- Graphics: It remains one of my biggest complains, and even if you tell me 1000 times they don't look so bad. No they do not! But they do NOT look breathtaking either.
...
2 observations -
First, this is really a matter of taste. I absolutely love the graphics personally, and don't think (for instance) that they need to be life-like to be breathtaking. I look both at the characters and especially the detail of effort put into the landscape, and find them better than any other MMO I've played.
Second, as others have said, I also think this is tied to accessibility. When you invest as much as EA/BioWare is purported to have spent, they need to appeal to the broadest possible range of computer specs out there (in order to be able to attract as many subscribers as possible). That means people with 5-10 year old machines, which means graphics need to be scaled back a bit. So given the need to scale back, I'm even more impressed that they managed that while still keeping a really "cool" look (in my opinion anyway).
- Combat: It's just the same critique as with graphics. They look ok. But dagnabit, it's Star Wars, it that 100-300 million dollar game and THAT'S IT? Thats the best combat you could come up with? I mean, again, it's ok. But the repetitive pew pew and the nailed to the ground mobs really isn't kicking me out of my shoes. And blast for that huge game, for Star Wars, for a really Triple A... this combat is just lame.
...
3 observations
First, you can't claim to know how it actually feels to take part in combat until you have. Nor can I. So I really have no idea if the combat is "lame". To me it certainly doesn't sound that way (based upon descriptions I've read on their website) - i.e. no autoattck certainly doesn't sound like EQ to me!
Second, unless you were expecting an MMOFPS, then you shouldn't really be surprised. Just because it isn't "different" doesn't mean it's necessarily "bad". Again, to keep it accessible to fans of the MMO genre (who are used to things working a certain way) as well as those who have never played and aren't fans of twitch-based FPS's (lots and lots of folks... i.e. my wife and kids!), going with "standard MMO combat mechanics" seems like a pretty good decision to me.
Lastly, see my second comment on graphics. Same deal. In order to run on older machines, they probably couldn't go all crazy on the animations, etc.
- Quests: Way back one of the SWTOR developer said, that we are NEVER going on such mundane quests like kill 10 rats in TOR. Never. And now if you look at the quests, it's EXACTLY like that.
...
Again, don't knock it until you've tried it. I understand what you're saying, don't get me wrong, but every RPG that I've ever played pretty much has the same quest mechanic. Go do stuff, come back to me when you're done for a reward. I'm not sure why you think GW2 is so different? Sure the quests are supposedly going to be "dynamic", but it's still just a dynamic version of killing rats and then getting a reward. And that's only if they actually can pull it off mind you... I haven't seen much of anything out of Arenanet lately...
On the other hand, at least BioWare seems like they're trying to give you an emotional reason as to WHY you should care about going off and killing those 10 rats. You may not care (as a gamer), but then I begin to wonder of MMORPG's are really for you at all? The whole point of an "RPG" is to play a role, to take part in a story, and that's what BioWare is trying to do that nobody else (in my opinion) has really done a good job of. Sucking you into a story. Give me my motivation for kiling those rats, make me feel like kililng them is important to me for some reason, and I'll have that in mind when I'm slaughtering away...
- Endgame: So the truth is out. Endgame is WOW. Period. I mean, maybe they still have a few aces up their sleeves, but from here it looked pretty much like WOW Endgame.
...
So? Why does SW:TOR have to be different from WoW? Why would they ever WANT to be? WoW has 11.5 million subscribers! They're obviously doing something RIGHT! Maybe you don't care for that end game mechanic, but 11.5 million paying subscribers don't seem to mind so much. And again, if you're trying to attract MMO players to shift away from something old to something new, you certainly want to do SOME things new, but not so much that you just confuse them... if you do that, they'll go right back to what they're comfortable with. So I think BioWare is doing something great here - i.e. giving existing MMO players something comfortable and cozy (typical MMO mechanics) while adding their own bit of innovative flair (what they're known for - emotional story-driven content... putting the RPG back into MMORPG).
- No Sandbox whatsoever: When TOR was announced, the Bioware devs said TOR was going to be no Sandbox and no Themepark, but a mix of both. It was a lie. TOR is a 100% Themepark and entirely DEVOID of ANY Sandbox elements! ...
I mean, what am I do to otherwise if my 200 hours class story are over?
...
Please list for me all of the sandbox-style MMO's out there with over 1 million subscribers.... go ahead... is that the chrip of crickets I hear?... exactly. "Sandbox" seems to be such a popular term used on these forums, but at the end of the day no matter how you slice it, the simple fact is that sandboxes don't do very well. Period. So why would BioWare invest a ton of money in a game mechanic that has been proven time and time again to not garner big subscriber numbers?
To the 2nd part of your question, obviously I can't tell you how to play the game, but I think BioWare's intent is for people to play a NEW class once they've finished their FIRST class. If there are 16 classes in the game (counting all of the advanced classes), that's 3,200 hours of content. Unique content mind you (since each class works differently and has it's own epic story line). Even if you play 20 hours per week, every week, that's 160 weeks (over 3 years) of content alone... and then of course there will be content updates and expansion packs... plenty to keep most gamers occupied for a very long time.
I know it will come over as rant, and it prolly is. But now that most of the cards have been revealed I can't help but feel let down. I mean, sure it will be a nice and decend game. I am going to play it a while. But why Bioware aimed for so little in so many core areas... it's something I just don't get why.
Depends on how you choose to look at it... I don't think that 3,200 hours of 100% voiced, 100% cinematic cutscene content is "aiming low". And I certainly don't think that re-implementing tried-and-true game mechanics is "aiming low" either... I consider that good, common business sense. BioWare didn't become one of the most respected RPG developers out there by making stupid decisions, after all, but of course only time will tell.
- Graphics: I like the graphics. Sure I love Aion's graphics, too. Which would I prefer? Doens't matter as long as the game is fun.
- Combat: I didn't expect different combat and I don't know why anyone else would. Even I can tell it was more of a business decision. Famaliar combat equals a predictable customer base. I think I prefer the typcal MMORPG combat anyways.
- Quests: I didn't expect anything different here in terms of quest objectives. I really can't think of any type of questing that hasn't been done before. I mean how could you really change the objectives to make it seem different? Even when they said they wouldn't have the go kill 10 of that quest, I still knew they would. It can't be escaped unless you remove the quests all together.
- Endgame: I expected this as well, but even inmy MMO experience, if the endgame doen't have the gear ladder, then it is just a PvP or RP endgame. That's how SWG was for me, had my crafted gear/ quest weapons and all I did was PvP because there wasn't anything else.
- No Sandbox whatsoever: I also remember them saying it wasn't a sandbox or themepark, but even I could tell it was going to be much more of a themepark than anything else. I mean, you will be following a story and they have told us there are some parts you cannot skip. I'm interested in this game because of the story and the way it will be presented, not because I would want a crafter's paradise. I don't think anyone that wants a true sandbox should even come close to buying this game. You're just going to be dissapointed and regret buying it.
--snip--
SWG is that way ---> It still exsists in both forms if you look for it. But in my opinion, even if SOE brought back Pre-CU or Pre-NGE I still wouldn't go back because the reason I played was the community and friends. The gameplay only enahnced my fun, but never defined it. I prefered the CU version anyways.
About Endgame for you was the PVP for many others was the collections and badges which was a huge pain in the a**
as for the graphics-quests-gameplay all p2p MMOs are 95% the same no matter what everybody say
the downside for me is that has no appearance tab and we dont know the storage capacity yet (inventory, backpack, bank, ship)
I think Erikson also said that it expands infinitely instead of using backs.
This could change however.
You start with 40 slots. You can pay to expand your inventory 10 slots at a time, capped at 80. The price of each row of slots gets progressively more expensive. That being said, any exact values (in terms of price and size) that you might see/hear about are prone to change as we make adjustments to the economy.
You can also pay to expand your ship's cargo hold, where you can store significantly more items.
We do not use the 'bag' paradigm that some other MMOs use - it's all one GUI.
What about where people with hands-on with the game state if you're not using a strategy in how you use your skills you die?
What about the developer video where they talked about zerging down an entire dungeon by dying over and over unti they had a 10 minute medical droid timer? You might die. But it will have no consequence, sorry.
What about where people with hands-on with the game state if you're not using a strategy in how you use your skills you die?
What about the developer video where they talked about zerging down an entire dungeon by dying over and over unti they had a 10 minute medical droid timer? You might die. But it will have no consequence, sorry.
and georg zoeller said that was an exploit that daniel erickson was using:
Amazing how all the insta-rez proponents fail to recognize how the top writer for the game is talking on the film about using 2 people to take on a 4 person instance. Running around dieing (over and over) and kiting MOB's to basically cheat his way through it.
.
Hehe, Daniel will be disappointed when those holes he's exploiting are gradually shut down. As mentioned, we just added this system in testing, so there some rough edges.
That said, we're also not terribly concerned with people being creative about some of the heroic content. We're pretty pragmatic about it - if people have fun doing a one off heroic quest in a very creative way (like, let's say luring a bunch of enemies to a cliff and then pushing them over with a force push) and they're having fun, that's something we're potentially fine with. In fact, we find that a lot of the 'creative' ways people find around more challenging content seems to take more time than doing it the planned way anyway.
As long as there's a reasonable effort vs. reward ratio here, who am I to say that you and your friend can't have fun figuring out a way to get past that 4 man heroic?
This obviously doesn't apply to Operations or Flashpoints (Did I mention that you can't order a probe in instanced content like a Flashpoint or Warzone?), but for world heroics, we're definitely taking a relaxed view on these things.
What about where people with hands-on with the game state if you're not using a strategy in how you use your skills you die?
What about the developer video where they talked about zerging down an entire dungeon by dying over and over unti they had a 10 minute medical droid timer? You might die. But it will have no consequence, sorry.
What about when they were explaining why they chose to go with medical droids in the first place?
Edit to add- What about the part in my post where I basically said, all of this means very little, what matters is how it feels to me?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I credit many of these as management decisions to err on the side of caution rather than provoke an unexpected response to radical change. Forum posters and MMO vets aside, it seems to me that a large portion of MMO players hold WoW as iconic of the definition of an MMORPG.
I don't follow TOR closely, in fact much of what I know of it is based on forum posts here on MMORPG.com. One point that I've seen posted is that of developer statements that there was significant influence on the TOR design from WoW. I cannot be surprised or offended to find out that this influence is showing up as details of the game are becoming known.
I wouldn't go so far as to imply that TOR will simply be "WoW with lightsabers" but that might not be terribly far from the case. What I expect is a fully functional, feature complete, conservatively designed game which bases its mass appeal on the Star Wars IP and the ability for mainstream players to find it accessible and instantly understandable.
Good, bad or ugly... I think they're shooting for a safe bet that the game will sell tons of boxes and attract mainstream players.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
What about where people with hands-on with the game state if you're not using a strategy in how you use your skills you die?
What about the developer video where they talked about zerging down an entire dungeon by dying over and over unti they had a 10 minute medical droid timer? You might die. But it will have no consequence, sorry.
and georg zoeller said that was an exploit that daniel erickson was using:
Amazing how all the insta-rez proponents fail to recognize how the top writer for the game is talking on the film about using 2 people to take on a 4 person instance. Running around dieing (over and over) and kiting MOB's to basically cheat his way through it.
.
Hehe, Daniel will be disappointed when those holes he's exploiting are gradually shut down. As mentioned, we just added this system in testing, so there some rough edges.
That said, we're also not terribly concerned with people being creative about some of the heroic content. We're pretty pragmatic about it - if people have fun doing a one off heroic quest in a very creative way (like, let's say luring a bunch of enemies to a cliff and then pushing them over with a force push) and they're having fun, that's something we're potentially fine with. In fact, we find that a lot of the 'creative' ways people find around more challenging content seems to take more time than doing it the planned way anyway.
As long as there's a reasonable effort vs. reward ratio here, who am I to say that you and your friend can't have fun figuring out a way to get past that 4 man heroic?
This obviously doesn't apply to Operations or Flashpoints (Did I mention that you can't order a probe in instanced content like a Flashpoint or Warzone?), but for world heroics, we're definitely taking a relaxed view on these things.
Interesting. I wonder if they would have fixed it if he hadn't talked about doing it on camera. At least they're looking at things, I'll give them credit where it's due. Would have been very embarrassing to see people just zerg ressing through content.
Thank you for updating us on the same things that have irked you for the past three years. We are about due for another
"I give up on TOR" thread again from you also (we are only at 2 of those) :P.
Would I have enjoyed a more realisitc art style? Sure. But I don't care for it to be like AoC where it breaks computers. Besides, the backgrounds, vistas, etc all look amazing in the pictures shown. It makes perfect sense why they went this way.
I agree, in videos, combat looks like they are standing there. But people who played it say otherwise. I wish I could comment more.
They said they would not have go kill 10 rats for no reason as your main objective. They said they wanted you fighting things that make sense. Why kill 10 rats and the next quest kill 10 bigger rats, and the final quest, kill 10 butterflys. They don't want that. They want you to kill 10 things that would be a danger in the context of the game.
Kill quests are going to be in any game like this.
AH yes, the wowclone end game arguement. Obviously that's the only thing. And since it's such a bad thing to do too. I mean, you could always have a totally barren planet and allow people to put down the same five houses, and hope they can entertain themselves with zero content. I like that idea! You also must ignore the crafting and what they are trying to do with it, along with the progressive story.
They have even said they have not revealed some things. They had the E3 video where they mentioned things but gave no details. Obviously they have many cards not played.
But then, you have never and will never be satisified. It's great to want a game to be the best it can be, but with the constant rehashing....I don't know, it just seems to lean towards whining.
I agree on some of your points as well, I am definitely going to be playing the game and most likely I will be playing it for many years to come, however I remember them saying we won't be doing kill 10 rats and yet some of the first quests you get are to kill 10 something, which I find disappointing and I hope that after you get off the starting planets that the variety in mission types opens greatly, it's something we won't be able to tell until we play through the game.
The thing I've been looking forward to most though is the story, and everything that goes with it. I disagree with the guy who says that story in an MMO is pointless, because it depends on the MMO. There's no excuse for the progression of an MMORPG to not play like an RPG and have a strong storyline, every MMO coming out next year and after will have one. It's a long overdue change to the genre.
You did notice in all the in-game footage that the "Kill 10 X" quests are bonus quests, right?
- Graphics: It remains one of my biggest complains, and even if you tell me 1000 times they don't look so bad. No they do not! But they do NOT look breathtaking either.
...
2 observations -
First, this is really a matter of taste. I absolutely love the graphics personally, and don't think (for instance) that they need to be life-like to be breathtaking. I look both at the characters and especially the detail of effort put into the landscape, and find them better than any other MMO I've played.
Second, as others have said, I also think this is tied to accessibility. When you invest as much as EA/BioWare is purported to have spent, they need to appeal to the broadest possible range of computer specs out there (in order to be able to attract as many subscribers as possible). That means people with 5-10 year old machines, which means graphics need to be scaled back a bit. So given the need to scale back, I'm even more impressed that they managed that while still keeping a really "cool" look (in my opinion anyway).
- Combat: It's just the same critique as with graphics. They look ok. But dagnabit, it's Star Wars, it that 100-300 million dollar game and THAT'S IT? Thats the best combat you could come up with? I mean, again, it's ok. But the repetitive pew pew and the nailed to the ground mobs really isn't kicking me out of my shoes. And blast for that huge game, for Star Wars, for a really Triple A... this combat is just lame.
...
3 observations
First, you can't claim to know how it actually feels to take part in combat until you have. Nor can I. So I really have no idea if the combat is "lame". To me it certainly doesn't sound that way (based upon descriptions I've read on their website) - i.e. no autoattck certainly doesn't sound like EQ to me!
Second, unless you were expecting an MMOFPS, then you shouldn't really be surprised. Just because it isn't "different" doesn't mean it's necessarily "bad". Again, to keep it accessible to fans of the MMO genre (who are used to things working a certain way) as well as those who have never played and aren't fans of twitch-based FPS's (lots and lots of folks... i.e. my wife and kids!), going with "standard MMO combat mechanics" seems like a pretty good decision to me.
Lastly, see my second comment on graphics. Same deal. In order to run on older machines, they probably couldn't go all crazy on the animations, etc.
- Quests: Way back one of the SWTOR developer said, that we are NEVER going on such mundane quests like kill 10 rats in TOR. Never. And now if you look at the quests, it's EXACTLY like that.
...
Again, don't knock it until you've tried it. I understand what you're saying, don't get me wrong, but every RPG that I've ever played pretty much has the same quest mechanic. Go do stuff, come back to me when you're done for a reward. I'm not sure why you think GW2 is so different? Sure the quests are supposedly going to be "dynamic", but it's still just a dynamic version of killing rats and then getting a reward. And that's only if they actually can pull it off mind you... I haven't seen much of anything out of Arenanet lately...
On the other hand, at least BioWare seems like they're trying to give you an emotional reason as to WHY you should care about going off and killing those 10 rats. You may not care (as a gamer), but then I begin to wonder of MMORPG's are really for you at all? The whole point of an "RPG" is to play a role, to take part in a story, and that's what BioWare is trying to do that nobody else (in my opinion) has really done a good job of. Sucking you into a story. Give me my motivation for kiling those rats, make me feel like kililng them is important to me for some reason, and I'll have that in mind when I'm slaughtering away...
- Endgame: So the truth is out. Endgame is WOW. Period. I mean, maybe they still have a few aces up their sleeves, but from here it looked pretty much like WOW Endgame.
...
So? Why does SW:TOR have to be different from WoW? Why would they ever WANT to be? WoW has 11.5 million subscribers! They're obviously doing something RIGHT! Maybe you don't care for that end game mechanic, but 11.5 million paying subscribers don't seem to mind so much. And again, if you're trying to attract MMO players to shift away from something old to something new, you certainly want to do SOME things new, but not so much that you just confuse them... if you do that, they'll go right back to what they're comfortable with. So I think BioWare is doing something great here - i.e. giving existing MMO players something comfortable and cozy (typical MMO mechanics) while adding their own bit of innovative flair (what they're known for - emotional story-driven content... putting the RPG back into MMORPG).
- No Sandbox whatsoever: When TOR was announced, the Bioware devs said TOR was going to be no Sandbox and no Themepark, but a mix of both. It was a lie. TOR is a 100% Themepark and entirely DEVOID of ANY Sandbox elements! ...
I mean, what am I do to otherwise if my 200 hours class story are over?
...
Please list for me all of the sandbox-style MMO's out there with over 1 million subscribers.... go ahead... is that the chrip of crickets I hear?... exactly. "Sandbox" seems to be such a popular term used on these forums, but at the end of the day no matter how you slice it, the simple fact is that sandboxes don't do very well. Period. So why would BioWare invest a ton of money in a game mechanic that has been proven time and time again to not garner big subscriber numbers?
To the 2nd part of your question, obviously I can't tell you how to play the game, but I think BioWare's intent is for people to play a NEW class once they've finished their FIRST class. If there are 16 classes in the game (counting all of the advanced classes), that's 3,200 hours of content. Unique content mind you (since each class works differently and has it's own epic story line). Even if you play 20 hours per week, every week, that's 160 weeks (over 3 years) of content alone... and then of course there will be content updates and expansion packs... plenty to keep most gamers occupied for a very long time.
I know it will come over as rant, and it prolly is. But now that most of the cards have been revealed I can't help but feel let down. I mean, sure it will be a nice and decend game. I am going to play it a while. But why Bioware aimed for so little in so many core areas... it's something I just don't get why.
Depends on how you choose to look at it... I don't think that 3,200 hours of 100% voiced, 100% cinematic cutscene content is "aiming low". And I certainly don't think that re-implementing tried-and-true game mechanics is "aiming low" either... I consider that good, common business sense. BioWare didn't become one of the most respected RPG developers out there by making stupid decisions, after all, but of course only time will tell.
You know I can accept in many terms people have a different taste. No quarrel here.
Also, it is true the final verdict will come when I play the game. I am open minded enough to change my opinion then.
As to the rest: it looks too much like copying the existing WOW formula and tagging story on it. They error of of this is twofold. First, there already exist tons of games like these. So there are a lot of people who are tired of the same old and many who may be interested in the story a while and then return to whatever, as they have done so many times. I still doubt so many MMO gamers are so keen into story and decisions. I know *I* am, but I just doubt too many MMO gamer are. But ok, we will have to see that.
Second: in an uphill battle if you play safe, you are going to lose, to paraphrase Sun-Zu. Bioware took zero risks, and in a risky situation as making the most expensive MMO ever, it's a no win situation. If you play safe, you expect to lose already. Such a safe play is usually the result of lack of trust in your own abilities. So you copy the formula of others. It requires some mental leap to understand what I mean, and I'm sorry I can't say it better. If you want to make a good game, you aim to make a good game. You do NOT start to calculate or scheme or make plans what target group X maybe wants and what audience Y possibly is used to as standard. No, you make a game that is fun and new and moving things ahead. The issue is, in the past 5 years, ALL MMos who tried that failed. Like Vanguard, for example. It was a great vision, but the execution was terrible. Such failures are responsible that Bioware devs are so afraid to make ANYTHING different from the all to well known WOW formula. But as I said: you can't win a battle if you just aim for Place #2. You have to do your very BEST right away. And that is what they didn't. They *calculated* and planned and overthought this way too much.
But, I guess, only time will tell who of us is right.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Is there any game you do not complain about with massive walls of text but yet purchase anyways? TOR is what it is and at no time has Bioware promised something extra super duper. They promised a familiar feeling game with a story and marketed to the masses. The masses cannot run Crysis 2 on high settings even. Your list is both silly and pointless espeicially considering you are supporting the game with your money anyways.
You mistake cause and effect. I complain so much because so many games are "bad". Without critique, how can we hope things ever improve?
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I'm sick and tired of people complaining about TOR when it's not out yet. Any and all critques are going to be inaccurate until you thoroughly play the game for yourself. If you aren't going to try it out/buy it, then stop looking at TOR forums. Forming opinions about this game is like only watching a movie trailer then giving a review of the entire movie. You are either psyched for it or not and you either have some doubts or not. Trolling an incomplete game is stupid.
What irks me is the way people who have decided for various reasons that the game isn't for them can't simply let go, move on to another game and forget about TOR.
Seriously guys if you don't like the direction of the game just let it go and move on
Is there any game you do not complain about with massive walls of text but yet purchase anyways? TOR is what it is and at no time has Bioware promised something extra super duper. They promised a familiar feeling game with a story and marketed to the masses. The masses cannot run Crysis 2 on high settings even. Your list is both silly and pointless espeicially considering you are supporting the game with your money anyways.
You mistake cause and effect. I complain so much because so many games are "bad". Without critique, how can we hope things ever improve?
Complaining on a forum isn't going to suddenly make MMO studios decide to start making something different. If you want your voice heard, use your wallet. Don't buy the games you don't think you'll enjoy enough. I stopped buying singleplayer games becuase 6-8 hours of enjoyment was not worth the price.
"If you're going to act like a noob, I'll treat you like one." -Caskio
You know I can accept in many terms people have a different taste. No quarrel here.
Also, it is true the final verdict will come when I play the game. I am open minded enough to change my opinion then.
As to the rest: it looks too much like copying the existing WOW formula and tagging story on it. They error of of this is twofold. First, there already exist tons of games like these. So there are a lot of people who are tired of the same old and many who may be interested in the story a while and then return to whatever, as they have done so many times. I still doubt so many MMO gamers are so keen into story and decisions. I know *I* am, but I just doubt too many MMO gamer are. But ok, we will have to see that.
Second: in an uphill battle if you play safe, you are going to lose, to paraphrase Sun-Zu. Bioware took zero risks, and in a risky situation as making the most expensive MMO ever, it's a no win situation. If you play safe, you expect to lose already. Such a safe play is usually the result of lack of trust in your own abilities. So you copy the formula of others. It requires some mental leap to understand what I mean, and I'm sorry I can't say it better. If you want to make a good game, you aim to make a good game. You do NOT start to calculate or scheme or make plans what target group X maybe wants and what audience Y possibly is used to as standard. No, you make a game that is fun and new and moving things ahead. The issue is, in the past 5 years, ALL MMos who tried that failed. Like Vanguard, for example. It was a great vision, but the execution was terrible. Such failures are responsible that Bioware devs are so afraid to make ANYTHING different from the all to well known WOW formula. But as I said: you can't win a battle if you just aim for Place #2. You have to do your very BEST right away. And that is what they didn't. They *calculated* and planned and overthought this way too much.
But, I guess, only time will tell who of us is right.
Comparing the game straight to WoW is a poor argument. Most games in the MMO genre take things from games before it and improve upon it. TOR taking things WoW isn't a problem at all since WoW took things from EQ. It's the way of things. TOR seems to be taking a lot of things from various games and improving on them. For example, one of the instanced PVP BGs they have is a take on Battlefield 2142's Titan gameplay mode. In TOR, you capture giant laser cannons, the more you own the faster the enemies ship (which you spawn and drop down from) is destroyed. Taking features, gameplay ideas etc from other games is a good thing. If it ain't broke, there's no need to fix it. Even with all the things they are getting from other games, they are still staying true to their style of game making. One last point would be, who cares if TOR emulates WoW, it is the best selling most popular MMO of all time. It's not a bad thing to want your game to be as polished, smooth and awesome as WoW once was (since it's gone downhill for me since WotLK came out anyways).
- Graphics: It remains one of my biggest complains, and even if you tell me 1000 times they don't look so bad. No they do not! But they do NOT look breathtaking either.
...
2 observations -
First, this is really a matter of taste. I absolutely love the graphics personally, and don't think (for instance) that they need to be life-like to be breathtaking. I look both at the characters and especially the detail of effort put into the landscape, and find them better than any other MMO I've played.
Second, as others have said, I also think this is tied to accessibility. When you invest as much as EA/BioWare is purported to have spent, they need to appeal to the broadest possible range of computer specs out there (in order to be able to attract as many subscribers as possible). That means people with 5-10 year old machines, which means graphics need to be scaled back a bit. So given the need to scale back, I'm even more impressed that they managed that while still keeping a really "cool" look (in my opinion anyway).
- Combat: It's just the same critique as with graphics. They look ok. But dagnabit, it's Star Wars, it that 100-300 million dollar game and THAT'S IT? Thats the best combat you could come up with? I mean, again, it's ok. But the repetitive pew pew and the nailed to the ground mobs really isn't kicking me out of my shoes. And blast for that huge game, for Star Wars, for a really Triple A... this combat is just lame.
...
3 observations
First, you can't claim to know how it actually feels to take part in combat until you have. Nor can I. So I really have no idea if the combat is "lame". To me it certainly doesn't sound that way (based upon descriptions I've read on their website) - i.e. no autoattck certainly doesn't sound like EQ to me!
Second, unless you were expecting an MMOFPS, then you shouldn't really be surprised. Just because it isn't "different" doesn't mean it's necessarily "bad". Again, to keep it accessible to fans of the MMO genre (who are used to things working a certain way) as well as those who have never played and aren't fans of twitch-based FPS's (lots and lots of folks... i.e. my wife and kids!), going with "standard MMO combat mechanics" seems like a pretty good decision to me.
Lastly, see my second comment on graphics. Same deal. In order to run on older machines, they probably couldn't go all crazy on the animations, etc.
- Quests: Way back one of the SWTOR developer said, that we are NEVER going on such mundane quests like kill 10 rats in TOR. Never. And now if you look at the quests, it's EXACTLY like that.
...
Again, don't knock it until you've tried it. I understand what you're saying, don't get me wrong, but every RPG that I've ever played pretty much has the same quest mechanic. Go do stuff, come back to me when you're done for a reward. I'm not sure why you think GW2 is so different? Sure the quests are supposedly going to be "dynamic", but it's still just a dynamic version of killing rats and then getting a reward. And that's only if they actually can pull it off mind you... I haven't seen much of anything out of Arenanet lately...
On the other hand, at least BioWare seems like they're trying to give you an emotional reason as to WHY you should care about going off and killing those 10 rats. You may not care (as a gamer), but then I begin to wonder of MMORPG's are really for you at all? The whole point of an "RPG" is to play a role, to take part in a story, and that's what BioWare is trying to do that nobody else (in my opinion) has really done a good job of. Sucking you into a story. Give me my motivation for kiling those rats, make me feel like kililng them is important to me for some reason, and I'll have that in mind when I'm slaughtering away...
- Endgame: So the truth is out. Endgame is WOW. Period. I mean, maybe they still have a few aces up their sleeves, but from here it looked pretty much like WOW Endgame.
...
So? Why does SW:TOR have to be different from WoW? Why would they ever WANT to be? WoW has 11.5 million subscribers! They're obviously doing something RIGHT! Maybe you don't care for that end game mechanic, but 11.5 million paying subscribers don't seem to mind so much. And again, if you're trying to attract MMO players to shift away from something old to something new, you certainly want to do SOME things new, but not so much that you just confuse them... if you do that, they'll go right back to what they're comfortable with. So I think BioWare is doing something great here - i.e. giving existing MMO players something comfortable and cozy (typical MMO mechanics) while adding their own bit of innovative flair (what they're known for - emotional story-driven content... putting the RPG back into MMORPG).
- No Sandbox whatsoever: When TOR was announced, the Bioware devs said TOR was going to be no Sandbox and no Themepark, but a mix of both. It was a lie. TOR is a 100% Themepark and entirely DEVOID of ANY Sandbox elements! ...
I mean, what am I do to otherwise if my 200 hours class story are over?
...
Please list for me all of the sandbox-style MMO's out there with over 1 million subscribers.... go ahead... is that the chrip of crickets I hear?... exactly. "Sandbox" seems to be such a popular term used on these forums, but at the end of the day no matter how you slice it, the simple fact is that sandboxes don't do very well. Period. So why would BioWare invest a ton of money in a game mechanic that has been proven time and time again to not garner big subscriber numbers?
To the 2nd part of your question, obviously I can't tell you how to play the game, but I think BioWare's intent is for people to play a NEW class once they've finished their FIRST class. If there are 16 classes in the game (counting all of the advanced classes), that's 3,200 hours of content. Unique content mind you (since each class works differently and has it's own epic story line). Even if you play 20 hours per week, every week, that's 160 weeks (over 3 years) of content alone... and then of course there will be content updates and expansion packs... plenty to keep most gamers occupied for a very long time.
I know it will come over as rant, and it prolly is. But now that most of the cards have been revealed I can't help but feel let down. I mean, sure it will be a nice and decend game. I am going to play it a while. But why Bioware aimed for so little in so many core areas... it's something I just don't get why.
Depends on how you choose to look at it... I don't think that 3,200 hours of 100% voiced, 100% cinematic cutscene content is "aiming low". And I certainly don't think that re-implementing tried-and-true game mechanics is "aiming low" either... I consider that good, common business sense. BioWare didn't become one of the most respected RPG developers out there by making stupid decisions, after all, but of course only time will tell.
You know I can accept in many terms people have a different taste. No quarrel here.
Also, it is true the final verdict will come when I play the game. I am open minded enough to change my opinion then.
As to the rest: it looks too much like copying the existing WOW formula and tagging story on it. They error of of this is twofold. First, there already exist tons of games like these. So there are a lot of people who are tired of the same old and many who may be interested in the story a while and then return to whatever, as they have done so many times. I still doubt so many MMO gamers are so keen into story and decisions. I know *I* am, but I just doubt too many MMO gamer are. But ok, we will have to see that.
Second: in an uphill battle if you play safe, you are going to lose, to paraphrase Sun-Zu. Bioware took zero risks, and in a risky situation as making the most expensive MMO ever, it's a no win situation. If you play safe, you expect to lose already. Such a safe play is usually the result of lack of trust in your own abilities. So you copy the formula of others. It requires some mental leap to understand what I mean, and I'm sorry I can't say it better. If you want to make a good game, you aim to make a good game. You do NOT start to calculate or scheme or make plans what target group X maybe wants and what audience Y possibly is used to as standard. No, you make a game that is fun and new and moving things ahead. The issue is, in the past 5 years, ALL MMos who tried that failed. Like Vanguard, for example. It was a great vision, but the execution was terrible. Such failures are responsible that Bioware devs are so afraid to make ANYTHING different from the all to well known WOW formula. But as I said: you can't win a battle if you just aim for Place #2. You have to do your very BEST right away. And that is what they didn't. They *calculated* and planned and overthought this way too much.
But, I guess, only time will tell who of us is right.
We all hate it, but the fact is ALL MMO's pre and post WoW are failures. When you look at subs in second place at 300k. Is that anything to care about at all when you compare it to 12 million?
I understand the frustration, but what works for millions of subs is a sub par graphics game that can run on 6 year old laptops. If you want every sub that wants to play but can't upgrade their system. You have to let them in at the bottom and still be able to have fun in the game.
Story will make a huge difference and keep many players in game. Not the hardcore as much, but the millions of casual and RPG fans. So we will see what happens, but I am looking forward to the game regardless of the limitations you pointed out.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them? R.A.Salvatore
Pretty much /agree with OP which is scary with i agree with elikal.
There is a differnce between what you want a game to be and what its showing. My standard of lookign at up and comign games is look at what you have been shown and told ... then expect about 70% of that and there you go.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
I think it will be fun to level up 2-3 characters. I think that will be a great experience. And in itself it will mean that I will get alot of fun and value when I buy the game and perhaps subscribe 1-3 months.
But I also hope the endgame will be much more than farming PvE/PvP instances for gear and other rewards. I will get disappointed if this is what we will get. I hope they want people to play this game for years. And understand what players want long term.
Seen the vid's at E3, and previous conventions, and also seen the Dev stuff.
Listened to Daniel comment many times how Blizz is 'cute' and available to Bounty Hunter characters.
Watch the YouTube vid, where the dev is commenting on the revoulutionary gameplay experience that is TOR, while his character stands there getting shot, yet his companion kills the 2 NPC's and the main isn't below 75% health.
Listen to George Zoller go on a rampage about this or that yet we see an afk character can't even go below 75% health from a static mob.
Great animations for the horn head human characters, the blind humans, the green humans, the pony tail head humans, the blue humans.. oh wait they have 'alien' species names.
Bioware is so concerned tehy are not making 'that other Star wars MMO' that they ended up making that other Star wars MMo.
SWTOR is the NGE 2.0
and before the diehard fans come in, and say something about it's not what I was expecting... ask yourself this: If it didn't have lightsabers, how much would you defend the game?
What about where people with hands-on with the game state if you're not using a strategy in how you use your skills you die?
What about hands-on experiences that say the game is full of challenge, the worlds are fun to explore, and combat feels fast and fluid?
What about hands-on experiences that explain the sheer size of the worlds, the quality of the writing, that TOR is Star Wars through and through?
What about hands on experiences that have applauded the companion system and how fun interacting with them can be?
What about hands-on experiences that state companion AI is more akin to those you find in games like Mass Effect, rather than typcial MMO pets?
What about all of this? It's as useful as what you pointed it out, it still doesn't tell me how the experience will feel from my perspective. Which is the only one that matters, and the only one that can justify a need to post criticism or praise.
You can choose not to play, but don't expect anyone to take what you have to say about the game seriously after launch.
I saw a Sith in a pink robe.
Remember in the Star Wars movies when that Sith wore a pink robe? Lawl, that was great. Through and Through.
You know I can accept in many terms people have a different taste. No quarrel here.
Also, it is true the final verdict will come when I play the game. I am open minded enough to change my opinion then.
As to the rest: it looks too much like copying the existing WOW formula and tagging story on it. They error of of this is twofold. First, there already exist tons of games like these. So there are a lot of people who are tired of the same old and many who may be interested in the story a while and then return to whatever, as they have done so many times. I still doubt so many MMO gamers are so keen into story and decisions. I know *I* am, but I just doubt too many MMO gamer are. But ok, we will have to see that.
Are there really a ton of games like this though? I see tons of WOW "clones", sure, but what do any of them offer that's unique? Rift has pseudo-dynamic content and the ability to swap in different roles, sure, but that's hardly ground-breaking (in my opinion, and yes I actually play Rift... for now...) But how many games out there have a huge focus on story? And how many of them are based in the Star Wars universe? I personally think that those two items alone are enough to make this different (enough) from all of the other MMO's.
Second: in an uphill battle if you play safe, you are going to lose, to paraphrase Sun-Zu. Bioware took zero risks, and in a risky situation as making the most expensive MMO ever, it's a no win situation. If you play safe, you expect to lose already. Such a safe play is usually the result of lack of trust in your own abilities. So you copy the formula of others. It requires some mental leap to understand what I mean, and I'm sorry I can't say it better. If you want to make a good game, you aim to make a good game. You do NOT start to calculate or scheme or make plans what target group X maybe wants and what audience Y possibly is used to as standard. No, you make a game that is fun and new and moving things ahead. The issue is, in the past 5 years, ALL MMos who tried that failed. Like Vanguard, for example. It was a great vision, but the execution was terrible. Such failures are responsible that Bioware devs are so afraid to make ANYTHING different from the all to well known WOW formula. But as I said: you can't win a battle if you just aim for Place #2. You have to do your very BEST right away. And that is what they didn't. They *calculated* and planned and overthought this way too much.
Zero risks? They've invested A LOT... tens of millions? hundreds of millions? I don't know... but I think we can agree it's a lot... That's risk! I think (maybe) what you're saying is that they didn't innovate enough? Well given that no other game has ever attempted this, and based upon the supposed budgets, few could ever afford to try, I think BioWare could very well be trying to pull off the biggest bet in the history of MMO's to-date. And to me, it seems like they are indeed trying to "move things ahead" as you've said, but in THEIR way, not necessarily yours or mine. They are known for story-driven games, so they're doing what they're good at. And there are other innovations as well - i.e. the multi-player quest dialog... who else does that? And if it fails, that's a big fail given how it's integrated into the core of the game. Also consider the integrated space game (love it or hate it)... who else has that?
Had BioWare not added all of the story/voice-over/cinematics, had they not attempted something new with multi-player quests/conversations, ahd they not added something ancillary like the space game, then I'd agree that they were just doing WoW in space. But I personally think they aren't playing it safe at all - if people don't like story, or multi-player quests, or the space game, this game is going to fail hard!
But, I guess, only time will tell who of us is right.
You know I can accept in many terms people have a different taste. No quarrel here.
Also, it is true the final verdict will come when I play the game. I am open minded enough to change my opinion then.
As to the rest: it looks too much like copying the existing WOW formula and tagging story on it. They error of of this is twofold. First, there already exist tons of games like these. So there are a lot of people who are tired of the same old and many who may be interested in the story a while and then return to whatever, as they have done so many times. I still doubt so many MMO gamers are so keen into story and decisions. I know *I* am, but I just doubt too many MMO gamer are. But ok, we will have to see that.
Second: in an uphill battle if you play safe, you are going to lose, to paraphrase Sun-Zu. Bioware took zero risks, and in a risky situation as making the most expensive MMO ever, it's a no win situation. If you play safe, you expect to lose already. Such a safe play is usually the result of lack of trust in your own abilities. So you copy the formula of others. It requires some mental leap to understand what I mean, and I'm sorry I can't say it better. If you want to make a good game, you aim to make a good game. You do NOT start to calculate or scheme or make plans what target group X maybe wants and what audience Y possibly is used to as standard. No, you make a game that is fun and new and moving things ahead. The issue is, in the past 5 years, ALL MMos who tried that failed. Like Vanguard, for example. It was a great vision, but the execution was terrible. Such failures are responsible that Bioware devs are so afraid to make ANYTHING different from the all to well known WOW formula. But as I said: you can't win a battle if you just aim for Place #2. You have to do your very BEST right away. And that is what they didn't. They *calculated* and planned and overthought this way too much.
But, I guess, only time will tell who of us is right.
There are indeed many MMOs that have tried to copy WoW and failed, the problem is they did it poorly. Bioware will most likely do it far better than anyone else has.
Your problem is thinking that Bioware is trying to please you (and by you i mean the gaming public) Biowares sole objective is to make money. Yes, that does including making a good game and keeping players happy, but only to a certain extent, quality is a means to an end, that end being money. When money is your goal you absolutely do begin your dev process with prospective audiences demographics, what type of people you want to attract to your game. This is the basis of the entire state of the industry, players want quality, innovation, content ... developers want money. No ammount of your desire will make them see things from your point of view.
Biowares decision to make a "WoW clone" (to use a term that i hate but none-the-less provides the best definition) has nothing to do with fear of changing the norm, it is 100% motivated by the salivation caused when they look at the $2 billion (yes, two billion dollars) in subs Blizzard is pulling in each year (not to mention the upfront game and xpac costs)
Comments
heres a little bit regarding storage:
DamionSchubert General Discussion -> Tatooine "HD" Screen Caps + Mount Description
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianne
I think Erikson also said that it expands infinitely instead of using backs.
This could change however.
You start with 40 slots. You can pay to expand your inventory 10 slots at a time, capped at 80. The price of each row of slots gets progressively more expensive. That being said, any exact values (in terms of price and size) that you might see/hear about are prone to change as we make adjustments to the economy.
You can also pay to expand your ship's cargo hold, where you can store significantly more items.
We do not use the 'bag' paradigm that some other MMOs use - it's all one GUI.
What about the developer video where they talked about zerging down an entire dungeon by dying over and over unti they had a 10 minute medical droid timer? You might die. But it will have no consequence, sorry.
word.
and georg zoeller said that was an exploit that daniel erickson was using:
GeorgZoeller General Discussion -> Thoughts on the Death Probe?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManuDragonne
Amazing how all the insta-rez proponents fail to recognize how the top writer for the game is talking on the film about using 2 people to take on a 4 person instance. Running around dieing (over and over) and kiting MOB's to basically cheat his way through it.
.
Hehe, Daniel will be disappointed when those holes he's exploiting are gradually shut down. As mentioned, we just added this system in testing, so there some rough edges.
That said, we're also not terribly concerned with people being creative about some of the heroic content. We're pretty pragmatic about it - if people have fun doing a one off heroic quest in a very creative way (like, let's say luring a bunch of enemies to a cliff and then pushing them over with a force push) and they're having fun, that's something we're potentially fine with. In fact, we find that a lot of the 'creative' ways people find around more challenging content seems to take more time than doing it the planned way anyway.
As long as there's a reasonable effort vs. reward ratio here, who am I to say that you and your friend can't have fun figuring out a way to get past that 4 man heroic?
This obviously doesn't apply to Operations or Flashpoints (Did I mention that you can't order a probe in instanced content like a Flashpoint or Warzone?), but for world heroics, we're definitely taking a relaxed view on these things.
What about when they were explaining why they chose to go with medical droids in the first place?
Edit to add- What about the part in my post where I basically said, all of this means very little, what matters is how it feels to me?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I credit many of these as management decisions to err on the side of caution rather than provoke an unexpected response to radical change. Forum posters and MMO vets aside, it seems to me that a large portion of MMO players hold WoW as iconic of the definition of an MMORPG.
I don't follow TOR closely, in fact much of what I know of it is based on forum posts here on MMORPG.com. One point that I've seen posted is that of developer statements that there was significant influence on the TOR design from WoW. I cannot be surprised or offended to find out that this influence is showing up as details of the game are becoming known.
I wouldn't go so far as to imply that TOR will simply be "WoW with lightsabers" but that might not be terribly far from the case. What I expect is a fully functional, feature complete, conservatively designed game which bases its mass appeal on the Star Wars IP and the ability for mainstream players to find it accessible and instantly understandable.
Good, bad or ugly... I think they're shooting for a safe bet that the game will sell tons of boxes and attract mainstream players.
Interesting. I wonder if they would have fixed it if he hadn't talked about doing it on camera. At least they're looking at things, I'll give them credit where it's due. Would have been very embarrassing to see people just zerg ressing through content.
what do you play them for then, the Boring combat, Walking, or Wasting your time?
Thank you for updating us on the same things that have irked you for the past three years. We are about due for another
"I give up on TOR" thread again from you also (we are only at 2 of those) :P.
Would I have enjoyed a more realisitc art style? Sure. But I don't care for it to be like AoC where it breaks computers. Besides, the backgrounds, vistas, etc all look amazing in the pictures shown. It makes perfect sense why they went this way.
I agree, in videos, combat looks like they are standing there. But people who played it say otherwise. I wish I could comment more.
They said they would not have go kill 10 rats for no reason as your main objective. They said they wanted you fighting things that make sense. Why kill 10 rats and the next quest kill 10 bigger rats, and the final quest, kill 10 butterflys. They don't want that. They want you to kill 10 things that would be a danger in the context of the game.
Kill quests are going to be in any game like this.
AH yes, the wowclone end game arguement. Obviously that's the only thing. And since it's such a bad thing to do too. I mean, you could always have a totally barren planet and allow people to put down the same five houses, and hope they can entertain themselves with zero content. I like that idea! You also must ignore the crafting and what they are trying to do with it, along with the progressive story.
They have even said they have not revealed some things. They had the E3 video where they mentioned things but gave no details. Obviously they have many cards not played.
But then, you have never and will never be satisified. It's great to want a game to be the best it can be, but with the constant rehashing....I don't know, it just seems to lean towards whining.
You did notice in all the in-game footage that the "Kill 10 X" quests are bonus quests, right?
You edited my quote. Please remove that. It is no fair practice.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
You know I can accept in many terms people have a different taste. No quarrel here.
Also, it is true the final verdict will come when I play the game. I am open minded enough to change my opinion then.
As to the rest: it looks too much like copying the existing WOW formula and tagging story on it. They error of of this is twofold. First, there already exist tons of games like these. So there are a lot of people who are tired of the same old and many who may be interested in the story a while and then return to whatever, as they have done so many times. I still doubt so many MMO gamers are so keen into story and decisions. I know *I* am, but I just doubt too many MMO gamer are. But ok, we will have to see that.
Second: in an uphill battle if you play safe, you are going to lose, to paraphrase Sun-Zu. Bioware took zero risks, and in a risky situation as making the most expensive MMO ever, it's a no win situation. If you play safe, you expect to lose already. Such a safe play is usually the result of lack of trust in your own abilities. So you copy the formula of others. It requires some mental leap to understand what I mean, and I'm sorry I can't say it better. If you want to make a good game, you aim to make a good game. You do NOT start to calculate or scheme or make plans what target group X maybe wants and what audience Y possibly is used to as standard. No, you make a game that is fun and new and moving things ahead. The issue is, in the past 5 years, ALL MMos who tried that failed. Like Vanguard, for example. It was a great vision, but the execution was terrible. Such failures are responsible that Bioware devs are so afraid to make ANYTHING different from the all to well known WOW formula. But as I said: you can't win a battle if you just aim for Place #2. You have to do your very BEST right away. And that is what they didn't. They *calculated* and planned and overthought this way too much.
But, I guess, only time will tell who of us is right.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
You mistake cause and effect. I complain so much because so many games are "bad". Without critique, how can we hope things ever improve?
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
tl;dr the entire thread
I'm sick and tired of people complaining about TOR when it's not out yet. Any and all critques are going to be inaccurate until you thoroughly play the game for yourself. If you aren't going to try it out/buy it, then stop looking at TOR forums. Forming opinions about this game is like only watching a movie trailer then giving a review of the entire movie. You are either psyched for it or not and you either have some doubts or not. Trolling an incomplete game is stupid.
What irks me is the way people who have decided for various reasons that the game isn't for them can't simply let go, move on to another game and forget about TOR.
Seriously guys if you don't like the direction of the game just let it go and move on
Complaining on a forum isn't going to suddenly make MMO studios decide to start making something different. If you want your voice heard, use your wallet. Don't buy the games you don't think you'll enjoy enough. I stopped buying singleplayer games becuase 6-8 hours of enjoyment was not worth the price.
"If you're going to act like a noob, I'll treat you like one." -Caskio
Adventurers wear fancy pants!!!
Comparing the game straight to WoW is a poor argument. Most games in the MMO genre take things from games before it and improve upon it. TOR taking things WoW isn't a problem at all since WoW took things from EQ. It's the way of things. TOR seems to be taking a lot of things from various games and improving on them. For example, one of the instanced PVP BGs they have is a take on Battlefield 2142's Titan gameplay mode. In TOR, you capture giant laser cannons, the more you own the faster the enemies ship (which you spawn and drop down from) is destroyed. Taking features, gameplay ideas etc from other games is a good thing. If it ain't broke, there's no need to fix it. Even with all the things they are getting from other games, they are still staying true to their style of game making. One last point would be, who cares if TOR emulates WoW, it is the best selling most popular MMO of all time. It's not a bad thing to want your game to be as polished, smooth and awesome as WoW once was (since it's gone downhill for me since WotLK came out anyways).
We all hate it, but the fact is ALL MMO's pre and post WoW are failures. When you look at subs in second place at 300k. Is that anything to care about at all when you compare it to 12 million?
I understand the frustration, but what works for millions of subs is a sub par graphics game that can run on 6 year old laptops. If you want every sub that wants to play but can't upgrade their system. You have to let them in at the bottom and still be able to have fun in the game.
Story will make a huge difference and keep many players in game. Not the hardcore as much, but the millions of casual and RPG fans. So we will see what happens, but I am looking forward to the game regardless of the limitations you pointed out.
How many people long for that "past, simpler, and better world," I wonder, without ever recognizing the truth that perhaps it was they who were simpler and better, and not the world about them?
R.A.Salvatore
Pretty much /agree with OP which is scary with i agree with elikal.
There is a differnce between what you want a game to be and what its showing. My standard of lookign at up and comign games is look at what you have been shown and told ... then expect about 70% of that and there you go.
"Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine
I think it will be fun to level up 2-3 characters. I think that will be a great experience. And in itself it will mean that I will get alot of fun and value when I buy the game and perhaps subscribe 1-3 months.
But I also hope the endgame will be much more than farming PvE/PvP instances for gear and other rewards. I will get disappointed if this is what we will get. I hope they want people to play this game for years. And understand what players want long term.
Really good post OP ... but it's to late ToR is already made and is what it is.
ToR looks like a crap MMO for the most part. (everyone has assholes and elbows and opinions)
There is always hope for ArcheAge, Everquest 3 and World of Darkness at least.
Played: MCO - EQ/EQ2 - WoW - VG - WAR - AoC - LoTRO - DDO - GW/GW2 - Eve - Rift - FE - TSW - TSO - WS - ESO - AA - BD
Playing: Sims 3 & 4, Diablo3 and PoE
Waiting on: Lost Ark
Who's going to make a Cyberpunk MMO?
I saw a Sith in a pink robe.
Remember in the Star Wars movies when that Sith wore a pink robe? Lawl, that was great. Through and Through.
There are indeed many MMOs that have tried to copy WoW and failed, the problem is they did it poorly. Bioware will most likely do it far better than anyone else has.
Your problem is thinking that Bioware is trying to please you (and by you i mean the gaming public) Biowares sole objective is to make money. Yes, that does including making a good game and keeping players happy, but only to a certain extent, quality is a means to an end, that end being money. When money is your goal you absolutely do begin your dev process with prospective audiences demographics, what type of people you want to attract to your game. This is the basis of the entire state of the industry, players want quality, innovation, content ... developers want money. No ammount of your desire will make them see things from your point of view.
Biowares decision to make a "WoW clone" (to use a term that i hate but none-the-less provides the best definition) has nothing to do with fear of changing the norm, it is 100% motivated by the salivation caused when they look at the $2 billion (yes, two billion dollars) in subs Blizzard is pulling in each year (not to mention the upfront game and xpac costs)