Neither got more votes than Both? I gotta say, thats pretty bad on a gaming site that focuses on all kinds of games. I love what TOR is bringing to the table and will likely play that for much longer than I play GW2, but I know for a fact, unless these two games release on the very same day, or even a week apart, these are both, day 1 buys for me.
I just don't understand why so many want to put these games against eachother, when any true, varied, gamer (what I thought would be IGNs core base) would willfully play just about anything that seems remotely interesting.
These are the two heavyweights on the horizon. Nothing else really comes close. They are natural competitors at this point.
As for me, I'll be playing GW2 only. SWTOR will do well for itself, I have no doubt, but nothing it's offering besides story appeals to me much. GW2 has that plus a lot of other stuff that makes me salivate.
Slapping the SW brand on something isn't enough to coax the cash from my wallet anymore. There was a time when it could do that, but Jar Jar Binks murdered that particular part of my youthful naivete. For me to ever buy into the IP again, I'll really need to be impressed, and currently I'm not.
ArenaNet has yet to develop a MMO stop thinking that GW and GW2 are mmo. They both are and continue to be Diablo with a HUB. You will still to continue joining the average joe computer when you enter an area outside the hub.
So please don't compare GW2 to ToR they are not even the same type of game. One is a true MMO the other is a Multiplayer RPG game with a common hub. If you want to compare GW or GW2 to something compare it to Neverwinter night from Bioware they are both similar type of RPG games with common hub to find people to go adventure with it.
They just hide that fact well.
Now someone said that Gw2 will do better in the longterm, well technically asumming they even if ToR retain 100k subscriber a month in the longterm ToR will be more profitable then GW2 will ever be simply for the fact they charge every month where GW2 doesn't.
ArenaNet has yet to develop a MMO stop thinking that GW and GW2 are mmo. They both are and continue to be Diablo with a HUB. You will still to continue joining the average joe computer when you enter an area outside the hub.
So please don't compare GW2 to ToR they are not even the same type of game. One is a true MMO the other is a Multiplayer RPG game with a common hub. If you want to compare GW or GW2 to something compare it to Neverwinter night from Bioware they are both similar type of RPG games with common hub to find people to go adventure with it.
They just hide that fact well.
Now someone said that Gw2 will do better in the longterm, well technically asumming they even if ToR retain 100k subscriber a month in the longterm ToR will be more profitable then GW2 will ever be simply for the fact they charge every month where GW2 doesn't.
Will Guild Wars 2 be an MMO?
Yes. Guild Wars 2 provides a massive, online persistent world.
ArenaNet has yet to develop a MMO stop thinking that GW and GW2 are mmo. They both are and continue to be Diablo with a HUB. You will still to continue joining the average joe computer when you enter an area outside the hub.
So please don't compare GW2 to ToR they are not even the same type of game. One is a true MMO the other is a Multiplayer RPG game with a common hub. If you want to compare GW or GW2 to something compare it to Neverwinter night from Bioware they are both similar type of RPG games with common hub to find people to go adventure with it.
They just hide that fact well.
Now someone said that Gw2 will do better in the longterm, well technically asumming they even if ToR retain 100k subscriber a month in the longterm ToR will be more profitable then GW2 will ever be simply for the fact they charge every month where GW2 doesn't.
Apparently you know absolutely nothing about GW2.
And about GW 1: They never said it was a MMO, but a CORPG.
These are the two heavyweights on the horizon. Nothing else really comes close. They are natural competitors at this point.
As for me, I'll be playing GW2 only. SWTOR will do well for itself, I have no doubt, but nothing it's offering besides story appeals to me much. GW2 has that plus a lot of other stuff that makes me salivate.
Slapping the SW brand on something isn't enough to coax the cash from my wallet anymore. There was a time when it could do that, but Jar Jar Binks murdered that particular part of my youthful naivete. For me to ever buy into the IP again, I'll really need to be impressed, and currently I'm not.
I can understand that to an extent. I don't like when people generalize greatly what SWTOR has or misrepresent what you can and cannot do in it to justify the game they are looking forward to playing. I don't believe that the game BioWare is making will only have story and nothing more. I also don't believe this game could have been any other game just with a different name on it.
What I see in SWTOR is a game unlike any other before it. To me, the possibility of storylines changing, the rewards for exploration, the open world PvP, the vast areas of the star wars universe that players haven't seen, and the wide array of hybridization choices for the classes coupled with the combat that allows you to dodge, block, and counter are as exciting to me as GW2s Dynamic Events, WvWvW PvP, skill (card) based combat, and of course no sub fee.
I just don't understand the idea behind, this one game will be good so all others can't be. Or, GW2 has this feature and SWTOR doesn't, so it must mean TOR will fail. I'm not saying everyone has to like both games, or even play both games here, I'm just trying to figure out why one being good forces the other to be bad.
These are the two heavyweights on the horizon. Nothing else really comes close. They are natural competitors at this point.
As for me, I'll be playing GW2 only. SWTOR will do well for itself, I have no doubt, but nothing it's offering besides story appeals to me much. GW2 has that plus a lot of other stuff that makes me salivate.
Slapping the SW brand on something isn't enough to coax the cash from my wallet anymore. There was a time when it could do that, but Jar Jar Binks murdered that particular part of my youthful naivete. For me to ever buy into the IP again, I'll really need to be impressed, and currently I'm not.
I can understand that to an extent. I don't like when people generalize greatly what SWTOR has or misrepresent what you can and cannot do in it to justify the game they are looking forward to playing. I don't believe that the game BioWare is making will only have story and nothing more. I also don't believe this game could have been any other game just with a different name on it.
What I see in SWTOR is a game unlike any other before it. To me, the possibility of storylines changing, the rewards for exploration, the open world PvP, the vast areas of the star wars universe that players haven't seen, and the wide array of hybridization choices for the classes coupled with the combat that allows you to dodge, block, and counter are as exciting to me as GW2s Dynamic Events, WvWvW PvP, skill (card) based combat, and of course no sub fee.
I just don't understand the idea behind, this one game will be good so all others can't be. Or, GW2 has this feature and SWTOR doesn't, so it must mean TOR will fail. I'm not saying everyone has to like both games, or even play both games here, I'm just trying to figure out why one being good forces the other to be bad.
I think part of it is a result of the influx of so many new mmos. with the player populations spread out more and more over different games, i think people use tatics like that in hopes of getting more people to their game for a larger population. obviously this can't be the only reason but i do think its one of reasons for it.
These are the two heavyweights on the horizon. Nothing else really comes close. They are natural competitors at this point.
As for me, I'll be playing GW2 only. SWTOR will do well for itself, I have no doubt, but nothing it's offering besides story appeals to me much. GW2 has that plus a lot of other stuff that makes me salivate.
Slapping the SW brand on something isn't enough to coax the cash from my wallet anymore. There was a time when it could do that, but Jar Jar Binks murdered that particular part of my youthful naivete. For me to ever buy into the IP again, I'll really need to be impressed, and currently I'm not.
I can understand that to an extent. I don't like when people generalize greatly what SWTOR has or misrepresent what you can and cannot do in it to justify the game they are looking forward to playing. I don't believe that the game BioWare is making will only have story and nothing more. I also don't believe this game could have been any other game just with a different name on it.
Anyone with a half a brain that has actually followed this game knows that TOR has more going for it than just story. The poll pretty much shows that expectations for this game didn't go down after PAX as some of the armchair experts here predicted.
What I see in SWTOR is a game unlike any other before it. To me, the possibility of storylines changing, the rewards for exploration, the open world PvP, the vast areas of the star wars universe that players haven't seen, and the wide array of hybridization choices for the classes coupled with the combat that allows you to dodge, block, and counter are as exciting to me as GW2s Dynamic Events, WvWvW PvP, skill (card) based combat, and of course no sub fee.
The choice aspect which affects your character's reputation in the gaming world is a huge draw for me. Take the Sith Warrior Class; you could have three warriors that end up completely different by the end game. One could have chosen to kill his master, one could have chosen to keep serving him and the other could have chosen to go light side. That doesn't happen in other games.
I just don't understand the idea behind, this one game will be good so all others can't be. Or, GW2 has this feature and SWTOR doesn't, so it must mean TOR will fail. I'm not saying everyone has to like both games, or even play both games here, I'm just trying to figure out why one being good forces the other to be bad.
I'll never understand that way of thinking either. I have absolutely no interest in GW2 and no amount of gushing from their fanbase is going to change that view. It's a completely different game in a different setting that has no appeal to me. However I don't hope that it fails or loses money like some of the haters of this game hope for TOR. I hope it's successful because I know that TOR isn't for everybody and they don't want to go back to World of Warcraft. We should be encouraging success, not failure.
Well, for me, I will buy SWTOR and look at GW2. I bought GW when it was released and didn't like it even with no subscription fee so I'm still undecided on GW2.
These are the two heavyweights on the horizon. Nothing else really comes close. They are natural competitors at this point.
As for me, I'll be playing GW2 only. SWTOR will do well for itself, I have no doubt, but nothing it's offering besides story appeals to me much. GW2 has that plus a lot of other stuff that makes me salivate.
Slapping the SW brand on something isn't enough to coax the cash from my wallet anymore. There was a time when it could do that, but Jar Jar Binks murdered that particular part of my youthful naivete. For me to ever buy into the IP again, I'll really need to be impressed, and currently I'm not.
I can understand that to an extent. I don't like when people generalize greatly what SWTOR has or misrepresent what you can and cannot do in it to justify the game they are looking forward to playing. I don't believe that the game BioWare is making will only have story and nothing more. I also don't believe this game could have been any other game just with a different name on it.
What I see in SWTOR is a game unlike any other before it. To me, the possibility of storylines changing, the rewards for exploration, the open world PvP, the vast areas of the star wars universe that players haven't seen, and the wide array of hybridization choices for the classes coupled with the combat that allows you to dodge, block, and counter are as exciting to me as GW2s Dynamic Events, WvWvW PvP, skill (card) based combat, and of course no sub fee.
I just don't understand the idea behind, this one game will be good so all others can't be. Or, GW2 has this feature and SWTOR doesn't, so it must mean TOR will fail. I'm not saying everyone has to like both games, or even play both games here, I'm just trying to figure out why one being good forces the other to be bad.
Within this very thread you have people misrepresenting what GW2 has to offer (hub-based gameplay? Really?) so both camps are well guilty of this. Many of the features you list in your second paragraph as existing in SWTOR also exist in GW2 as well (as I'm sure you know).
Not that I am the audience addressed in your post, but my reasons for no longer being interested in SWTOR over (or equivalent to) GW2 are due to the features GW2 offers that SWTOR doesn't (or at least isn't advertising heavily) such as anti-griefing measures, no loot/node stealing, and the general gameplay/endgame elements that ANet is supporting that I don't see Bioware supporting - and that's fine for those for whom these aspects are not important. But that is essentially it: SWTOR is providing for some people things that they won't get in GW2 and vice versa.
As for playing both, not only am I opposed to a subscription scheme in the first place, but I don't have time to play two games, so ultimately I have to choose one, and I've laid out more than one reason why I choose the game I did. It's all about preference.
Edit: I am in no way surprised by the poll results, as both Star Wars and Bioware have more name recognition than a game company who made a quasi-MMO five years ago.
These are the two heavyweights on the horizon. Nothing else really comes close. They are natural competitors at this point.
As for me, I'll be playing GW2 only. SWTOR will do well for itself, I have no doubt, but nothing it's offering besides story appeals to me much. GW2 has that plus a lot of other stuff that makes me salivate.
Slapping the SW brand on something isn't enough to coax the cash from my wallet anymore. There was a time when it could do that, but Jar Jar Binks murdered that particular part of my youthful naivete. For me to ever buy into the IP again, I'll really need to be impressed, and currently I'm not.
I can understand that to an extent. I don't like when people generalize greatly what SWTOR has or misrepresent what you can and cannot do in it to justify the game they are looking forward to playing. I don't believe that the game BioWare is making will only have story and nothing more. I also don't believe this game could have been any other game just with a different name on it.
What I see in SWTOR is a game unlike any other before it. To me, the possibility of storylines changing, the rewards for exploration, the open world PvP, the vast areas of the star wars universe that players haven't seen, and the wide array of hybridization choices for the classes coupled with the combat that allows you to dodge, block, and counter are as exciting to me as GW2s Dynamic Events, WvWvW PvP, skill (card) based combat, and of course no sub fee.
I just don't understand the idea behind, this one game will be good so all others can't be. Or, GW2 has this feature and SWTOR doesn't, so it must mean TOR will fail. I'm not saying everyone has to like both games, or even play both games here, I'm just trying to figure out why one being good forces the other to be bad.
Since when was that in TOR? All I remember the combat being was standard fare combat with the cover system.
These are the two heavyweights on the horizon. Nothing else really comes close. They are natural competitors at this point.
As for me, I'll be playing GW2 only. SWTOR will do well for itself, I have no doubt, but nothing it's offering besides story appeals to me much. GW2 has that plus a lot of other stuff that makes me salivate.
Slapping the SW brand on something isn't enough to coax the cash from my wallet anymore. There was a time when it could do that, but Jar Jar Binks murdered that particular part of my youthful naivete. For me to ever buy into the IP again, I'll really need to be impressed, and currently I'm not.
I can understand that to an extent. I don't like when people generalize greatly what SWTOR has or misrepresent what you can and cannot do in it to justify the game they are looking forward to playing. I don't believe that the game BioWare is making will only have story and nothing more. I also don't believe this game could have been any other game just with a different name on it.
Anyone with a half a brain that has actually followed this game knows that TOR has more going for it than just story. The poll pretty much shows that expectations for this game didn't go down after PAX as some of the armchair experts here predicted.
What I see in SWTOR is a game unlike any other before it. To me, the possibility of storylines changing, the rewards for exploration, the open world PvP, the vast areas of the star wars universe that players haven't seen, and the wide array of hybridization choices for the classes coupled with the combat that allows you to dodge, block, and counter are as exciting to me as GW2s Dynamic Events, WvWvW PvP, skill (card) based combat, and of course no sub fee.
The choice aspect which affects your character's reputation in the gaming world is a huge draw for me. Take the Sith Warrior Class; you could have three warriors that end up completely different by the end game. One could have chosen to kill his master, one could have chosen to keep serving him and the other could have chosen to go light side. That doesn't happen in other games.
I just don't understand the idea behind, this one game will be good so all others can't be. Or, GW2 has this feature and SWTOR doesn't, so it must mean TOR will fail. I'm not saying everyone has to like both games, or even play both games here, I'm just trying to figure out why one being good forces the other to be bad.
I'll never understand that way of thinking either. I have absolutely no interest in GW2 and no amount of gushing from their fanbase is going to change that view. It's a completely different game in a different setting that has no appeal to me. However I don't hope that it fails or loses money like some of the haters of this game hope for TOR. I hope it's successful because I know that TOR isn't for everybody and they don't want to go back to World of Warcraft. We should be encouraging success, not failure.
While I know I'll play GW2 and TOR, I agree with this. There are a LOT more people...harping on TOR to fail. Those that might prefer TOR don't seem to have it out for GW2 at all. I know I want GW2 to do well, especially since I will play it.
I won't play Darkfall, MO, or a few other games. I sure don't wish them to do badly. I won't post on their forums laughing at them for their game.
I dunno. It's one thing to discuss a game and bring up points on why it might not do so good (in a non trollish fashion, I know that's hard :P), but it's another to just have it out for a game just because.
As to the poll, SW is world wide. People who don't play computer games at all know of it. GW is just a video game. It's obvious which one will be voted for in a poll that is not just about MMOs.
so won't ToR be rather heavily instanced? Maybe not to the same sort of extent as GW1, but similar to AoC?
Think they said about 85% of it is open free roaming world that you can share with others.
So that would put it at about 15% intances. Think most of that is flashpoint and areas you talk to npcs and the like.
Here is the offical quote:
Quote: For the average planet, I'd say that 85+% of space is located in open, non phased areas - Bioware
Edit: i expect, and this is just purely speculation. that being the starter worlds are mostly designed to be story driven (sort of like a tutorial/intro to your class) that this will likely be more instances with the instance material dropping off as you get more into the game.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
so won't ToR be rather heavily instanced? Maybe not to the same sort of extent as GW1, but similar to AoC?
Think they said about 85% of it is open free roaming world that you can share with others.
So that would put it at about 15% intances. Think most of that is flashpoint and areas you talk to npcs and the like.
Here is the offical quote:
Quote: For the average planet, I'd say that 85+% of space is located in open, non phased areas - Bioware
Edit: i expect, and this is just purely speculation. that being the starter worlds are mostly designed to be story driven (sort of like a tutorial/intro to your class) that this will likely be more instances with the instance material dropping off as you get more into the game.
I guess I did not explain that very well. what I meant to say is that ToR will not be a seamless persistant world, but instead be similar to AoC with multiple zones. From my understanding, GW2 will be much more of a seamless persistant world and therefore be more alike the "real" mmo, at least according to modern perception.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
so won't ToR be rather heavily instanced? Maybe not to the same sort of extent as GW1, but similar to AoC?
Think they said about 85% of it is open free roaming world that you can share with others.
So that would put it at about 15% intances. Think most of that is flashpoint and areas you talk to npcs and the like.
Here is the offical quote:
Quote: For the average planet, I'd say that 85+% of space is located in open, non phased areas - Bioware
Edit: i expect, and this is just purely speculation. that being the starter worlds are mostly designed to be story driven (sort of like a tutorial/intro to your class) that this will likely be more instances with the instance material dropping off as you get more into the game.
I guess I did not explain that very well. what I meant to say is that ToR will not be a seamless persistant world, but instead be similar to AoC with multiple zones. From my understanding, GW2 will be much more of a seamless persistant world and therefore be more alike the "real" mmo, at least according to modern perception.
Going from what they say in multiple instances (pun not intended) that the worlds are big and not instanced or phased, naturally some of the more pivotal areas will be phased (via a green barrier but form what they state most of what you see is presistant and a world where you can run into others.
As for zoning, you'll zone when you leave a planet or when (at least from PaX east) you do a flashpoint. Other then that each world is suppose to be seemless (no loading) worlds. You actually download parts of the world as you walk.
Quote that i hope points it out: Quote: The vast majority of our worlds are public spaces. So basically, when you arrive at Coruscant it is a public space for everyone to be running around in. - AskaJedi
Edit: unless you mean something like now entering Hoth #5, which i suppose could be possible but considering these worlds are suppoes to be really big, I guess i don't see that happening, as for do we know specifically. No, theres not really any info on that one way or the other.
Note: as with all info i don't know i'll ask and get back to you with the answer.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
I guess I did not explain that very well. what I meant to say is that ToR will not be a seamless persistant world, but instead be similar to AoC with multiple zones. From my understanding, GW2 will be much more of a seamless persistant world and therefore be more alike the "real" mmo, at least according to modern perception.
I think it's the other way around.
Every world in SWTOR is completely seamless, even more so than other MMO's: you can walk from the phased/instanced areas into the open world without any sign of a loading screen as if it is all one contiguous world, with only a green transparant shield notifying you that you passed from the public open world into an instance or phased area.
GW2 will have portals between areas and zone loading as seen in the footage when you move from the outdoors area into the city, between city districts and the sortlike portals seen in an area at the edges of it.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
so won't ToR be rather heavily instanced? Maybe not to the same sort of extent as GW1, but similar to AoC?
Think they said about 85% of it is open free roaming world that you can share with others.
So that would put it at about 15% intances. Think most of that is flashpoint and areas you talk to npcs and the like.
Here is the offical quote:
Quote: For the average planet, I'd say that 85+% of space is located in open, non phased areas - Bioware
Edit: i expect, and this is just purely speculation. that being the starter worlds are mostly designed to be story driven (sort of like a tutorial/intro to your class) that this will likely be more instances with the instance material dropping off as you get more into the game.
I guess I did not explain that very well. what I meant to say is that ToR will not be a seamless persistant world, but instead be similar to AoC with multiple zones. From my understanding, GW2 will be much more of a seamless persistant world and therefore be more alike the "real" mmo, at least according to modern perception.
Going from what they say in multiple instances (pun not intended) that the worlds are big and not instanced or phased, naturally some of the more pivotal areas will be phased (via a green barrier but form what they state most of what you see is presistant and a world where you can run into others.
As for zoning, you'll zone when you leave a planet or when (at least from PaX east) you do a flashpoint. Other then that each world is suppose to be seemless (no loading) worlds. You actually download parts of the world as you walk.
Quote that i hope points it out: Quote: The vast majority of our worlds are public spaces. So basically, when you arrive at Coruscant it is a public space for everyone to be running around in. - AskaJedi
yes, exactly. It will be similar to AoC. You travel from one map, to another map, to another map. Not saying it's a bad thing as such. It's just an observation, as earlier on people were talking about the validity of GW2 as an mmo.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
so won't ToR be rather heavily instanced? Maybe not to the same sort of extent as GW1, but similar to AoC?
Think they said about 85% of it is open free roaming world that you can share with others.
So that would put it at about 15% intances. Think most of that is flashpoint and areas you talk to npcs and the like.
Here is the offical quote:
Quote: For the average planet, I'd say that 85+% of space is located in open, non phased areas - Bioware
Edit: i expect, and this is just purely speculation. that being the starter worlds are mostly designed to be story driven (sort of like a tutorial/intro to your class) that this will likely be more instances with the instance material dropping off as you get more into the game.
I guess I did not explain that very well. what I meant to say is that ToR will not be a seamless persistant world, but instead be similar to AoC with multiple zones. From my understanding, GW2 will be much more of a seamless persistant world and therefore be more alike the "real" mmo, at least according to modern perception.
GW2 will be very heavily instanced, mostly in the form of phasing.
so won't ToR be rather heavily instanced? Maybe not to the same sort of extent as GW1, but similar to AoC?
Think they said about 85% of it is open free roaming world that you can share with others.
So that would put it at about 15% intances. Think most of that is flashpoint and areas you talk to npcs and the like.
Here is the offical quote:
Quote: For the average planet, I'd say that 85+% of space is located in open, non phased areas - Bioware
Edit: i expect, and this is just purely speculation. that being the starter worlds are mostly designed to be story driven (sort of like a tutorial/intro to your class) that this will likely be more instances with the instance material dropping off as you get more into the game.
I guess I did not explain that very well. what I meant to say is that ToR will not be a seamless persistant world, but instead be similar to AoC with multiple zones. From my understanding, GW2 will be much more of a seamless persistant world and therefore be more alike the "real" mmo, at least according to modern perception.
Going from what they say in multiple instances (pun not intended) that the worlds are big and not instanced or phased, naturally some of the more pivotal areas will be phased (via a green barrier but form what they state most of what you see is presistant and a world where you can run into others.
As for zoning, you'll zone when you leave a planet or when (at least from PaX east) you do a flashpoint. Other then that each world is suppose to be seemless (no loading) worlds. You actually download parts of the world as you walk.
Quote that i hope points it out: Quote: The vast majority of our worlds are public spaces. So basically, when you arrive at Coruscant it is a public space for everyone to be running around in. - AskaJedi
yes, exactly. It will be similar to AoC. You travel from one map, to another map, to another map. Not saying it's a bad thing as such. It's just an observation, as earlier on people were talking about the validity of GW2 as an mmo.
yes, exactly. It will be similar to AoC. You travel from one map, to another map, to another map. Not saying it's a bad thing as such. It's just an observation, as earlier on people were talking about the validity of GW2 as an mmo.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
So far common knowledge (aka no actual links to the quote) seems to be no sharding. Which means once you enter Hoth, thats the only hoth, akin to say EQ.
Each planet has only one version of itself and you walk around that planet seemless in and out of phased areas (to talk to quest npcs), what i mean by seemless is there is no zoning/loading you can walk in and out as many times as you wish back and forth through the green barrier.
The only times you'll load is when you go into a instance like a flashpoint (dungeon) or if you leave the planet via your ship.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
That poll reflects how I look at both games. Looking forward to both but much more to Swtor. Both games have a lot going for them but my personal GW2's negatives outweigh Swtor's by a mile.
Mainly because I think Swtor will have the most realistic world(s) in a broader sense; GW2 still heavily employs the teleporting system for getting around and everyone on your server is your buddy in the open world; there will be no pvp servers. PvP is limited to instances and WvWvW in seperate areas and it ignores all racial faction conflict described in the lore.
Another artificial aspect in my eyes is GW2's sidekick system where your stats get adjusted up or down, depending on the level of content you are participating in.
A deep conflict between player factions spilling over in the game world itself, where people get to know their friends and enemies on a more personal level and get to build good or bad reputations for themselves, like in SWTOR, appeals much more to me.
Then again, I am a huge pvp ruleset fan because it adds so much random player made content and excitement to a game and pvp'less worlds like lotro's bore me eventually.
That said: WvWvW could be a load of fun, depending on the implementation.
yes, exactly. It will be similar to AoC. You travel from one map, to another map, to another map. Not saying it's a bad thing as such. It's just an observation, as earlier on people were talking about the validity of GW2 as an mmo.
? Are you talking about GW2 or SWTOR?
Sorry, I meant to say that ToR is similar to AoC, as in you travel from one map to another map to another map. The size of the map, and lore dictating the transition are moot. And I'm not trying to spread misinformation, or speak ill of ToR.
I thought that GW2 was going to be a seamless world, except for the instances like dungeons or personal story.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
Comments
These are the two heavyweights on the horizon. Nothing else really comes close. They are natural competitors at this point.
As for me, I'll be playing GW2 only. SWTOR will do well for itself, I have no doubt, but nothing it's offering besides story appeals to me much. GW2 has that plus a lot of other stuff that makes me salivate.
Slapping the SW brand on something isn't enough to coax the cash from my wallet anymore. There was a time when it could do that, but Jar Jar Binks murdered that particular part of my youthful naivete. For me to ever buy into the IP again, I'll really need to be impressed, and currently I'm not.
GW2 looks amazing. But i'm gonna go with swtor. I will still try GW2. I sub to TOR and pay no sub to GW2 win win
ArenaNet has yet to develop a MMO stop thinking that GW and GW2 are mmo. They both are and continue to be Diablo with a HUB. You will still to continue joining the average joe computer when you enter an area outside the hub.
So please don't compare GW2 to ToR they are not even the same type of game. One is a true MMO the other is a Multiplayer RPG game with a common hub. If you want to compare GW or GW2 to something compare it to Neverwinter night from Bioware they are both similar type of RPG games with common hub to find people to go adventure with it.
They just hide that fact well.
Now someone said that Gw2 will do better in the longterm, well technically asumming they even if ToR retain 100k subscriber a month in the longterm ToR will be more profitable then GW2 will ever be simply for the fact they charge every month where GW2 doesn't.
Will Guild Wars 2 be an MMO?
Yes. Guild Wars 2 provides a massive, online persistent world.
http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/game-faq/#five
An official statement disagrees with you.
Apparently you know absolutely nothing about GW2.
And about GW 1: They never said it was a MMO, but a CORPG.
I can understand that to an extent. I don't like when people generalize greatly what SWTOR has or misrepresent what you can and cannot do in it to justify the game they are looking forward to playing. I don't believe that the game BioWare is making will only have story and nothing more. I also don't believe this game could have been any other game just with a different name on it.
What I see in SWTOR is a game unlike any other before it. To me, the possibility of storylines changing, the rewards for exploration, the open world PvP, the vast areas of the star wars universe that players haven't seen, and the wide array of hybridization choices for the classes coupled with the combat that allows you to dodge, block, and counter are as exciting to me as GW2s Dynamic Events, WvWvW PvP, skill (card) based combat, and of course no sub fee.
I just don't understand the idea behind, this one game will be good so all others can't be. Or, GW2 has this feature and SWTOR doesn't, so it must mean TOR will fail. I'm not saying everyone has to like both games, or even play both games here, I'm just trying to figure out why one being good forces the other to be bad.
Ditto!
I think part of it is a result of the influx of so many new mmos. with the player populations spread out more and more over different games, i think people use tatics like that in hopes of getting more people to their game for a larger population. obviously this can't be the only reason but i do think its one of reasons for it.
I'll never understand that way of thinking either. I have absolutely no interest in GW2 and no amount of gushing from their fanbase is going to change that view. It's a completely different game in a different setting that has no appeal to me. However I don't hope that it fails or loses money like some of the haters of this game hope for TOR. I hope it's successful because I know that TOR isn't for everybody and they don't want to go back to World of Warcraft. We should be encouraging success, not failure.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
Well, for me, I will buy SWTOR and look at GW2. I bought GW when it was released and didn't like it even with no subscription fee so I'm still undecided on GW2.
Within this very thread you have people misrepresenting what GW2 has to offer (hub-based gameplay? Really?) so both camps are well guilty of this. Many of the features you list in your second paragraph as existing in SWTOR also exist in GW2 as well (as I'm sure you know).
Not that I am the audience addressed in your post, but my reasons for no longer being interested in SWTOR over (or equivalent to) GW2 are due to the features GW2 offers that SWTOR doesn't (or at least isn't advertising heavily) such as anti-griefing measures, no loot/node stealing, and the general gameplay/endgame elements that ANet is supporting that I don't see Bioware supporting - and that's fine for those for whom these aspects are not important. But that is essentially it: SWTOR is providing for some people things that they won't get in GW2 and vice versa.
As for playing both, not only am I opposed to a subscription scheme in the first place, but I don't have time to play two games, so ultimately I have to choose one, and I've laid out more than one reason why I choose the game I did. It's all about preference.
Edit: I am in no way surprised by the poll results, as both Star Wars and Bioware have more name recognition than a game company who made a quasi-MMO five years ago.
Since when was that in TOR? All I remember the combat being was standard fare combat with the cover system.
While I know I'll play GW2 and TOR, I agree with this. There are a LOT more people...harping on TOR to fail. Those that might prefer TOR don't seem to have it out for GW2 at all. I know I want GW2 to do well, especially since I will play it.
I won't play Darkfall, MO, or a few other games. I sure don't wish them to do badly. I won't post on their forums laughing at them for their game.
I dunno. It's one thing to discuss a game and bring up points on why it might not do so good (in a non trollish fashion, I know that's hard :P), but it's another to just have it out for a game just because.
As to the poll, SW is world wide. People who don't play computer games at all know of it. GW is just a video game. It's obvious which one will be voted for in a poll that is not just about MMOs.
so won't ToR be rather heavily instanced? Maybe not to the same sort of extent as GW1, but similar to AoC?
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Think they said about 85% of it is open free roaming world that you can share with others.
So that would put it at about 15% intances. Think most of that is flashpoint and areas you talk to npcs and the like.
Here is the offical quote:
Quote: For the average planet, I'd say that 85+% of space is located in open, non phased areas - Bioware
Edit: i expect, and this is just purely speculation. that being the starter worlds are mostly designed to be story driven (sort of like a tutorial/intro to your class) that this will likely be more instances with the instance material dropping off as you get more into the game.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
I guess I did not explain that very well. what I meant to say is that ToR will not be a seamless persistant world, but instead be similar to AoC with multiple zones. From my understanding, GW2 will be much more of a seamless persistant world and therefore be more alike the "real" mmo, at least according to modern perception.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Going from what they say in multiple instances (pun not intended) that the worlds are big and not instanced or phased, naturally some of the more pivotal areas will be phased (via a green barrier but form what they state most of what you see is presistant and a world where you can run into others.
As for zoning, you'll zone when you leave a planet or when (at least from PaX east) you do a flashpoint. Other then that each world is suppose to be seemless (no loading) worlds. You actually download parts of the world as you walk.
Quote that i hope points it out: Quote: The vast majority of our worlds are public spaces. So basically, when you arrive at Coruscant it is a public space for everyone to be running around in. - AskaJedi
Edit: unless you mean something like now entering Hoth #5, which i suppose could be possible but considering these worlds are suppoes to be really big, I guess i don't see that happening, as for do we know specifically. No, theres not really any info on that one way or the other.
Note: as with all info i don't know i'll ask and get back to you with the answer.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
I think it's the other way around.
Every world in SWTOR is completely seamless, even more so than other MMO's: you can walk from the phased/instanced areas into the open world without any sign of a loading screen as if it is all one contiguous world, with only a green transparant shield notifying you that you passed from the public open world into an instance or phased area.
GW2 will have portals between areas and zone loading as seen in the footage when you move from the outdoors area into the city, between city districts and the sortlike portals seen in an area at the edges of it.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
yes, exactly. It will be similar to AoC. You travel from one map, to another map, to another map. Not saying it's a bad thing as such. It's just an observation, as earlier on people were talking about the validity of GW2 as an mmo.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
GW2 will be very heavily instanced, mostly in the form of phasing.
you travel from one PLANET to another PLANET
? Are you talking about GW2 or SWTOR?
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
So far common knowledge (aka no actual links to the quote) seems to be no sharding. Which means once you enter Hoth, thats the only hoth, akin to say EQ.
Each planet has only one version of itself and you walk around that planet seemless in and out of phased areas (to talk to quest npcs), what i mean by seemless is there is no zoning/loading you can walk in and out as many times as you wish back and forth through the green barrier.
The only times you'll load is when you go into a instance like a flashpoint (dungeon) or if you leave the planet via your ship.
Help me Bioware, you're my only hope.
Is ToR going to be good? Dude it's Bioware making a freaking star wars game, all signs point to awesome. -G4tv MMo report.
That poll reflects how I look at both games. Looking forward to both but much more to Swtor. Both games have a lot going for them but my personal GW2's negatives outweigh Swtor's by a mile.
Mainly because I think Swtor will have the most realistic world(s) in a broader sense; GW2 still heavily employs the teleporting system for getting around and everyone on your server is your buddy in the open world; there will be no pvp servers. PvP is limited to instances and WvWvW in seperate areas and it ignores all racial faction conflict described in the lore.
Another artificial aspect in my eyes is GW2's sidekick system where your stats get adjusted up or down, depending on the level of content you are participating in.
A deep conflict between player factions spilling over in the game world itself, where people get to know their friends and enemies on a more personal level and get to build good or bad reputations for themselves, like in SWTOR, appeals much more to me.
Then again, I am a huge pvp ruleset fan because it adds so much random player made content and excitement to a game and pvp'less worlds like lotro's bore me eventually.
That said: WvWvW could be a load of fun, depending on the implementation.
My brand new bloggity blog.
Sorry, I meant to say that ToR is similar to AoC, as in you travel from one map to another map to another map. The size of the map, and lore dictating the transition are moot. And I'm not trying to spread misinformation, or speak ill of ToR.
I thought that GW2 was going to be a seamless world, except for the instances like dungeons or personal story.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.