however most people are out doing things so you don't see as many people.



    Sure the game has less people now but tbh the people playing by the end of 2004 were major fans of the game who will still keep coming back even during the NGE and we saw a increase of players towards the end of the CU.



    SWG is old and dated now though and wont ever grow.

  • StraddenStradden Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
    Originally posted by Burntvet

    Originally posted by Stradden

    Originally posted by Burntvet


    And now that you mention it, I would like to see one of the MMORPG.com editors answer this simple question: Is SOE a paid advertiser on this site?
    I am not wearing a tin-foil hat, but in the interestes of full disclosure, it is a fair question.

     

    They have been. I don't think they are right now, but they have bought ad space from us in the past, just like pretty much every other MMO company out there. Our content office and our business office are not only separate in terms of one not informing the other of its business, but we are also separated by a continent. Content = Nova Scotia Canada, Business = Hawaii.

    So, since you can clearly see the ads on the site, if you're asking me if they are a secret advertiser, the answer is no. If SOE is paying us for AD SPACE, you'll know because you'll see an AD.

    When a company purchases ad space from us, that's exactly what they get. They get a certain amount of space on the site to advertise their product, they don't get any input at all into content or editorial workings of the site.

    I explained, quite rationally, the reason for the change in the words. I know there are a lot of people out there who would love for this to be some giant conspiracy, but it's not. Go back and look through older reviews and see what a 6.5 is worth. That's probably a more worthwile approach than insulting me and everyone else who works for MMORPG.com with these accusations.

    Also, while we're at it... In what world is a 6.5 a score worth buying? I mean seriously. 6.5 is NOT A GOOD SCORE, nor is "Acceptable" a good descriptor. I suspect you won't see "Acceptable" - MMORPG.com on any boxes.

    If I seem upset about this, it's because I am. Every time something like this comes up, it bothers me just a little bit more. I don't know why people feel like it's ok to insult someone else's integrity without a)any kind of evidence or b) knowing them at all.

    Hope that clears things up for you.

     

    Don't know if you were responding specifically to me, but I might have missed the part where I insulted you.

    It was as a simple question, the answer to which reviewers in other media outlets routinely disclose. Especially, where a commerical relationship exists separate from products/services being analyzed or reviewed.

    Consumer Reports (tm) has a very high degree of credibility, for example, because they take NO money, advertising or otherwise, from the companies whose products they review. It completely removes any perception of bias. You answered truthfully that SOE has been a paid advertiser in the past and may be in the future. That's fine, no one is saying different.

    I can accept that reviews and advertising departments may be separate, and that one may not influence the other here, but the same can not be said for other sites (we remember that Gamespot deal, and others).

    So, I think a bit of skepticism is both warranted and useful when such information is not disclaimed.

    Yeah, I now regret quoting your post, as I could totally see what you were saying.

    I think my frustrated response is to the people who automatically jump to those conclusions and feel perfectly free to make accusations (see some fo the earlier posts in this thread).

    We make no bones about the fact that MMO companies advertise with us. The bottom line is that they are the companies that get the most out of advertising here (no one comes to MMORPG.com if they aren't at least interested in playing MMOs). As a result, we can change more for ad space from them than we could from say, Ford (remember, I'm guessing here. I have nothing to dow ith the business end of this site, thank God or we'd all be in trouble. Business man I am not.)

    I'll tell you what: You'll know the first time that anything inappropriate happens. I've always said that I would leave this site if we were EVER to make ANY concessions in terms of reviews and the like for an advertiser. Both morally and in terms of my career, I couldn't afford to stay at a company that engaged in those kinds of activities. fortunately, in the 3+ years I';ve been here, there has never, ever been even a whisper of funny business.

     

     

    Cheers,
    Jon Wood
    Managing Editor
    MMORPG.com

  • Bob_BlawblawBob_Blawblaw Member Posts: 1,278
    Originally posted by Stradden

    Originally posted by Burntvet


    And now that you mention it, I would like to see one of the MMORPG.com editors answer this simple question: Is SOE a paid advertiser on this site?
    I am not wearing a tin-foil hat, but in the interestes of full disclosure, it is a fair question.

     

    They have been. I don't think they are right now, but they have bought ad space from us in the past, just like pretty much every other MMO company out there. Our content office and our business office are not only separate in terms of one not informing the other of its business, but we are also separated by a continent. Content = Nova Scotia Canada, Business = Hawaii.

    So, since you can clearly see the ads on the site, if you're asking me if they are a secret advertiser, the answer is no. If SOE is paying us for AD SPACE, you'll know because you'll see an AD.

    When a company purchases ad space from us, that's exactly what they get. They get a certain amount of space on the site to advertise their product, they don't get any input at all into content or editorial workings of the site.

    I explained, quite rationally, the reason for the change in the words. I know there are a lot of people out there who would love for this to be some giant conspiracy, but it's not. Go back and look through older reviews and see what a 6.5 is worth. That's probably a more worthwile approach than insulting me and everyone else who works for MMORPG.com with these accusations.

    Also, while we're at it... In what world is a 6.5 a score worth buying? I mean seriously. 6.5 is NOT A GOOD SCORE, nor is "Acceptable" a good descriptor. I suspect you won't see "Acceptable" - MMORPG.com on any boxes.

    If I seem upset about this, it's because I am. Every time something like this comes up, it bothers me just a little bit more. I don't know why people feel like it's ok to insult someone else's integrity without a)any kind of evidence or b) knowing them at all.

    Hope that clears things up for you.

     

    No, it doesn't. You never answered the question as to why the term was changed.

    To me, Mediocre = not very good. Acceptable =  OK. Two very different adjectives despite the 6.5 score.

    So why the change of heart Jon?

    If you don't want to be attacked for stuff like this, then don't pull stuff like this. Simple as that. If you are that concerned about your integrity, then prove that you have some. It's not a difficult equation.

    So once again, why was the term changed?

     

  • StraddenStradden Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
    Originally posted by Bob_Blawblaw

    No, it doesn't. You never answered the question as to why the term was changed.
    To me, Mediocre = not very good. Acceptable =  OK. Two very different adjectives despite the 6.5 score.
    So why the change of heart Jon?
    If you don't want to be attacked for stuff like this, then don't pull stuff like this. Simple as that. If you are that concerned about your integrity, then prove that you have some. It's not a difficult equation.
    So once again, why was the term changed?

    I see you didn't actually read my original response. it's post #42 in this thread. Here is is AGAIN so you don't have to go back:

    We have been working some kinks out of our new review system (you may have noticed that this is the first review of its kind).

    The score of 6.5 was given to us by the reviewer. The Mediocre / acceptable / etc word category is tied directly to the score. The score itself did not change in any way.

    6.5 designates an "acceptable" rating. I would like to say again that the rating itself was not changed. We have now corrected the biug that was causing all scores entered to read "mediocre".

    My apologies for the mix-up.

    I'm not "pulling" anything and there was no change of heart. I actually didn't even notice the change until it was pointed out to me through this thread. I saw that there was a bug in our system, I reported it and it was fixed. End of story.

    As to my integrity, how exactly do you want me to "prove that I have some?" I've been doing my best to be as transparent as possible.

    Cheers,
    Jon Wood
    Managing Editor
    MMORPG.com

  • Teran1987Teran1987 Member UncommonPosts: 202

    Sony Online Entertainment - Where games go to die

     

    This game deserves a -1.5 :p

    "Life is not judged by the breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away."

  • NicroxNicrox Member Posts: 140

    Good review its a fair and honest review. Though I'd like too see a live interview with some tough questions asked. Maybe a few other people have some questions and Stradden can do a live interview with Smed LOL.

    1- If so many vets want to come back too swg why is the classic server idea not a good idea since EQ has a classic server.

    2- What is the future for swg now that theres a rumor of a new swg mmo from Bioware.

    3- With so many servers and a of population has the idea of merging all servers too one been considers such as what Eve has.

     

     

  • Bob_BlawblawBob_Blawblaw Member Posts: 1,278
    Originally posted by Stradden

    Originally posted by Bob_Blawblaw

    No, it doesn't. You never answered the question as to why the term was changed.
    To me, Mediocre = not very good. Acceptable =  OK. Two very different adjectives despite the 6.5 score.
    So why the change of heart Jon?
    If you don't want to be attacked for stuff like this, then don't pull stuff like this. Simple as that. If you are that concerned about your integrity, then prove that you have some. It's not a difficult equation.
    So once again, why was the term changed?

    I see you didn't actually read my original response. it's post #42 in this thread. Here is is AGAIN so you don't have to go back:

    We have been working some kinks out of our new review system (you may have noticed that this is the first review of its kind).

    The score of 6.5 was given to us by the reviewer. The Mediocre / acceptable / etc word category is tied directly to the score. The score itself did not change in any way.

    6.5 designates an "acceptable" rating. I would like to say again that the rating itself was not changed. We have now corrected the biug that was causing all scores entered to read "mediocre".

    My apologies for the mix-up.

    I'm not "pulling" anything and there was no change of heart. I actually didn't even notice the change until it was pointed out to me through this thread. I saw that there was a bug in our system, I reported it and it was fixed. End of story.

    As to my integrity, how exactly do you want me to "prove that I have some?" I've been doing my best to be as transparent as possible.

     

    My apologies Jon, you got me. I am sorry.

    You have to see it from our perspective. This site hasn't exactly developed a fair reputation in the moderation department. In the past people have recieved some pretty unjust bans for things that can only be described as insulting to certain developers who may have MMORPG.com on the payroll for advertising. So when we see things like this happen, intentional or otherwise, it gets the synapses firing in defensive position.

    I'd advise the next time something like this happens, some sort of post should be made in regards to the score changes (ie: 'our bad, it was a bug') before somebody else discovers it and cries foul play.

    We live and learn.

  • severiusseverius Member UncommonPosts: 1,515

    I thought the review was rather entertaining.  Especially this: "That said, the game itself remains one of, if not the, most unique endeavors in the short history of the MMORPG genre, and would do well to invest a bit of marketing effort in promoting itself as a thinking man's game rather than a clone of the combat-only orgies that are being churned out by virtually every development studio in the business."

    1. The game was marketed quite heavily especially after the NGE was forced upon an already paying subscriber base.  That marketing proved ineffective and the only marketing the game really gets anymore are the free, please come back and play because we have an investor meeting coming up and we need to show that people log in.

    2. Thinking man's game?  Seriously?!?!?!  The game was originally designed and released in this state.  It has been 4 years since SWG was a game that took any thought.  They dumbed it down with the hologrind, then they dumbed it down further with the village.  They then dumbed it down even further with the removal of jedi death penalties and the like.  Then when it was thought they couldn't dumb it down any further they released the NGE which in fact turned the game into oneo fthose "clone of the combat-only orgies that are being churned out".  Maybe the reviewer should have actually played the original game then he would not have given it a 6.5, not even a 3... it might, in its current incarnation deserve a .5 and that is being generous.

    Thinking man's game, gimme a  break, maybe if you were weened through a steady stream of gameboy games.

  • severiusseverius Member UncommonPosts: 1,515
    Originally posted by Nicrox


    Good review its a fair and honest review. Though I'd like too see a live interview with some tough questions asked. Maybe a few other people have some questions and Stradden can do a live interview with Smed LOL.
    1- If so many vets want to come back too swg why is the classic server idea not a good idea since EQ has a classic server.
    2- What is the future for swg now that theres a rumor of a new swg mmo from Bioware.
    3- With so many servers and a of population has the idea of merging all servers too one been considers such as what Eve has.



     

    I doubt that there are many vets that would return.  Most of us know SOE all to well anymore and a great many of us have left and wouldn't come back if they paid us to, well.... ok for 72k per year I will come back and write stellar reviews of all soe games :P

    Anything concerning the future of SWG would and is rumor.  For almost 2 years now LEC was pulling the license from SOE etcetcetcetc.  I would wager that SOE will keep it wallowing away until SOE finally gives up and admits defeat.  If bioware is making a Star Wars MMO it will probably kill off most of the subs at least for a time.  There are, I believe, some people that continue paying to play thinking that SOE will finally return the game to some semblance of its former glory.  However as long as people pay SOE for the screw overs they will continue to do just that.

    The game's mechanics do not allow for easy server merges.  Not that there are huge guilds and town left anymore to merge the servers would require everyone to pack up then there would be a land rush scenario like what happened in oklahoma a hundred plus years ago.  Also, as far as I know there is still the resource issue.  Resources across servers are not equal.  There are qualities of resources on one server that never appeared on others.  SOE rendered most of hte things in game useless I just dont see them doing that again lol.

  • StraddenStradden Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
    Originally posted by Bob_Blawblaw

    My apologies Jon, you got me. I am sorry.
    You have to see it from our perspective. This site hasn't exactly developed a fair reputation in the moderation department. In the past people have recieved some pretty unjust bans for things that can only be described as insulting to certain developers who may have MMORPG.com on the payroll for advertising. So when we see things like this happen, intentional or otherwise, it gets the synapses firing in defensive position.
    I'd advise the next time something like this happens, some sort of post should be made in regards to the score changes (ie: 'our bad, it was a bug') before somebody else discovers it and cries foul play.
    We live and learn.

    Yeah, like I said, I didn't see that it had been fixed until it was too late :)

    While I understand everyone's frustration with the moderation, I think I'd like to address that as well.

    I think the important thing to remember is that posts that are highly critical of anything are going to be more likley to break our rules than anything else. People often get carried away and go too far in the heat of the moment or because they feel very passionately about the subject. It's the nature of the beast.

    I'm not by any means saying that people don't get warnings / bans unfairly. That's just human nature. Mistakes happen. That's why we encourage our users to petition community@mmorpg.com if they feel they were trreated unfairly. Our Community Manager then investiages the situation. Usually, he finds that the ban / warning was within reason, occasionally he overturns them.

    I talked earlier about the fact that I am pretty well insulated from the business side of things. The mods are even MORE insulated than I am. The CM, who is behind me if you're into rank, is the only staff member who deals with the mods. Even I don't talk to them which means that the business office NEVER talks to them which means they are free from minfluence from us. The only directives they get from us come in the form of our RoC, which the CM makes sure that they enforce.

    There are a number of ex mods roaming around on these forums (Enigma springs immediately to mind :). I would encourage you to talk to them if you want the whole story on the way that moderation works. It hasn't changed too much since I was CM other than the fact that we've actually added the ability for users to petition warnings or bans.

    If you have any other questions or concerns, I'd be happy to answer them as openly and honestly as I possibly can.

    Cheers,
    Jon Wood
    Managing Editor
    MMORPG.com

  • JYCowboyJYCowboy Member UncommonPosts: 652
    Originally posted by Nicrox


    Good review its a fair and honest review. Though I'd like too see a live interview with some tough questions asked. Maybe a few other people have some questions and Stradden can do a live interview with Smed LOL.
    1- If so many vets want to come back too swg why is the classic server idea not a good idea since EQ has a classic server.
    2- What is the future for swg now that theres a rumor of a new swg mmo from Bioware.
    3- With so many servers and a of population has the idea of merging all servers too one been considers such as what Eve has.
     
     



     

    Answers to above:

    1. SOE is not the soul decider of what happens to SWG, LEC is also there.  LEC packages, markets and gathers the market research that is/was used to decide what to do.  SOE developes and runs(servers) the game.  In truth, LEC doesn't want us, the vets who like challenge and world building sandbox as we make up a niche market on thier studies.  They wanted the quick gratification casual market that WOW found and changed the game to meet that.   The target from day one was One Million Subscriptions, just like Linage & Linage II for the times.  They knew it could happen with the right mix.  They didn't count on SOE's trend of releasing an unfinished product to be completed with subs collected later.  In other words, both are to blame.  Going with the NGE was total format change from Sandbox social experiment to quick easy gratification game.  The demographic target went from 12 to 25 year old males to 8 to 18 year old males which is the bigger demographic.  The vocal minority of forum crawler vets were gifted with Ghost ability and some elder gifts for playing and had the door held open if they didn't like it.  Funny thing was the door was slammed in thier faces when the exodus came(defaulting on the ToOW refunds).  Both companies made a commitment for 6 months to do the NGE.  The NGE introduced things that they couldn't go back on (extra characters, Loot, and scrapping of infrastructer code, etc. etc.) to do a roll back.  Further, they knew it would be rough for the first year as they slowly introduced content (and fixes) that would make the game they wanted for thier market.  That first year was crappy in plan also.  Why not a classic server?  It would be totally unsupported as the devs that knew those machanics transfered, got fired, or quit SWG because of the policy or anger.  Remember the NGE was sprung on the live dev team much like it was on us the players.  IMO, this change was fueled with George's philosphy that Star Wars is for kids who are that target market.

    2. Not a rumor.  There will be a new Star Wars MMO based on KOTOR.  It is in development and many of the devs from SWG's launch are working on it.  Will it kill SWG?  Nope.  SOE will fight tooth and nail to keep its contract with LEC and keep this filler for its Station Pass.  Also there are still players subscribing and playing daily.  The problem is they are now spread out over the whole of the galaxies doing Encounters, Base Clubbing, or quest lines.  The static cities are not the gathering places as they once were.  Searches on can give a good idea who might be on as the post 25 or 30 people at a time on a given server.  Howerver, of the 25 servers only the top 5 have significate population and still could benefit from mergers.  There are players on SWG who don't know its history or post on the forums.  They simply play.  LEC could pull the license from SOE if subs and income falls below a certain level.  But what that level is no one knows.  EQ is a bad example to use for getting a classic server for SWG.  EQ is wholly owned by SOE who makes all the decission for those games.  SWG has 2 owners that don't always agree.

    Many here and other forums have faith that the new KOTOR MMO will be everything they want.  Sandbox gameplay with all the content due such a enterprise.  Thats just not the trend in the MMO market right now even if Bioware is involved.  IP holders dont want experiments or next WOW killer.  They choose game formats that can adapt to the content of the IP with little investment and risk free develpment but capture the flavor of that IP.  Examples: AoC, LotRO.  Good or bad, SW:KOTOR online will not be SWG Pre-CU.

    3. Server merge is coming.  As of this posting, I learned that over a week period servers will be taken off line for "maintance".  The list consists of servers with the lowest pops and with only 3 with average pops being maintained.  IMHO, prep for the coming merge. One dev, DevH, has not been seen or heard from for months now.  He has been commited to working on the merge issue.

  • DeeweDeewe Member UncommonPosts: 1,980

    Well Mr Wood,

    even as a SWG "vet" I'm sorry to see how things can turn bad when writing about this game.

    I guess you knew this review would become a hot topic

    Now, regarding your article, I would be interested in your input on the points I mentionned in my post #4

    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/2352018#2352018

     

  • KabelKabel Member Posts: 31

    "That said, the game itself remains one of, if not the, most unique endeavors in the short history of the MMORPG genre, and would do well to invest a bit of marketing effort in promoting itself as a thinking man's game rather than a clone of the combat-only orgies that are being churned out by virtually every development studio in the business."

     

    I've been having a good time playing this game again.  I re-subscribed at the end of August and rolled a new toon on one of the populated servers, and I gotta tell ya, it has been a real breath of fresh air compared to the gluttony of free to play mmo's that I tried, the WoW clones (AoC included) and the over-hyped failure that Vanguard turned out to be. 

    SWG has a shady past, there's no getting around that point.  But if you lay every modern mmo on the table next to each other as they stand now, there simply is no other game that compares to SWG and what it has to offer the player looking for a sandbox style mmo.

  • StraddenStradden Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
    Originally posted by Deewe


    Well Mr Wood,
    even as a SWG "vet" I'm sorry to see how things can turn bad when writing about this game.
    I guess you knew this review would become a hot topic
    Now, regarding your article, I would be interested in your input on the points I mentionned in my post #4
    http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/2352018#2352018
     

    I would, but I didn't write the article :) Jef Reahard, one of our reviewers did :)

    Cheers,
    Jon Wood
    Managing Editor
    MMORPG.com

  • OzmodanOzmodan Member EpicPosts: 9,581
    Originally posted by Kabel


    "That said, the game itself remains one of, if not the, most unique endeavors in the short history of the MMORPG genre, and would do well to invest a bit of marketing effort in promoting itself as a thinking man's game rather than a clone of the combat-only orgies that are being churned out by virtually every development studio in the business."
     
    I've been having a good time playing this game again.  I re-subscribed at the end of August and rolled a new toon on one of the populated servers, and I gotta tell ya, it has been a real breath of fresh air compared to the gluttony of free to play mmo's that I tried, the WoW clones (AoC included) and the over-hyped failure that Vanguard turned out to be. 
    SWG has a shady past, there's no getting around that point.  But if you lay every modern mmo on the table next to each other as they stand now, there simply is no other game that compares to SWG and what it has to offer the player looking for a sandbox style mmo.



     

    What don't you get,  SWG is no longer a sandbox, it has classes, no item decay means a dead economy, the crafters nightmare.  SWG is just not a sandbox in any sense of the word.

  • ClattucClattuc Member UncommonPosts: 163
    Originally posted by Ozmodan



    What don't you get,  SWG is no longer a sandbox, it has classes, no item decay means a dead economy, the crafters nightmare.  SWG is just not a sandbox in any sense of the word.

    It is still MORE of a sandbox than most MMO's.  The "classes" (a/k/a iconic professions) are just some fencing erected to keep you from mixing professions like the old days.  You can respec any time you want, and you keep your category XP (combat, trade, ent) when you do respec, which means if you switch back later you don't lose anything.  Beast mastery is an option for everyone, and Pilot and Politician are still independent trees.  That's still pretty sandbox-y.

    I hear you about stuff like item decay, but that's hardly a sandbox issue, and it's purely policy also: if they wanted to turn it back on tomorrow, they could.  The reason they don't want to is that they're worried that people on the various ghost servers will have no way to replace decayed stuff.  There are lot of "permanent emergency" policies like that - take self destruct in JTL for example.

    Part of the problem with all this is that  while Vogel wanted a million casual Star Wars fan gamers, Koster built something elegant and complicated and unusual -- that appealed to a market 1/6th that size.  Then they left.  Brass at SOE/LEC never really "got" their own game, and the new developers found that if you messed with the gears too much, the pretty machine broke spectacularly.  So most of the guts are still in there.  They put a dunce cap and a strait jacket on it with the NGE, but the strait jacket is wearing thin and the gears are glinting through.

Sign In or Register to comment.