I don't get what the problme is with people either flaming or liking a game. Like really there is no regulation of freedom of speech on this website since it is not governmentally owned. The people who get to decide ultimately what we say is MMORPG.com. So as long as they do not see a problem with one is saying and think it is not crossing the lines than it is open game. To be honest if you are to tell me that this is a mmo I would laugh in your face because of the amount of stuff I have actually seen. I am sick and tired of listening to what devs say. So unless you can back it up and show me. Than stfu and sit down. Right now as it stand this game is looking to be a co-op game. Really if you read everything what the devs have said this is pratically a co-op with pvp in it. If I were to ever buy this game I would hope there is no monthly fee because this in the long run is pretty much a single player game with a few probably 10% group play. Is this game innovative... No... Many games and mmo's have done everything possible. There is really nothing new left to do in the mmo industry unless you were to make something crazy like an artificial AI. Literally creating a living breathing world like Earth in a mmo. However as it stand AI needs some assitance and can't really think on its own like a living person can.
Apparently there has been a lot of people drinking their haterade laterly, even bringing negative attention to this game will spark people's curiousity as to why people hate this game. Personally, it don't matter to me whether or not it is an mmo or single player co-op. When i was playing kotor 1&2 i always wished i could have a friend playing along side me instead of npc's. So the fact i can run the storyline quests with a friend is awesome imo. I don't need to be standing around spamming LFG in public chat for hours just to get a full party of 5-6 random nubs who will most likely try to ruin my quest or fun. But the thing i find most funny about all this hate, especially from the usual suspects. Is the fact they will be right there in line with us trying this game out and will do one of two things after playing it. 1.) they will run back to forums and talk about how awesome the game is and pretend they were on board as a fan from day one. 2.) they will play the game up until so and so level, log out and run back to forums and complain about how bad they thought the game was and how it will fail hard. Then when all is said and done and the next mmo to be made is announced, the cycle of hate will continue on the path of trying to knock down another game. So not being much of a poster, i will sit back, watch the trolls be nubs and laugh at them and their posts while occasionally posting here and there. All while waiting for a game i think is gonna be epic to me, don't care if you don't play, just one less nub troll trying to ruin the game, as long as i'm having fun, thats all that matters.
Tillamook, I commend you for trying to point out facts. But it's a worthless exercise in futility to argue with trolls.You'll get the same type of excuses that rational people get when trying to convince conspiracy theorists that the moon landing wasn't faked. They'll say your facts come from the developers and therefore should be dismissed out of hand. Substitute "government" for "developers" and know one would know the difference.
I really don't understand all of the "It's not an MMO!" arguments to be honest. Massively Multiplayer Online... That is a very broad definition that many try to squeeze into their narrow perception. No where does MMO insist on a persistant world, or define itself as massive amounts of people in the same area, or whatever. It is very generic.
I think this game will be an MMO in the same way GW is an MMO. Massively multiplayer and online, but just not in the normal conventions of a giant, uninstanced, persistant world that many use to define MMO.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
I really don't understand all of the "It's not an MMO!" arguments to be honest. Massively Multiplayer Online... That is a very broad definition that many try to squeeze into their narrow perception. No where does MMO insist on a persistant world, or define itself as massive amounts of people in the same area, or whatever. It is very generic. This game will be an MMO in the same way GW is an MMO. Massively multiplayer and online, but just not in the normal conventions of a giant, uninstanced, persistant world that many use to define MMO.
It "might" be like GW and so on, but you really can't say "This game WILL BE" now can you?
I really don't understand all of the "It's not an MMO!" arguments to be honest. Massively Multiplayer Online... That is a very broad definition that many try to squeeze into their narrow perception. No where does MMO insist on a persistant world, or define itself as massive amounts of people in the same area, or whatever. It is very generic. This game will be an MMO in the same way GW is an MMO. Massively multiplayer and online, but just not in the normal conventions of a giant, uninstanced, persistant world that many use to define MMO.
It "might" be like GW and so on, but you really can't say "This game WILL BE" now can you?
I thought the "I think" was implied but I edited just for you :P
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
I really don't understand all of the "It's not an MMO!" arguments to be honest. Massively Multiplayer Online... That is a very broad definition that many try to squeeze into their narrow perception. No where does MMO insist on a persistant world, or define itself as massive amounts of people in the same area, or whatever. It is very generic. This game will be an MMO in the same way GW is an MMO. Massively multiplayer and online, but just not in the normal conventions of a giant, uninstanced, persistant world that many use to define MMO.
It "might" be like GW and so on, but you really can't say "This game WILL BE" now can you?
I thought the "I think" was implied but I edited just for you :P
With the constant amount of jackasses flowing in here telling everybody "how it is" I really coudn't tell. I just seen it like it was written down.
I really don't understand all of the "It's not an MMO!" arguments to be honest. Massively Multiplayer Online... That is a very broad definition that many try to squeeze into their narrow perception. No where does MMO insist on a persistant world, or define itself as massive amounts of people in the same area, or whatever. It is very generic. This game will be an MMO in the same way GW is an MMO. Massively multiplayer and online, but just not in the normal conventions of a giant, uninstanced, persistant world that many use to define MMO.
It "might" be like GW and so on, but you really can't say "This game WILL BE" now can you?
I thought the "I think" was implied but I edited just for you :P
With the constant amount of jackasses flowing in here telling everybody "how it is" I really coudn't tell. I just seen it like it was written down.
So sorry if "I think" was intended.
Nah, I meant to put it but forgot, so I did come off as one of those "I HAVE FAKTS!" guys haha
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Also if the game is like guild GW (I really never liked that game). I would probably still play it. They have put forth enough for me to believe I would enjoy playing it with friends. And to be honest, I won't play a certain MMO unless atleast one friend goes with me. See no point in playing by myself.
Why so cynical? Has Bioware done something that I'm not aware of in the past to earn such cynicism?
No, Bioware have not.
Burt the hands of their lords and masters at LA and EA are red with the blood of a thousand dashed hopes and dreams.
And if LA and EA were in fact making TOR we could safely move you from the catorgy of "bitter SWG vet" to "concerned consumer". Alas though it appears Bioware is in fact the developer.
I am not really understanding all of the hate directed at people who are concerned with the direction of this game.
I'll be honest with you all, I'm one of them. I've followed the game, and watched it since it was announced. What I've seen so far has me excited. So, yes, I *will* be in line with you all on release day.
The problem is that the game, with the limited information that is available to us, looks to be a massive single player RPG with multiplayer functionality and an complex hub.
This raises some serious issues for those of us who take our MMOs seriously. It seems like, while the story parts will be fun (and I look forward to them), that there is going to be relatively little to justify a monthly fee. I've worked in MMO development before, and I can honestly say that there is only so much "story" that can be crammed into a game like this. Eventually, and it might take a month or two, we're going to be running the same missions over and over again. If we group at all we'll see a lot of the content faster. This is a problem because, other than the "story" bits, bioware has given us nothing.
There is not one word about what "end game" will look like. Not one word about how pvp is going to work. Not one word about the server architecture. Not one word about some of the sandbox elements a lot of EVE and former SWG players would like to see.
And to answer some of you, no. I trust bioware implicitly when it comes to making single player Western RPGs. They are, at this moment in time, the best in the business. What I'm not sure about is their ability to build and sustain an MMO. What they do works very well for single player games, and there are a lot of potential problems (as stated above) with trying to build a Massively Multiplayer Game around what they do.
Furthermore, I think that it is MORE than fair to point out the failings of EA, which now owns and operates Bioware. EA's track record is CERTAINLY on the table for discussion. And so is Lucas Arts for that matter, since they control the license and are almost certainly playing a large role in development.
Why so cynical? Has Bioware done something that I'm not aware of in the past to earn such cynicism?
No, Bioware have not.
Burt the hands of their lords and masters at LA and EA are red with the blood of a thousand dashed hopes and dreams.
And if LA and EA were in fact making TOR we could safely move you from the catorgy of "bitter SWG vet" to "concerned consumer". Alas though it appears Bioware is in fact the developer.
Bioware is the developer, sure. EA owns Bioware. EA controls what the studio does. If you have ANY doubts about it, just ask the boys and girls at Mythic.
Why so cynical? Has Bioware done something that I'm not aware of in the past to earn such cynicism?
No, Bioware have not.
Burt the hands of their lords and masters at LA and EA are red with the blood of a thousand dashed hopes and dreams.
And if LA and EA were in fact making TOR we could safely move you from the catorgy of "bitter SWG vet" to "concerned consumer". Alas though it appears Bioware is in fact the developer.
Bioware is the developer, sure. EA owns Bioware. EA controls what the studio does. If you have ANY doubts about it, just ask the boys and girls at Mythic.
Why would I ask Mythic anything when Bioware runs them now? I'd ask Bioware.
EA trusts Bioware enough to not only give them their own autonomy BUT to also give them the directional control of Mythic as well. If EA had any doubts about the competance of Bioware they wouldn't be handing over control of Mythic to them. So by bringing up Mythic I'd say you've destroyed your own point.
A: Yes, Star Wars: The Old Republic is a MMO, or “massively multiplayer online game”. Star Wars: The Old Republic will allow thousands of players to explore, adventure, and fight in a single game session.
A: While there are some tasks that cannot be completed without the cooperation of others, the majority of the game can be accomplished by playing alone. www.swtor.com/info/faq#348
So see there you have it, it's an MMO. And unlike EQ2 you won't always need to recruit 5 friends to get beyond level 40, but some tasks will require a group. Seriously, I doubt BioWare is gonna spend nearly 200 million to make a co-op play game and omfg LIE TO US ALL. If this is a co-op game, then so is WoW, so is SWG pre-cu, since you could play that entire game solo. What some of you folks state is only YOUR opinion not fact, the above FAQ I highlighted is fact. Will there be instances? sure, no more or less than in any other MMO game out there today I'm sure. Will they make use of phasing? I'm sure, they have talked about it. Most likely most of the content instances will be in the early stages of the game and heroic content. Keep in mind EQ2 had shit loads of instance zoning, more than a lot of games, but oh yeah because you had to recruit 5 people to run a Heroic encounter, that made it an MMO. I'm willing to bet a lot of games here on this site would lose their MMO card if the standards were set by angry SWG players, which they aren't.
That is all.
Lol, quoting the Q&A like that is not going to convince anyone.
I must admit tho that after seeing the latest video's I got interested more in this game, however I also noticed alot of solo and duo play.
You can't tell with a straigth face this will be a serious mmorpg, but it might be a nice mmo light and it might be fun. Things will depend alot on the subscription fee. Because it will have to offer more than let's say Diablo III if it wants to compete for my euro's.
If you are interested in subscription or PCU numbers for MMORPG's, check out my site : http://mmodata.blogspot.be/ Favorite MMORPG's : DAoC pre ToA-NF, SWG Pre CU-NGE, EVE Online
I noticed that to. Probably had something to do with them not demonstrating full scale raiding. Or the fact that it's in alpha and it not being in the hands of players, a bunch of players able to show it's capabilities in large scale fights.
It's funny how people base most of this stuff off a 20 minute video cut into 4 different demonstrations. A LOT of solo play you say. yeah..
Wait for beta. I'm sure the MMO part will be more visible then.
This inane argument over the classification of games is just.....retarded.
Not it's not. Single-player RPG's represent older titles that sold without a subscription fee. They were limited worlds that may have even featured some limited coop play. MMO's are massive online worlds that are supposed to be filled and played simultaneously by hundreds if not thousands of players. They require significantly more development time and money and more hardware and personal support for both management and future content development.
As consumers we can justify a $15 monthly fee for an MMO, and not for a single-player RPG. All PC games sold in the past two decades have followed this model because the free market has supported it. To say that is doesn't matter weather Star Wars: TOG will be an MMO or not is ludicrous because it effects what consumers will be willing to pay for it. Consumers simply won't pay $15 a month for a single-player RPG no matter how well it has been developed or voiced over despite what a scant few of you may think.
We'll all have to wait and see what the final product will be and none of us are sure what exactly that will be. If Star Wars TOR doesn't create a massive world that allows for interaction among thousands of players, it won't last long because nobody is going to pay a subscription fee for it. MMO players expect large scale battles PvE or PvP, not two man skirmishes. MMO players expect a huge player run economy, not worthless loot pick-ups (Anyone need some extra Diablo gold? 'Cause I have extra if you want). MMO players expect some sort of crafting system and want to sell and trade these crafts with a huge market. Finally, MMO players expect to make a difference in their respective worlds. Will these choices that are offered in the cutscenes really make a difference or are they just a bit of different dialogs that will ultimately lead players to the same place no matter what they pick. The developers had better make sure that it's the former because MMO players in today's market are demanding and the MMO min/maxers will instantly see right through any gloss or BS whereas single-player RPGers won't really care too much.
I truly hope Star Wars TOR will be the next great MMO, but from what I've seen so far I'm not holding my breath. Thanks to Warhammer Online (my latest burn), it's tough to get excited for any product until it proves itself to the market. Unfortunately the constant battery of crap developers have pushed on consumers these days have made us a cynical and careful lot.
Why would I ask Mythic anything when Bioware runs them now? I'd ask Bioware.
EA trusts Bioware enough to not only give them their own autonomy BUT to also give them the directional control of Mythic as well. If EA had any doubts about the competance of Bioware they wouldn't be handing over control of Mythic to them. So by bringing up Mythic I'd say you've destroyed your own point.
Yes, that's right. Because EA controlled Mythic. In the final analysis EA wasn't happy with Mythic and closed the studio.
Given EAs history with studios its bought up, and titles under its control, especially given its recent history with Mythic--which was a very good (one of the best) MMO studio, its really hard for you to argue that EA doesn't maintain creative control over everything that happens at Bioware.
In fact, it is really quite comical that you would try to suggest otherwise.
Straight up, I'm not the only one who saw EA's purchase of Bioware as one of the greatest tragedies over the last decade in the video game business.
Mythic churned out a pretty terrible game (WAR) and EA slammed them for it. They had no one to blame but themselves. Don't try to push the blame onto EA. All EA did was shove ungodly amounts of money into Mythic which will probabley never be recouped.
So I think it's pretty comical you would try to suggest the failings of WAR and it's subsequant effects were the result of EAs doing.
Fans and trolls all a like know what have been said about this game and know what has been seen. The mojority of it lean to the fact that this game will be majorly played single player. Like I said before, I will no longer play a mmo with a monthly fee that I am pretty much play by myself.
Also it is just the fact that us gamers are saying that this game is the type of mmo we want. So other developers will follow in line. It is kinda like WoW. It success pretty much set the bar for the coming games afterwards. If this "MMO" is successful, than it will set the bar for other developers to follow. I am one who does not want more MMO's to be like this, a single player mmo with the choice of group play. I am hoping more and more games come out that has balance between group play and single play or sandbox (50/50 split).
P.S. That game you suggested for me tillamook. All those features have been implied into an other mmo game. You can't honestly sit there and tell me that there is more features that can be added to an mmo that has not been already (or semi) done by an other MMO. At this time and point of age of mmo we are at the point where we say "what more can be done?". Since there is very little inovative features left to add. Devs have to now look at how to imply those features in a successful way that did not work for the other game.
"is this an mmorpg?" of course it is dont be rediculous. All mmo's dont have to be cut from the same mold, and they dont have to offer the same features. We all have different tastes whether you like to solo 95% of the time while interacting in cities for economical purposes or pvp or whether you like to get groups together and go out and do 20-40 person raids. Its all about what each player wants and as long as there are players out there who enjoy a play style there will be a company making a game for them. You can sit around al day and argue about what mmorpg means to YOU but at the end of the day continuous subscribers will tell the tale as to whether or not its a game or play style that gamers will support. Keep in mind tho that in both SUPER popular mmo's you could solo your way to max level without much effort and its only been at end game where you've really been required to group/raid to continue experiencing content and this is a piece of this game that we have little to no info on....
Where are we going??? Why are we in this handbasket??
I wonder what people were after exactly from TOR? (I mean apart from the SWG people who want SWG2 )
After all, would there be more rants if they had shown examples of content that was the same as WoW but with their art over the top? I remember when WAR was being shown, they constantly waved flags and showed content that was "different" - public quests yay we're innovating! etc.
I can see that Bioware are doing a similar thing in that they are trying to show what they are doing differently for an mmo. Granted it sounds a lot like the epic quests in Lotro, so hardly an innovation, but they are showing how they intend to implement story via cutscenes and dialogue. I honestly can't see them faulted for that.
Too single player? Let's look at most other mmo's (yes even/especially WoW), single player is usually the way to go whilst levelling (in WoW honestly who grouped up to kill kobolds in the human starting area? - first group I had in WoW was for deadmines). Sure, once you hit endgame you tend to group more for dungeons - but even then, plenty of solo content via crafting, daily quests etc.
Bioware stated that they have carved a story for each class that is bigger than the single player storyline in Kotor 1&2. I honestly can't see the problem there, unless you don't like story/content and prefer fast levelling/phat lewt?
Most MMO's I've played have had interesting story's to play through, but I tended to find that once you'd levelled one character to the top, the rest of the time you power-levelled alts and ignored story the second time. By giving you a decent story for each class, Bioware is aiming to give people replayability.
Currently we know honestly little about TOR except for what they've shown us - and what they've shown us so far is the direction they are taking. It will be an mmo from the perspective that a lot of people will play it with plenty per server (or however they design it). You will have a class quest (possibly similar to the epic lines in Lotro), but other than that all they are saying so far is that quest giver will be voice acted. They've said the usual "mmo" stuff will be in with raids, crafting, dungeons etc.
So all the naysaying seems a bit off to me.
Frankly if I'd seen their coverage and it'd all been about how similar they are to other mmo's it probably would have dented my interest. I mean jeez guys what did you want them to say "Our first dungeon is the 'deadspacemines' where you enter space pirate caves and fight a large alien with a vibro-hammer before boarding their space ship and fighting the leader called Han Cleef?"
So far, they've shown how they are different, why not wait till they declare how they will also be the same before declaring they won't be?
Comments
LMAO. Full PvP. They forgot to mention full loot and perma death though :P
This inane argument over the classification of games is just.....retarded.
Apparently there has been a lot of people drinking their haterade laterly, even bringing negative attention to this game will spark people's curiousity as to why people hate this game. Personally, it don't matter to me whether or not it is an mmo or single player co-op. When i was playing kotor 1&2 i always wished i could have a friend playing along side me instead of npc's. So the fact i can run the storyline quests with a friend is awesome imo. I don't need to be standing around spamming LFG in public chat for hours just to get a full party of 5-6 random nubs who will most likely try to ruin my quest or fun. But the thing i find most funny about all this hate, especially from the usual suspects. Is the fact they will be right there in line with us trying this game out and will do one of two things after playing it. 1.) they will run back to forums and talk about how awesome the game is and pretend they were on board as a fan from day one. 2.) they will play the game up until so and so level, log out and run back to forums and complain about how bad they thought the game was and how it will fail hard. Then when all is said and done and the next mmo to be made is announced, the cycle of hate will continue on the path of trying to knock down another game. So not being much of a poster, i will sit back, watch the trolls be nubs and laugh at them and their posts while occasionally posting here and there. All while waiting for a game i think is gonna be epic to me, don't care if you don't play, just one less nub troll trying to ruin the game, as long as i'm having fun, thats all that matters.
Tillamook, I commend you for trying to point out facts. But it's a worthless exercise in futility to argue with trolls.You'll get the same type of excuses that rational people get when trying to convince conspiracy theorists that the moon landing wasn't faked. They'll say your facts come from the developers and therefore should be dismissed out of hand. Substitute "government" for "developers" and know one would know the difference.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
I really don't understand all of the "It's not an MMO!" arguments to be honest. Massively Multiplayer Online... That is a very broad definition that many try to squeeze into their narrow perception. No where does MMO insist on a persistant world, or define itself as massive amounts of people in the same area, or whatever. It is very generic.
I think this game will be an MMO in the same way GW is an MMO. Massively multiplayer and online, but just not in the normal conventions of a giant, uninstanced, persistant world that many use to define MMO.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
It "might" be like GW and so on, but you really can't say "This game WILL BE" now can you?
It "might" be like GW and so on, but you really can't say "This game WILL BE" now can you?
I thought the "I think" was implied but I edited just for you :P
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
It "might" be like GW and so on, but you really can't say "This game WILL BE" now can you?
I thought the "I think" was implied but I edited just for you :P
With the constant amount of jackasses flowing in here telling everybody "how it is" I really coudn't tell. I just seen it like it was written down.
So sorry if "I think" was intended.
It "might" be like GW and so on, but you really can't say "This game WILL BE" now can you?
I thought the "I think" was implied but I edited just for you :P
With the constant amount of jackasses flowing in here telling everybody "how it is" I really coudn't tell. I just seen it like it was written down.
So sorry if "I think" was intended.
Nah, I meant to put it but forgot, so I did come off as one of those "I HAVE FAKTS!" guys haha
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Also if the game is like guild GW (I really never liked that game). I would probably still play it. They have put forth enough for me to believe I would enjoy playing it with friends. And to be honest, I won't play a certain MMO unless atleast one friend goes with me. See no point in playing by myself.
Even if it's not an MMO, it's multiplayer KOTOR for sure. We win either way to me.
See you in the dream..
The Fires from heaven, now as cold as ice. A rapid ascension tolls a heavy price.
No, Bioware have not.
Burt the hands of their lords and masters at LA and EA are red with the blood of a thousand dashed hopes and dreams.
And if LA and EA were in fact making TOR we could safely move you from the catorgy of "bitter SWG vet" to "concerned consumer". Alas though it appears Bioware is in fact the developer.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
I am not really understanding all of the hate directed at people who are concerned with the direction of this game.
I'll be honest with you all, I'm one of them. I've followed the game, and watched it since it was announced. What I've seen so far has me excited. So, yes, I *will* be in line with you all on release day.
The problem is that the game, with the limited information that is available to us, looks to be a massive single player RPG with multiplayer functionality and an complex hub.
This raises some serious issues for those of us who take our MMOs seriously. It seems like, while the story parts will be fun (and I look forward to them), that there is going to be relatively little to justify a monthly fee. I've worked in MMO development before, and I can honestly say that there is only so much "story" that can be crammed into a game like this. Eventually, and it might take a month or two, we're going to be running the same missions over and over again. If we group at all we'll see a lot of the content faster. This is a problem because, other than the "story" bits, bioware has given us nothing.
There is not one word about what "end game" will look like. Not one word about how pvp is going to work. Not one word about the server architecture. Not one word about some of the sandbox elements a lot of EVE and former SWG players would like to see.
And to answer some of you, no. I trust bioware implicitly when it comes to making single player Western RPGs. They are, at this moment in time, the best in the business. What I'm not sure about is their ability to build and sustain an MMO. What they do works very well for single player games, and there are a lot of potential problems (as stated above) with trying to build a Massively Multiplayer Game around what they do.
Furthermore, I think that it is MORE than fair to point out the failings of EA, which now owns and operates Bioware. EA's track record is CERTAINLY on the table for discussion. And so is Lucas Arts for that matter, since they control the license and are almost certainly playing a large role in development.
-R
No, Bioware have not.
Burt the hands of their lords and masters at LA and EA are red with the blood of a thousand dashed hopes and dreams.
And if LA and EA were in fact making TOR we could safely move you from the catorgy of "bitter SWG vet" to "concerned consumer". Alas though it appears Bioware is in fact the developer.
Bioware is the developer, sure. EA owns Bioware. EA controls what the studio does. If you have ANY doubts about it, just ask the boys and girls at Mythic.
No, Bioware have not.
Burt the hands of their lords and masters at LA and EA are red with the blood of a thousand dashed hopes and dreams.
And if LA and EA were in fact making TOR we could safely move you from the catorgy of "bitter SWG vet" to "concerned consumer". Alas though it appears Bioware is in fact the developer.
Bioware is the developer, sure. EA owns Bioware. EA controls what the studio does. If you have ANY doubts about it, just ask the boys and girls at Mythic.
Why would I ask Mythic anything when Bioware runs them now? I'd ask Bioware.
EA trusts Bioware enough to not only give them their own autonomy BUT to also give them the directional control of Mythic as well. If EA had any doubts about the competance of Bioware they wouldn't be handing over control of Mythic to them. So by bringing up Mythic I'd say you've destroyed your own point.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
Lol, quoting the Q&A like that is not going to convince anyone.
I must admit tho that after seeing the latest video's I got interested more in this game, however I also noticed alot of solo and duo play.
You can't tell with a straigth face this will be a serious mmorpg, but it might be a nice mmo light and it might be fun. Things will depend alot on the subscription fee. Because it will have to offer more than let's say Diablo III if it wants to compete for my euro's.
If you are interested in subscription or PCU numbers for MMORPG's, check out my site :
http://mmodata.blogspot.be/
Favorite MMORPG's : DAoC pre ToA-NF, SWG Pre CU-NGE, EVE Online
I noticed that to. Probably had something to do with them not demonstrating full scale raiding. Or the fact that it's in alpha and it not being in the hands of players, a bunch of players able to show it's capabilities in large scale fights.
It's funny how people base most of this stuff off a 20 minute video cut into 4 different demonstrations. A LOT of solo play you say. yeah..
Wait for beta. I'm sure the MMO part will be more visible then.
Not it's not. Single-player RPG's represent older titles that sold without a subscription fee. They were limited worlds that may have even featured some limited coop play. MMO's are massive online worlds that are supposed to be filled and played simultaneously by hundreds if not thousands of players. They require significantly more development time and money and more hardware and personal support for both management and future content development.
As consumers we can justify a $15 monthly fee for an MMO, and not for a single-player RPG. All PC games sold in the past two decades have followed this model because the free market has supported it. To say that is doesn't matter weather Star Wars: TOG will be an MMO or not is ludicrous because it effects what consumers will be willing to pay for it. Consumers simply won't pay $15 a month for a single-player RPG no matter how well it has been developed or voiced over despite what a scant few of you may think.
We'll all have to wait and see what the final product will be and none of us are sure what exactly that will be. If Star Wars TOR doesn't create a massive world that allows for interaction among thousands of players, it won't last long because nobody is going to pay a subscription fee for it. MMO players expect large scale battles PvE or PvP, not two man skirmishes. MMO players expect a huge player run economy, not worthless loot pick-ups (Anyone need some extra Diablo gold? 'Cause I have extra if you want). MMO players expect some sort of crafting system and want to sell and trade these crafts with a huge market. Finally, MMO players expect to make a difference in their respective worlds. Will these choices that are offered in the cutscenes really make a difference or are they just a bit of different dialogs that will ultimately lead players to the same place no matter what they pick. The developers had better make sure that it's the former because MMO players in today's market are demanding and the MMO min/maxers will instantly see right through any gloss or BS whereas single-player RPGers won't really care too much.
I truly hope Star Wars TOR will be the next great MMO, but from what I've seen so far I'm not holding my breath. Thanks to Warhammer Online (my latest burn), it's tough to get excited for any product until it proves itself to the market. Unfortunately the constant battery of crap developers have pushed on consumers these days have made us a cynical and careful lot.
Why would I ask Mythic anything when Bioware runs them now? I'd ask Bioware.
EA trusts Bioware enough to not only give them their own autonomy BUT to also give them the directional control of Mythic as well. If EA had any doubts about the competance of Bioware they wouldn't be handing over control of Mythic to them. So by bringing up Mythic I'd say you've destroyed your own point.
Yes, that's right. Because EA controlled Mythic. In the final analysis EA wasn't happy with Mythic and closed the studio.
Given EAs history with studios its bought up, and titles under its control, especially given its recent history with Mythic--which was a very good (one of the best) MMO studio, its really hard for you to argue that EA doesn't maintain creative control over everything that happens at Bioware.
In fact, it is really quite comical that you would try to suggest otherwise.
Straight up, I'm not the only one who saw EA's purchase of Bioware as one of the greatest tragedies over the last decade in the video game business.
-R
Mythic churned out a pretty terrible game (WAR) and EA slammed them for it. They had no one to blame but themselves. Don't try to push the blame onto EA. All EA did was shove ungodly amounts of money into Mythic which will probabley never be recouped.
So I think it's pretty comical you would try to suggest the failings of WAR and it's subsequant effects were the result of EAs doing.
Alltern8 Blog | Star Wars Space Combat and The Old Republic | Cryptic Studios - A Pre Post-Mortem | Klingon Preview, STO's Monster Play
Posted on wrong account
Fans and trolls all a like know what have been said about this game and know what has been seen. The mojority of it lean to the fact that this game will be majorly played single player. Like I said before, I will no longer play a mmo with a monthly fee that I am pretty much play by myself.
Also it is just the fact that us gamers are saying that this game is the type of mmo we want. So other developers will follow in line. It is kinda like WoW. It success pretty much set the bar for the coming games afterwards. If this "MMO" is successful, than it will set the bar for other developers to follow. I am one who does not want more MMO's to be like this, a single player mmo with the choice of group play. I am hoping more and more games come out that has balance between group play and single play or sandbox (50/50 split).
P.S. That game you suggested for me tillamook. All those features have been implied into an other mmo game. You can't honestly sit there and tell me that there is more features that can be added to an mmo that has not been already (or semi) done by an other MMO. At this time and point of age of mmo we are at the point where we say "what more can be done?". Since there is very little inovative features left to add. Devs have to now look at how to imply those features in a successful way that did not work for the other game.
"is this an mmorpg?" of course it is dont be rediculous. All mmo's dont have to be cut from the same mold, and they dont have to offer the same features. We all have different tastes whether you like to solo 95% of the time while interacting in cities for economical purposes or pvp or whether you like to get groups together and go out and do 20-40 person raids. Its all about what each player wants and as long as there are players out there who enjoy a play style there will be a company making a game for them. You can sit around al day and argue about what mmorpg means to YOU but at the end of the day continuous subscribers will tell the tale as to whether or not its a game or play style that gamers will support. Keep in mind tho that in both SUPER popular mmo's you could solo your way to max level without much effort and its only been at end game where you've really been required to group/raid to continue experiencing content and this is a piece of this game that we have little to no info on....
Where are we going??? Why are we in this handbasket??
I wonder what people were after exactly from TOR? (I mean apart from the SWG people who want SWG2
)
After all, would there be more rants if they had shown examples of content that was the same as WoW but with their art over the top? I remember when WAR was being shown, they constantly waved flags and showed content that was "different" - public quests yay we're innovating! etc.
I can see that Bioware are doing a similar thing in that they are trying to show what they are doing differently for an mmo. Granted it sounds a lot like the epic quests in Lotro, so hardly an innovation, but they are showing how they intend to implement story via cutscenes and dialogue. I honestly can't see them faulted for that.
Too single player? Let's look at most other mmo's (yes even/especially WoW), single player is usually the way to go whilst levelling (in WoW honestly who grouped up to kill kobolds in the human starting area? - first group I had in WoW was for deadmines). Sure, once you hit endgame you tend to group more for dungeons - but even then, plenty of solo content via crafting, daily quests etc.
Bioware stated that they have carved a story for each class that is bigger than the single player storyline in Kotor 1&2. I honestly can't see the problem there, unless you don't like story/content and prefer fast levelling/phat lewt?
Most MMO's I've played have had interesting story's to play through, but I tended to find that once you'd levelled one character to the top, the rest of the time you power-levelled alts and ignored story the second time. By giving you a decent story for each class, Bioware is aiming to give people replayability.
Currently we know honestly little about TOR except for what they've shown us - and what they've shown us so far is the direction they are taking. It will be an mmo from the perspective that a lot of people will play it with plenty per server (or however they design it). You will have a class quest (possibly similar to the epic lines in Lotro), but other than that all they are saying so far is that quest giver will be voice acted. They've said the usual "mmo" stuff will be in with raids, crafting, dungeons etc.
So all the naysaying seems a bit off to me.
Frankly if I'd seen their coverage and it'd all been about how similar they are to other mmo's it probably would have dented my interest. I mean jeez guys what did you want them to say "Our first dungeon is the 'deadspacemines' where you enter space pirate caves and fight a large alien with a vibro-hammer before boarding their space ship and fighting the leader called Han Cleef?"
So far, they've shown how they are different, why not wait till they declare how they will also be the same before declaring they won't be?