Ok, PvP aside which we take as a granted, MMO's should also promote positive player interactions. Not make them mandatory, but promote them. An MMO that goes out of its way to de-emphasize positive player interaction will be seen by many as (want to be careful here) not necessarily a bad game... but not strictly as an MMO. People who've been longing to bring together some of their favorite IP's and MMO's get disappointed when it turns out a lot of what they think makes an MMO an MMO will be left out of the game. There is a difference between an 'mmo' and an 'rpg with multiplayer'
That basically sums up the ideas most people against this idea have. People don't want to pay monthly to play an rpg with multiplayer. I think Hellgate London basically proved that.
If Bioware goes ahead with this whole AI companion thing being a major focus of the game then it's going to fail. And I'm not saying that as matter of pure opinion. I'm saying this based on a proven industry record of events. If people never really need to interact beyond trading items then the subscription retention rate will be miserable. Bioware is a division of EA by the way and I doubt seriously EA is going to be willing to keep another MMO limping along until the devs can fix it like with WAR.
I know no one at Bioware is going to read this, so saying anything directly aimed at them is retarded. I'm just saying in general that if the companions are a main focus, all-encompassing feature of the game it's going to fail.
TL:DR
Let me put it this way. The system as describe sounds almost exactly like Guild Wars. How many people do you think would actually be willing to pay monthly for Guild Wars?
Ok, PvP aside which we take as a granted, MMO's should also promote positive player interactions. Not make them mandatory, but promote them. An MMO that goes out of its way to de-emphasize positive player interaction will be seen by many as (want to be careful here) not necessarily a bad game... but not strictly as an MMO. People who've been longing to bring together some of their favorite IP's and MMO's get disappointed when it turns out a lot of what they think makes an MMO an MMO will be left out of the game. There is a difference between an 'mmo' and an 'rpg with multiplayer'
That basically sums up the ideas most people against this idea have. People don't want to pay monthly to play an rpg with multiplayer. I think Hellgate London basically proved that.
I would like to point out that those people, just like the rest of us, should probably wait until we know more about Companions before deciding what to think about them.
If Bioware goes ahead with this whole AI companion thing being a major focus of the game then it's going to fail. And I'm not saying that as matter of pure opinion. I'm saying this based on a proven industry record of events. If people never really need to interact beyond trading items then the subscription retention rate will be miserable. Bioware is a division of EA by the way and I doubt seriously EA is going to be willing to keep another MMO limping along until the devs can fix it like with WAR.
This is BS. As said above, you have no idea what the Companion System will be like. Except from that you will have a companion. What that means, when you can use them, how you can use them, how much you can't do with them, how much you still need other players for, you have no clue about, so, how again can you say it -WILL- fail?
I know no one at Bioware is going to read this, so saying anything directly aimed at them is retarded. I'm just saying in general that if the companions are a main focus, all-encompassing feature of the game it's going to fail.
TL:DR
Let me put it this way. The system as describe sounds almost exactly like Guild Wars. How many people do you think would actually be willing to pay monthly for Guild Wars?
People who have this crazy notion in their heads that the system will be like Guild Wars...why don't you just wait until the system is actually announced?
Until then, I reserve the opinion that I have no opinion. Because I personally only make an opinion on what I -know-. And since I have no clue whatsoever about the companion system beyond that there will be companions which will be story-anchors and possibly a little like the companions in KOTOR, I will wait until I know a bit more.
Instead of making assumptions based on doom-visions. ^^
Why can't you have a companion and also need to group or at least interact with others in the world?
Why can't a single player storyline exist in a sandbox game?
I'm not saying this game will accomplish both, but I don't see why everyone assumes it can't. As someone else touched on, the problem with most mmo's isn't necessarily the lack of grouping, but the lack of interaction. What SWG did well wasn't necessarily grouping, but the interactions you had with other players whether they be entertainers, crafters, doctors or whatever. I think what most people miss about that particular game is that is catered to a large variety of play styles. Honestly, it wouldn't take much to do the same in a new game, simply design things in such a way that you need other classes to do things that an alt can't. Companies are starting to realize that WoW is it's own entity and cloning it won't get you 10 million subs, it's adapt or die really, and aim for a realistic customer base.
Just because you can have companions doesn't mean you need to use them at all. Really both KOTOR games if you wanted to you could have left your companions on the Ebon Hawk 95% of the time and not missed anything, but it certainly would have been harder. None of the companion specific side quests I can think of were mandatory to progress or gave any IWIN type loot.
I have played plenty of pet classes in MMOs and still needed and/or wanted to group for harder content. I wouldn't be all doom-and-gloom about companions killing grouping in TOR yet.
I think if the Campanion system is done well to address a certain need, it could be a kickass thing. I'll explain.
A pair of successful MMORPG's, being Everquest 1 and Dark Age of Camelot, had a class system in place that focused on players picking specialists. Characters were focusd sharply into roles of tanks, ranged DPS, close combat DPS, healers, and crowd control. The system worked, but it also had a glaring flaw as well. A majority of these classes couldn't solo level worth a darn, and some of them (EQ cleric comes to mind) couldn't solo at all.
Warcraft and other games stepped in to address this situation with character design being altered so that players could solo easily and then "respec" back to their specialist pve group purpose. This lead to problems of characters with a core design purpose to tank, heal, or do damage having to be re balanced and re worked again and again, well after game launch once players desired to remain in their solo configuration for pve grouping.
If companions filled a game design need of helping specialist role classes solo, with the companions not being available for group PvE or PvP use, I wouldn't throw rocks at it.
Just another step towards being a single player game... /sigh
Sadly, this seems to be the direction people want their games to head. . . I have no idea why grouping has faded so badly, I blame the new crowd of MMO players.
I have a feeling it's due to the resentment garnered by that very grouping community that has held all MMOers hostage since it's inception. Groupers have always been very tyrannical about their play style, insisting that everyone conform to it or leave the game. That soloers should never, ever get good experience or good gear through their play style, since obviously no one ever groups for the fun of it and has to be bribed to do so. City of Heroes proves that this is a complete fallacy. A game that does not require grouping for the majority of it's content and yet people still do for all of the content and not just for the supergroup based scenarios.
Whatever the reason or reasons, I'm glad that TOR is not going to implement forced grouping and I bet it will still be a very popular game for it.
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
I just want a well made star wars mmo, not some game that is released half finished and 2 years late because they decided to "reinvent" the mmo genre just to try to be different. many games have have went that way and they all lay bleeding to death under wow's boot heel.
Just another step towards being a single player game... /sigh
Sadly, this seems to be the direction people want their games to head. . .
I have no idea why grouping has faded so badly, I blame the new crowd of MMO players.
I have a feeling it's due to the resentment garnered by that very grouping community that has held all MMOers hostage since it's inception. Groupers have always been very tyrannical about their play style, insisting that everyone conform to it or leave the game. That soloers should never, ever get good experience or good gear through their play style, since obviously no one ever groups for the fun of it and has to be bribed to do so. City of Heroes proves that this is a complete fallacy. A game that does not require grouping for the majority of it's content and yet people still do for all of the content and not just for the supergroup based scenarios.
Whatever the reason or reasons, I'm glad that TOR is not going to implement forced grouping and I bet it will still be a very popular game for it.
1.) An extension of the middle finger is in order for Locklain. Players with attitudes like yours is why grouping isn't popular, not the players who choose not to play with you.Don't be such an elitist douchbag to others and maybe they will want to group with you. Just a thought.
2.) I'm glad as well that grouping will not be forced here. Vrazule hit the nail right on the head. The groupers pull this garbage in every thread. They come in spouting that the game is either going to be just another WOW or Guild Wars rip off(or sometimes both) just because their narrow vision of how gaming should be isn't the template for all MMORPGs. WOW has grouping all the time in it.I should know because I see it and participate in game all the time. I'm so glad that I don't HAVE to stand around like an idiot spamming LFG just to do a mission on a slow time of the day. I don't miss those days one bit.
I don't see what the big deal is seriously. KotOR 1+2 was awesome and you had companions there also. This game is story driven which is something a lot of people have been crying for for a long time now. Quests that matters and worth reading instead of clicking through to get the next exp fix. If you weren't a fan of the KotOR series chances are you won't like the MMO either
People complain about forced grouping. Well now there might be an option to avoid that. But i guess it's better to change the stance to "love forced grouping" now that the problem might be solved. It seems like people just want to complain to complain. Fix one of their issues and they take an opposite stance on it so they can continue complaining.
There shouldn't be 1 standard for every MMO being released. Having something different is a positive thing. If you dislike the style SW: TOR is turning out to be then thank god for other options? I for one love the direction this is going as i am tired of the same ol same ol
This ^
I dont mind grouping, in fact, that is why I like to play MMOs, but I will say the majority of the time I will go it alone and I like the idea of a story in an MMO.
What it does is let me hop on and do my thing when I dont have time to sit around getting a group organized and having a story makes what I am doing interesting rather than other MMOs wherere you just keep grinding away for levels and gear. Then, when I have time, I can look to group with people and hopefully there is some PvP or some end game content to where this is desireable, but that doesnt mean having a little solo time is a bad thing.
Bottom line is, if you like the status quoe of just grinding for loot or levels and dont care to have a story, and want anything that matters the slightest to require a group, there are tons of games out there for you, go play those. Dont expect every game to be as you wish though as there are other people with other tastes out there.
Comments
Ok, PvP aside which we take as a granted, MMO's should also promote positive player interactions. Not make them mandatory, but promote them. An MMO that goes out of its way to de-emphasize positive player interaction will be seen by many as (want to be careful here) not necessarily a bad game... but not strictly as an MMO. People who've been longing to bring together some of their favorite IP's and MMO's get disappointed when it turns out a lot of what they think makes an MMO an MMO will be left out of the game. There is a difference between an 'mmo' and an 'rpg with multiplayer'
That basically sums up the ideas most people against this idea have. People don't want to pay monthly to play an rpg with multiplayer. I think Hellgate London basically proved that.
If Bioware goes ahead with this whole AI companion thing being a major focus of the game then it's going to fail. And I'm not saying that as matter of pure opinion. I'm saying this based on a proven industry record of events. If people never really need to interact beyond trading items then the subscription retention rate will be miserable. Bioware is a division of EA by the way and I doubt seriously EA is going to be willing to keep another MMO limping along until the devs can fix it like with WAR.
I know no one at Bioware is going to read this, so saying anything directly aimed at them is retarded. I'm just saying in general that if the companions are a main focus, all-encompassing feature of the game it's going to fail.
TL:DR
Let me put it this way. The system as describe sounds almost exactly like Guild Wars. How many people do you think would actually be willing to pay monthly for Guild Wars?
Ok, PvP aside which we take as a granted, MMO's should also promote positive player interactions. Not make them mandatory, but promote them. An MMO that goes out of its way to de-emphasize positive player interaction will be seen by many as (want to be careful here) not necessarily a bad game... but not strictly as an MMO. People who've been longing to bring together some of their favorite IP's and MMO's get disappointed when it turns out a lot of what they think makes an MMO an MMO will be left out of the game. There is a difference between an 'mmo' and an 'rpg with multiplayer'
That basically sums up the ideas most people against this idea have. People don't want to pay monthly to play an rpg with multiplayer. I think Hellgate London basically proved that.
I would like to point out that those people, just like the rest of us, should probably wait until we know more about Companions before deciding what to think about them.
If Bioware goes ahead with this whole AI companion thing being a major focus of the game then it's going to fail. And I'm not saying that as matter of pure opinion. I'm saying this based on a proven industry record of events. If people never really need to interact beyond trading items then the subscription retention rate will be miserable. Bioware is a division of EA by the way and I doubt seriously EA is going to be willing to keep another MMO limping along until the devs can fix it like with WAR.
This is BS. As said above, you have no idea what the Companion System will be like. Except from that you will have a companion. What that means, when you can use them, how you can use them, how much you can't do with them, how much you still need other players for, you have no clue about, so, how again can you say it -WILL- fail?
I know no one at Bioware is going to read this, so saying anything directly aimed at them is retarded. I'm just saying in general that if the companions are a main focus, all-encompassing feature of the game it's going to fail.
TL:DR
Let me put it this way. The system as describe sounds almost exactly like Guild Wars. How many people do you think would actually be willing to pay monthly for Guild Wars?
People who have this crazy notion in their heads that the system will be like Guild Wars...why don't you just wait until the system is actually announced?
Until then, I reserve the opinion that I have no opinion. Because I personally only make an opinion on what I -know-. And since I have no clue whatsoever about the companion system beyond that there will be companions which will be story-anchors and possibly a little like the companions in KOTOR, I will wait until I know a bit more.
Instead of making assumptions based on doom-visions. ^^
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
I don't understand the either/or mentality.
Why can't you have a companion and also need to group or at least interact with others in the world?
Why can't a single player storyline exist in a sandbox game?
I'm not saying this game will accomplish both, but I don't see why everyone assumes it can't. As someone else touched on, the problem with most mmo's isn't necessarily the lack of grouping, but the lack of interaction. What SWG did well wasn't necessarily grouping, but the interactions you had with other players whether they be entertainers, crafters, doctors or whatever. I think what most people miss about that particular game is that is catered to a large variety of play styles. Honestly, it wouldn't take much to do the same in a new game, simply design things in such a way that you need other classes to do things that an alt can't. Companies are starting to realize that WoW is it's own entity and cloning it won't get you 10 million subs, it's adapt or die really, and aim for a realistic customer base.
Just because you can have companions doesn't mean you need to use them at all. Really both KOTOR games if you wanted to you could have left your companions on the Ebon Hawk 95% of the time and not missed anything, but it certainly would have been harder. None of the companion specific side quests I can think of were mandatory to progress or gave any IWIN type loot.
I have played plenty of pet classes in MMOs and still needed and/or wanted to group for harder content. I wouldn't be all doom-and-gloom about companions killing grouping in TOR yet.
I think if the Campanion system is done well to address a certain need, it could be a kickass thing. I'll explain.
A pair of successful MMORPG's, being Everquest 1 and Dark Age of Camelot, had a class system in place that focused on players picking specialists. Characters were focusd sharply into roles of tanks, ranged DPS, close combat DPS, healers, and crowd control. The system worked, but it also had a glaring flaw as well. A majority of these classes couldn't solo level worth a darn, and some of them (EQ cleric comes to mind) couldn't solo at all.
Warcraft and other games stepped in to address this situation with character design being altered so that players could solo easily and then "respec" back to their specialist pve group purpose. This lead to problems of characters with a core design purpose to tank, heal, or do damage having to be re balanced and re worked again and again, well after game launch once players desired to remain in their solo configuration for pve grouping.
If companions filled a game design need of helping specialist role classes solo, with the companions not being available for group PvE or PvP use, I wouldn't throw rocks at it.
I have a feeling it's due to the resentment garnered by that very grouping community that has held all MMOers hostage since it's inception. Groupers have always been very tyrannical about their play style, insisting that everyone conform to it or leave the game. That soloers should never, ever get good experience or good gear through their play style, since obviously no one ever groups for the fun of it and has to be bribed to do so. City of Heroes proves that this is a complete fallacy. A game that does not require grouping for the majority of it's content and yet people still do for all of the content and not just for the supergroup based scenarios.
Whatever the reason or reasons, I'm glad that TOR is not going to implement forced grouping and I bet it will still be a very popular game for it.
With PvE raiding, it has never been a question of being "good enough". I play games to have fun, not to be a simpering toady sitting through hour after hour of mind numbing boredom and fawning over a guild master in the hopes that he will condescend to reward me with shiny bits of loot. But in games where those people get the highest progression, anyone who doesn't do that will just be a moving target for them and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay money for the privilege. - Neanderthal
I just want a well made star wars mmo, not some game that is released half finished and 2 years late because they decided to "reinvent" the mmo genre just to try to be different. many games have have went that way and they all lay bleeding to death under wow's boot heel.
It will give the option to WOW players to have a chance in PVP...if the opponent isn't using at all that is. Gosh I had to say that man...
666
I have no idea why grouping has faded so badly, I blame the new crowd of MMO players.
I have a feeling it's due to the resentment garnered by that very grouping community that has held all MMOers hostage since it's inception. Groupers have always been very tyrannical about their play style, insisting that everyone conform to it or leave the game. That soloers should never, ever get good experience or good gear through their play style, since obviously no one ever groups for the fun of it and has to be bribed to do so. City of Heroes proves that this is a complete fallacy. A game that does not require grouping for the majority of it's content and yet people still do for all of the content and not just for the supergroup based scenarios.
Whatever the reason or reasons, I'm glad that TOR is not going to implement forced grouping and I bet it will still be a very popular game for it.
1.) An extension of the middle finger is in order for Locklain. Players with attitudes like yours is why grouping isn't popular, not the players who choose not to play with you.Don't be such an elitist douchbag to others and maybe they will want to group with you. Just a thought.
2.) I'm glad as well that grouping will not be forced here. Vrazule hit the nail right on the head. The groupers pull this garbage in every thread. They come in spouting that the game is either going to be just another WOW or Guild Wars rip off(or sometimes both) just because their narrow vision of how gaming should be isn't the template for all MMORPGs. WOW has grouping all the time in it.I should know because I see it and participate in game all the time. I'm so glad that I don't HAVE to stand around like an idiot spamming LFG just to do a mission on a slow time of the day. I don't miss those days one bit.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
yea its gonna be a great single payer game..
Dont believe they are screwing this game up ..to funny
This ^
I dont mind grouping, in fact, that is why I like to play MMOs, but I will say the majority of the time I will go it alone and I like the idea of a story in an MMO.
What it does is let me hop on and do my thing when I dont have time to sit around getting a group organized and having a story makes what I am doing interesting rather than other MMOs wherere you just keep grinding away for levels and gear. Then, when I have time, I can look to group with people and hopefully there is some PvP or some end game content to where this is desireable, but that doesnt mean having a little solo time is a bad thing.
Bottom line is, if you like the status quoe of just grinding for loot or levels and dont care to have a story, and want anything that matters the slightest to require a group, there are tons of games out there for you, go play those. Dont expect every game to be as you wish though as there are other people with other tastes out there.