What this article fails to do is point out that tanking is a necessity in early levels and in most games, like World of Warcraft, you can over gear content and delete archetype from your group. That said the article doesn't go into detail about Trials or use the word "Raid" (trials) at all which would be impossible without a tank.
Further, many Veteran Dungeons would be impossible to complete without a tank such as Ruins of Mazzatun, Bloodroot Forge, White-Gold Tower, Imperial City Prison, and Falkreath Hold, especially on hard mode for the last boss.
As you know there is a divide among players regarding the "trinity" in games. BDO and GW2 removed the trinity and many dislike this while others don't. By reading that article about the Dragon Knight the reader, who may be looking for a trinity-type game, would be dissuaded from trying it.
The article misinforms the reader very eloquently and gives inaccurate information.
The context of this article would, at face value, dissuade some from even trying the game. I don't personally like the game but the power this site has over the reader and this genre should be respected. By questioning if the game will actually "survive" this year it will make some avoid it all together. Would you want to play a game where all of your progress *might* be deleted in under a year?
The article doesn't prove the game will indeed die and we should again respect the power this site has as I am certain it would dissuade people from trying the game.
Someone commented on this article stating: "lmao .. no .. its not going anywhere till 2023 at the earliest
worthless clickbait ... you have to do better than this ..."
Tanking isn't necessary for over 90% of the content in ESO. In most MMOs unless I'm doing raid level a content a tank isn't necessary. You don't like the author's opinion. That's all this amounts to and you're trying to balloon that into something it's not.
I'd argue you can't do 90% of the dungeons on Veteran turning on the scroll at the last boss with four DPS with resto staves. I mean, if you're talking about just doing normal dungeons without a tank that's a different story but I don't think you do Vet pledges daily with scroll at the end (for two keys). There'd be no way to without a tank. Zero raids can be done without a tank.
I'm sure you can't do 90% of the dungeons on veteran without a tank, or rather most groups couldn't.
But then I didn't say did I? I said 90% of the content which is what the author of the article said. He didn't say you could steamroll and zerg raids with no tank. That was you going someplace else all on your own. You should go reread what he said again without jumping to conclusions.
Most content doesn't require a tank. True.
Magicka DKs aren't in a great position. Not sure, I don't have a DK.
But this should be in that ESO thread so that author can see and respond if he wants. This isn't the right place for an ESO tanking discussion. This is the place where you try and make a case for you OP claim, which you're not done well. If this was raid, I'd kick you and get a better tank.
This quote from the article pretty much counters your entire post:
" I think that is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that I feel like really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
If "success" in a game is spamming the easiest content with four DPS using Resto Staves then casual has been redefined.
Succeeding in the game is doing undaunted pledges on veteran and even regular trials. Even non veteran trials will need that "dedicated tanking skill tree."
Also, saying a game won't make it through the year is a bit ridiculous. Especially given there's content coming out for SW:TOR, there's a healthy player base, and the game developers have stated nothing of the sort.
You still seem to be reading something into the ESO article that just isn't there. Anyway ... Take the ESO discussion to the ESO thread.
Again, regarding the SWTOR article, it never said the game wouldn't make it through the year. It referenced the rumor that it wouldn't, and stated clearly that it isn't likely that the game would close any time soon.
Based on your responses, it doesn't seem like you're reading what you're replying to fully or at all. "Listen (read) to understand, not to respond." would be the advice I would give, in this situation.
What this article fails to do is point out that tanking is a necessity in early levels and in most games, like World of Warcraft, you can over gear content and delete archetype from your group. That said the article doesn't go into detail about Trials or use the word "Raid" (trials) at all which would be impossible without a tank.
Further, many Veteran Dungeons would be impossible to complete without a tank such as Ruins of Mazzatun, Bloodroot Forge, White-Gold Tower, Imperial City Prison, and Falkreath Hold, especially on hard mode for the last boss.
As you know there is a divide among players regarding the "trinity" in games. BDO and GW2 removed the trinity and many dislike this while others don't. By reading that article about the Dragon Knight the reader, who may be looking for a trinity-type game, would be dissuaded from trying it.
The article misinforms the reader very eloquently and gives inaccurate information.
The context of this article would, at face value, dissuade some from even trying the game. I don't personally like the game but the power this site has over the reader and this genre should be respected. By questioning if the game will actually "survive" this year it will make some avoid it all together. Would you want to play a game where all of your progress *might* be deleted in under a year?
The article doesn't prove the game will indeed die and we should again respect the power this site has as I am certain it would dissuade people from trying the game.
Someone commented on this article stating: "lmao .. no .. its not going anywhere till 2023 at the earliest
worthless clickbait ... you have to do better than this ..."
Tanking isn't necessary for over 90% of the content in ESO. In most MMOs unless I'm doing raid level a content a tank isn't necessary. You don't like the author's opinion. That's all this amounts to and you're trying to balloon that into something it's not.
I'd argue you can't do 90% of the dungeons on Veteran turning on the scroll at the last boss with four DPS with resto staves. I mean, if you're talking about just doing normal dungeons without a tank that's a different story but I don't think you do Vet pledges daily with scroll at the end (for two keys). There'd be no way to without a tank. Zero raids can be done without a tank.
I'm sure you can't do 90% of the dungeons on veteran without a tank, or rather most groups couldn't.
But then I didn't say did I? I said 90% of the content which is what the author of the article said. He didn't say you could steamroll and zerg raids with no tank. That was you going someplace else all on your own. You should go reread what he said again without jumping to conclusions.
Most content doesn't require a tank. True.
Magicka DKs aren't in a great position. Not sure, I don't have a DK.
But this should be in that ESO thread so that author can see and respond if he wants. This isn't the right place for an ESO tanking discussion. This is the place where you try and make a case for you OP claim, which you're not done well. If this was raid, I'd kick you and get a better tank.
This quote from the article pretty much counters your entire post:
" I think that is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that I feel like really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
If "success" in a game is spamming the easiest content with four DPS using Resto Staves then casual has been redefined.
Succeeding in the game is doing undaunted pledges on veteran and even regular trials. Even non veteran trials will need that "dedicated tanking skill tree."
Also, saying a game won't make it through the year is a bit ridiculous. Especially given there's content coming out for SW:TOR, there's a healthy player base, and the game developers have stated nothing of the sort.
You still seem to be reading something into the ESO article that just isn't there. Anyway ... Take the ESO discussion to the ESO thread.
Again, regarding the SWTOR article, it never said the game wouldn't make it through the year. It referenced the rumor that it wouldn't, and stated clearly that it isn't likely that the game would close any time soon.
Based on your responses, it doesn't seem like you're reading what you're replying to fully or at all. "Listen (read) to understand, not to respond." would be the advice I would give, in this situation.
It's fake news and that narrative has to stop. Pursue more friendly narratives and themes that exacerbate your own opinion as an opinion. Don't write off a game just because you don't like it or because you have reservations about its publisher or developer.
It's especially bad to push a false narrative about one game and then promote another in the same category. It seems to reveal some other type of agenda.
The ESO beef is really something that should go in that thread, not this one. We've already established the OP has no grounds and isn't interested in making their OP case. They just want their own personal attention ESO thread. That's rude to the ESO article author.
I was asked to shows some examples and I did. There were counter arguments from you and others about the ESO example. It's not realistic to expect me to be attacked on a point I was requested to make and then tell me to bury it into the ESO thread.
What this article fails to do is point out that tanking is a necessity in early levels and in most games, like World of Warcraft, you can over gear content and delete archetype from your group. That said the article doesn't go into detail about Trials or use the word "Raid" (trials) at all which would be impossible without a tank.
Further, many Veteran Dungeons would be impossible to complete without a tank such as Ruins of Mazzatun, Bloodroot Forge, White-Gold Tower, Imperial City Prison, and Falkreath Hold, especially on hard mode for the last boss.
As you know there is a divide among players regarding the "trinity" in games. BDO and GW2 removed the trinity and many dislike this while others don't. By reading that article about the Dragon Knight the reader, who may be looking for a trinity-type game, would be dissuaded from trying it.
The article misinforms the reader very eloquently and gives inaccurate information.
The context of this article would, at face value, dissuade some from even trying the game. I don't personally like the game but the power this site has over the reader and this genre should be respected. By questioning if the game will actually "survive" this year it will make some avoid it all together. Would you want to play a game where all of your progress *might* be deleted in under a year?
The article doesn't prove the game will indeed die and we should again respect the power this site has as I am certain it would dissuade people from trying the game.
Someone commented on this article stating: "lmao .. no .. its not going anywhere till 2023 at the earliest
worthless clickbait ... you have to do better than this ..."
Tanking isn't necessary for over 90% of the content in ESO. In most MMOs unless I'm doing raid level a content a tank isn't necessary. You don't like the author's opinion. That's all this amounts to and you're trying to balloon that into something it's not.
I'd argue you can't do 90% of the dungeons on Veteran turning on the scroll at the last boss with four DPS with resto staves. I mean, if you're talking about just doing normal dungeons without a tank that's a different story but I don't think you do Vet pledges daily with scroll at the end (for two keys). There'd be no way to without a tank. Zero raids can be done without a tank.
I'm sure you can't do 90% of the dungeons on veteran without a tank, or rather most groups couldn't.
But then I didn't say did I? I said 90% of the content which is what the author of the article said. He didn't say you could steamroll and zerg raids with no tank. That was you going someplace else all on your own. You should go reread what he said again without jumping to conclusions.
Most content doesn't require a tank. True.
Magicka DKs aren't in a great position. Not sure, I don't have a DK.
But this should be in that ESO thread so that author can see and respond if he wants. This isn't the right place for an ESO tanking discussion. This is the place where you try and make a case for you OP claim, which you're not done well. If this was raid, I'd kick you and get a better tank.
This quote from the article pretty much counters your entire post:
" I think that is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that I feel like really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
If "success" in a game is spamming the easiest content with four DPS using Resto Staves then casual has been redefined.
Succeeding in the game is doing undaunted pledges on veteran and even regular trials. Even non veteran trials will need that "dedicated tanking skill tree."
Also, saying a game won't make it through the year is a bit ridiculous. Especially given there's content coming out for SW:TOR, there's a healthy player base, and the game developers have stated nothing of the sort.
You still seem to be reading something into the ESO article that just isn't there. Anyway ... Take the ESO discussion to the ESO thread.
Again, regarding the SWTOR article, it never said the game wouldn't make it through the year. It referenced the rumor that it wouldn't, and stated clearly that it isn't likely that the game would close any time soon.
Based on your responses, it doesn't seem like you're reading what you're replying to fully or at all. "Listen (read) to understand, not to respond." would be the advice I would give, in this situation.
It's fake news and that narrative has to stop. Pursue more friendly narratives and themes that exacerbate your own opinion as an opinion. Don't write off a game just because you don't like it or because you have reservations about its publisher or developer.
It's especially bad to push a false narrative about one game and then promote another in the same category. It seems to reveal some other type of agenda.
You clearly didn't read the article or the responses you've quoted. I've pointed out several times now that what you're claiming the article stated is simply not there.
What this article fails to do is point out that tanking is a necessity in early levels and in most games, like World of Warcraft, you can over gear content and delete archetype from your group. That said the article doesn't go into detail about Trials or use the word "Raid" (trials) at all which would be impossible without a tank.
Further, many Veteran Dungeons would be impossible to complete without a tank such as Ruins of Mazzatun, Bloodroot Forge, White-Gold Tower, Imperial City Prison, and Falkreath Hold, especially on hard mode for the last boss.
As you know there is a divide among players regarding the "trinity" in games. BDO and GW2 removed the trinity and many dislike this while others don't. By reading that article about the Dragon Knight the reader, who may be looking for a trinity-type game, would be dissuaded from trying it.
The article misinforms the reader very eloquently and gives inaccurate information.
The context of this article would, at face value, dissuade some from even trying the game. I don't personally like the game but the power this site has over the reader and this genre should be respected. By questioning if the game will actually "survive" this year it will make some avoid it all together. Would you want to play a game where all of your progress *might* be deleted in under a year?
The article doesn't prove the game will indeed die and we should again respect the power this site has as I am certain it would dissuade people from trying the game.
Someone commented on this article stating: "lmao .. no .. its not going anywhere till 2023 at the earliest
worthless clickbait ... you have to do better than this ..."
Tanking isn't necessary for over 90% of the content in ESO. In most MMOs unless I'm doing raid level a content a tank isn't necessary. You don't like the author's opinion. That's all this amounts to and you're trying to balloon that into something it's not.
I'd argue you can't do 90% of the dungeons on Veteran turning on the scroll at the last boss with four DPS with resto staves. I mean, if you're talking about just doing normal dungeons without a tank that's a different story but I don't think you do Vet pledges daily with scroll at the end (for two keys). There'd be no way to without a tank. Zero raids can be done without a tank.
I'm sure you can't do 90% of the dungeons on veteran without a tank, or rather most groups couldn't.
But then I didn't say did I? I said 90% of the content which is what the author of the article said. He didn't say you could steamroll and zerg raids with no tank. That was you going someplace else all on your own. You should go reread what he said again without jumping to conclusions.
Most content doesn't require a tank. True.
Magicka DKs aren't in a great position. Not sure, I don't have a DK.
But this should be in that ESO thread so that author can see and respond if he wants. This isn't the right place for an ESO tanking discussion. This is the place where you try and make a case for you OP claim, which you're not done well. If this was raid, I'd kick you and get a better tank.
This quote from the article pretty much counters your entire post:
" I think that is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that I feel like really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
If "success" in a game is spamming the easiest content with four DPS using Resto Staves then casual has been redefined.
Succeeding in the game is doing undaunted pledges on veteran and even regular trials. Even non veteran trials will need that "dedicated tanking skill tree."
Also, saying a game won't make it through the year is a bit ridiculous. Especially given there's content coming out for SW:TOR, there's a healthy player base, and the game developers have stated nothing of the sort.
You still seem to be reading something into the ESO article that just isn't there. Anyway ... Take the ESO discussion to the ESO thread.
Again, regarding the SWTOR article, it never said the game wouldn't make it through the year. It referenced the rumor that it wouldn't, and stated clearly that it isn't likely that the game would close any time soon.
Based on your responses, it doesn't seem like you're reading what you're replying to fully or at all. "Listen (read) to understand, not to respond." would be the advice I would give, in this situation.
It's fake news and that narrative has to stop. Pursue more friendly narratives and themes that exacerbate your own opinion as an opinion. Don't write off a game just because you don't like it or because you have reservations about its publisher or developer.
It's especially bad to push a false narrative about one game and then promote another in the same category. It seems to reveal some other type of agenda.
You clearly didn't read the article or the responses you've quoted. I've pointed out several times now that what you're claiming the article stated is simply not there.
I have quoted the author saying you don't need a tank to succeed which is fake news. When I click "news" on the top of this site that article is there. Is it really "news?"
What this article fails to do is point out that tanking is a necessity in early levels and in most games, like World of Warcraft, you can over gear content and delete archetype from your group. That said the article doesn't go into detail about Trials or use the word "Raid" (trials) at all which would be impossible without a tank.
Further, many Veteran Dungeons would be impossible to complete without a tank such as Ruins of Mazzatun, Bloodroot Forge, White-Gold Tower, Imperial City Prison, and Falkreath Hold, especially on hard mode for the last boss.
As you know there is a divide among players regarding the "trinity" in games. BDO and GW2 removed the trinity and many dislike this while others don't. By reading that article about the Dragon Knight the reader, who may be looking for a trinity-type game, would be dissuaded from trying it.
The article misinforms the reader very eloquently and gives inaccurate information.
The context of this article would, at face value, dissuade some from even trying the game. I don't personally like the game but the power this site has over the reader and this genre should be respected. By questioning if the game will actually "survive" this year it will make some avoid it all together. Would you want to play a game where all of your progress *might* be deleted in under a year?
The article doesn't prove the game will indeed die and we should again respect the power this site has as I am certain it would dissuade people from trying the game.
Someone commented on this article stating: "lmao .. no .. its not going anywhere till 2023 at the earliest
worthless clickbait ... you have to do better than this ..."
Tanking isn't necessary for over 90% of the content in ESO. In most MMOs unless I'm doing raid level a content a tank isn't necessary. You don't like the author's opinion. That's all this amounts to and you're trying to balloon that into something it's not.
I'd argue you can't do 90% of the dungeons on Veteran turning on the scroll at the last boss with four DPS with resto staves. I mean, if you're talking about just doing normal dungeons without a tank that's a different story but I don't think you do Vet pledges daily with scroll at the end (for two keys). There'd be no way to without a tank. Zero raids can be done without a tank.
I'm sure you can't do 90% of the dungeons on veteran without a tank, or rather most groups couldn't.
But then I didn't say did I? I said 90% of the content which is what the author of the article said. He didn't say you could steamroll and zerg raids with no tank. That was you going someplace else all on your own. You should go reread what he said again without jumping to conclusions.
Most content doesn't require a tank. True.
Magicka DKs aren't in a great position. Not sure, I don't have a DK.
But this should be in that ESO thread so that author can see and respond if he wants. This isn't the right place for an ESO tanking discussion. This is the place where you try and make a case for you OP claim, which you're not done well. If this was raid, I'd kick you and get a better tank.
This quote from the article pretty much counters your entire post:
" I think that is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that I feel like really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
If "success" in a game is spamming the easiest content with four DPS using Resto Staves then casual has been redefined.
Succeeding in the game is doing undaunted pledges on veteran and even regular trials. Even non veteran trials will need that "dedicated tanking skill tree."
Also, saying a game won't make it through the year is a bit ridiculous. Especially given there's content coming out for SW:TOR, there's a healthy player base, and the game developers have stated nothing of the sort.
You still seem to be reading something into the ESO article that just isn't there. Anyway ... Take the ESO discussion to the ESO thread.
Again, regarding the SWTOR article, it never said the game wouldn't make it through the year. It referenced the rumor that it wouldn't, and stated clearly that it isn't likely that the game would close any time soon.
Based on your responses, it doesn't seem like you're reading what you're replying to fully or at all. "Listen (read) to understand, not to respond." would be the advice I would give, in this situation.
Some people have admitted they only read the article title and post their opinions based on that. The whole point to the forums is that we get to comment on an article. When people do have a beef with an article they make those known there, where everyone discussing that subject can give their opinion on that subject.
The whole point of this thread (or at least the restated argument by the OP) was that MMORPG.com was spreading misinformation, however, they haven't even read the articles they're claiming spread misinformation.
Its clear at this point that the OP didn't read any of what was said here
or in the articles. Its been pointed out at least three times now that
the SWTOR article never claimed the game would close within the year (rather the opposite, actually),
yet they continually assert that it does.
What this article fails to do is point out that tanking is a necessity in early levels and in most games, like World of Warcraft, you can over gear content and delete archetype from your group. That said the article doesn't go into detail about Trials or use the word "Raid" (trials) at all which would be impossible without a tank.
Further, many Veteran Dungeons would be impossible to complete without a tank such as Ruins of Mazzatun, Bloodroot Forge, White-Gold Tower, Imperial City Prison, and Falkreath Hold, especially on hard mode for the last boss.
As you know there is a divide among players regarding the "trinity" in games. BDO and GW2 removed the trinity and many dislike this while others don't. By reading that article about the Dragon Knight the reader, who may be looking for a trinity-type game, would be dissuaded from trying it.
The article misinforms the reader very eloquently and gives inaccurate information.
The context of this article would, at face value, dissuade some from even trying the game. I don't personally like the game but the power this site has over the reader and this genre should be respected. By questioning if the game will actually "survive" this year it will make some avoid it all together. Would you want to play a game where all of your progress *might* be deleted in under a year?
The article doesn't prove the game will indeed die and we should again respect the power this site has as I am certain it would dissuade people from trying the game.
Someone commented on this article stating: "lmao .. no .. its not going anywhere till 2023 at the earliest
worthless clickbait ... you have to do better than this ..."
Tanking isn't necessary for over 90% of the content in ESO. In most MMOs unless I'm doing raid level a content a tank isn't necessary. You don't like the author's opinion. That's all this amounts to and you're trying to balloon that into something it's not.
I'd argue you can't do 90% of the dungeons on Veteran turning on the scroll at the last boss with four DPS with resto staves. I mean, if you're talking about just doing normal dungeons without a tank that's a different story but I don't think you do Vet pledges daily with scroll at the end (for two keys). There'd be no way to without a tank. Zero raids can be done without a tank.
I'm sure you can't do 90% of the dungeons on veteran without a tank, or rather most groups couldn't.
But then I didn't say did I? I said 90% of the content which is what the author of the article said. He didn't say you could steamroll and zerg raids with no tank. That was you going someplace else all on your own. You should go reread what he said again without jumping to conclusions.
Most content doesn't require a tank. True.
Magicka DKs aren't in a great position. Not sure, I don't have a DK.
But this should be in that ESO thread so that author can see and respond if he wants. This isn't the right place for an ESO tanking discussion. This is the place where you try and make a case for you OP claim, which you're not done well. If this was raid, I'd kick you and get a better tank.
This quote from the article pretty much counters your entire post:
" I think that is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that I feel like really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
If "success" in a game is spamming the easiest content with four DPS using Resto Staves then casual has been redefined.
Succeeding in the game is doing undaunted pledges on veteran and even regular trials. Even non veteran trials will need that "dedicated tanking skill tree."
Also, saying a game won't make it through the year is a bit ridiculous. Especially given there's content coming out for SW:TOR, there's a healthy player base, and the game developers have stated nothing of the sort.
You still seem to be reading something into the ESO article that just isn't there. Anyway ... Take the ESO discussion to the ESO thread.
Again, regarding the SWTOR article, it never said the game wouldn't make it through the year. It referenced the rumor that it wouldn't, and stated clearly that it isn't likely that the game would close any time soon.
Based on your responses, it doesn't seem like you're reading what you're replying to fully or at all. "Listen (read) to understand, not to respond." would be the advice I would give, in this situation.
Some people have admitted they only read the article title and post their opinions based on that. The whole point to the forums is that we get to comment on an article. When people do have a beef with an article they make those known there, where everyone discussing that subject can give their opinion on that subject.
The whole point of this thread (or at least the restated argument by the OP) was that MMORPG.com was spreading misinformation, however, they haven't even read the articles they're claiming spread misinformation.
Its clear at this point that the OP didn't read any of what was said here
or in the articles. Its been pointed out at least three times now that
the SWTOR article never claimed the game would close within the year (rather the opposite, actually),
yet they continually assert that it does.
From the article:
" That is not to say something drastic could happen in the next few months. It could for sure. Moving new resources in a studio onto a game is nothing new for EA, several studios help with bigger projects over time and this is pretty common. However, if Bioware Austin is beginning a new product, then more limited resources will be put toward SWTOR for the future. Which, so far into 2018 we have not heard much from the franchise. With Star Wars changing so much in these last few years, we certainly hope the game stays. Still, it would not be a major surprise if less and less is done with the title. "
That narrative is speculative and likely to be false. Pursuing that type of theme will dissuade people from trying the game. It makes the reader think twice about investing time into something that "something drastic could happen to" in the next few months. The reader trusts the author because the site is backing what they say. The site has merit in the industry.
" That is not to say something drastic could happen in the next few months. It could for sure. Moving new resources in a studio onto a game is nothing new for EA, several studios help with bigger projects over time and this is pretty common. However, if Bioware Austin is beginning a new product, then more limited resources will be put toward SWTOR for the future. Which, so far into 2018 we have not heard much from the franchise. With Star Wars changing so much in these last few years, we certainly hope the game stays. Still, it would not be a major surprise if less and less is done with the title. "
That narrative is speculative and likely to be false. Pursuing that type of theme will dissuade people from trying the game. It makes the reader think twice about investing time into something that "something drastic could happen to" in the next few months. The reader trusts the author because the site is backing what they say. The site has merit in the industry.
Again, it is never stated, as you paraphrased, that the game will close
within the year. In fact, you selectively chose to leave out the main
point of that entire paragraph, which was a summary of the article as a
whole:
"The final thought here is simple? Will EA shut down SWTOR? That answer is likely No, for the time being."
" That is not to say something drastic could happen in the next few months. It could for sure. Moving new resources in a studio onto a game is nothing new for EA, several studios help with bigger projects over time and this is pretty common. However, if Bioware Austin is beginning a new product, then more limited resources will be put toward SWTOR for the future. Which, so far into 2018 we have not heard much from the franchise. With Star Wars changing so much in these last few years, we certainly hope the game stays. Still, it would not be a major surprise if less and less is done with the title. "
That narrative is speculative and likely to be false. Pursuing that type of theme will dissuade people from trying the game. It makes the reader think twice about investing time into something that "something drastic could happen to" in the next few months. The reader trusts the author because the site is backing what they say. The site has merit in the industry.
Again, it is never stated, as you paraphrased, that the game will close
within the year. In fact, you selectively chose to leave out the main
point of that entire paragraph, which was a summary of the article as a
whole:
"The final thought here is simple? Will EA shut down SWTOR? That answer is likely No, for the time being."
Your own bias is showing here.
We're arguing semantics. You think it's okay to create speculation surrounding a games life span with nothing to base it on and I do not. We won't agree and that's fine.
I stopped expecting too much from the site writers/editors a long time ago. If you want some real conversation/insight you're going to have to sift through the comments.
No disrespect but every article reads like a fluff piece (in between OP EDs that seem to purposely incense the readers), and I'm not knocking it because I've been here long enough to know what it is.
There's games that have been exposed as vaporware but if you didn't know any better and read about them HERE they were all potentially great titles that just magically disappeared.
I just treat it like some cool folks who are/were fans of MMORPGs made a website and don't want to step on any toes and lose behind the scenes access.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
I stopped expecting too much from the site writers/editors a long time ago. If you want some real conversation/insight you're going to have to sift through the comments.
No disrespect but every article reads like a fluff piece (in between OP EDs that seem to purposely incense the readers), and I'm not knocking it because I've been here long enough to know what it is.
There's games that have been exposed as vaporware but if you didn't know any better and read about them HERE they were all potentially great titles that just magically disappeared.
I just treat it like some cool folks who are/were fans of MMORPGs made a website and don't want to step on any toes and lose behind the scenes access.
Thank you for expressing the way you feel. A lot of people I've spoken to have felt the same way. There are a few die hard paladin/white knights that will defend this site until the last post; as we can see happening here.
I am trying to get this site back on the train tracks it's gone off course.
"I used to think the worst thing in life was to be all alone. It's not. The worst thing in life is to end up with people who make you feel all alone." Robin Williams
OP you still seem to struggle understanding this site. While it publishes news and reviews, they just serve as points around which the community forms discussions. It’s the forums that are the heart and soul of MMORPG.COM
The great part about it is that when you have a different opinion about a subject than the author you are able to express that in the forums which are always linked. If you make a good case you have people agree with you. If you make a poor case then people will disagree.
In general do the articles slant positive? Sure. Can it be frustrating at times? Sure... it’s always a bit frustrating when you think you see or know something that the author doesn’t. So you create a post explaining why... and thus maybe a good debate occurs.
I think the posters here have the skeptic side covered pretty well
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
OP you still seem to struggle understanding this site. While it publishes news and reviews, they just serve as points around which the community forms discussions. It’s the forums that are the heart and soul of MMORPG.COM
The great part about it is that when you have a different opinion about a subject than the author you are able to express that in the forums which are always linked. If you make a good case you have people agree with you. If you make a poor case then people will disagree.
In general do the articles slant positive? Sure. Can it be frustrating at times? Sure... it’s always a bit frustrating when you think you see or know something that the author doesn’t. So you create a post explaining why... and thus maybe a good debate occurs.
I think the posters here have the skeptic side covered pretty well
The MMORPG genre is arguably in decline with a few hopeful titles on the horizon. These titles could revive the genre by breathing much needed life back into it. This website has become the bastion of MMORPG news. It is the first place we the players go to find new games, read about current ones, and watch video reviews. In the past year or so a host of articles have flooded the main page of MMORPG.com that, by most accounts, seem to be biased. What the writers and reviewers on MMORPG.com say and do has a huge impact on the genre at large.
It would seem that this website now possesses the power to dissuade the reader from ever trying a game or encourage them to try a different one due to bias or heavily opinionated reviews that seem to turn the tides of the genre. The sponsoring of certain article also has the potential to pollute the mind of the reader and I don't agree with turning this into MMORPG nascar(speaking on sponsors).
I will be the first to say I love this site but I do believe there needs to be a larger emphasis on remaining unbiased and allowing the reader to formulate their own opinion before a game is inadvertently "damned." We put a lot of faith in this site to steer us in the right direction but MMORPG.com should be careful not to reshape the entire genre with its articles.
Use your power for good.
If you think this incredibly niche website has any impact whatsoever on the future of MMO development you are sorely mistaken. This website is the bastion for jaded MMO veterans... certainly in the comment sections / forums. I don't really see this website as having a larger impact then mainstream news media outlets such as Gamespot,IGN,Kotaku, and prominent influencers via Twitch / Youtube. I think you severely underestimate the size of the audience this web site reaches.
You are wrong though. The Big Budget AAA MMORPG is in decline. There are absolutely plenty of MMOs in development. Last year was a bit of an off year, but there are more MMOs in the works now then there has ever been. You could also argue that even some big budget games tip their toe into the water enough for some players (Games like Destiny) and plenty more smaller companies making waves with tip toeing in the territory as well. (Path of Exile, Warframe)
Also, as to the discussion regarding bias towards certain titles..everyone has a bias. You can't avoid being biased towards things, this is human nature. You can try your best to remain as unbiased as possible, but you can be influenced in any way shape or form. If I tell you a movie is bad, then you go see it, I will have influenced you in some way. That is how bias works. You can't just avoid it. If you treat someone's opinion as invalid because you think they like something too much for whatever reason then you might miss some valid information. The thing is, they could be completely unbiased, so by you thinking someone is bias you are literally creating a bias towards that information.
I don't think this site has the level of influence the OP seems to indicate it does. In fact, I almost get the impression that I am being told unable to think for myself after reading that post.
Seems to me I've expressed opinions at odds with this site over a number of threads recently.
This site is just another point of reference for me and I take it as such. Everyone has different tastes, even if someone gives a good or bad review you have to see if their reasons will impact you similarly.
If someone says i hate this game because it has a hard learning curve, that is inherently different than someone saying, i hate this game cuz it is full of bugs. The first is a feature that is good or bad based on taste, second is 99% bad.
My point is, use your brain, and the site will have the necessary impact that it should have. Which is just another piece of the puzzle in deciding what to play.
In addition to this site, i look at the comments on the forums and then steam reviews and finally i look at gameplay on youtube, then i decide if i want to play it or not. If i have to purchae the game, i wait for a sale usually but not always.
Cryomatrix
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Editorials are generally opinionated and speculative. Also, I'd like to point something out in the example you gave. It reads as such:
" I think that is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that I feel like really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
Yet for some reason, you're acting as if it says:
"That is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
Now, if it were written as you seem to believe it is, you'd have a fair point because it comes off as a statement of fact. However, the words I've italicized in the sentence as it was actually written clearly delineate it as a statement of opinion, and in an article very plainly labeled as an opinion piece at that.
Or in other words, you're seeing something which simply isn't there, at least in that particular instance.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
I agree with some of the OP's observations, but by and large not his conclusions. We have to allow the staff to be negative sometimes, that said, I find the reviews lean to the positive myself.
Compared to Twitter, Facebook, Metacritic, Steam Player Reviews; I doubt any forum has a huge effect on player choice.
I think like the OP that this site is a bastion of MMOs, but there we part, the staff should not refrain from calling a turkey a turkey.
Also when you talk of what the review got wrong, I don't think your examples support your concerns. The examples would not have made players decided to not play the game, they may have been factually incorrect but the issues you point out don't seem to be deal breakers.
But I do think we should recognise this sites importance to MMOs and what that means, I rarely see a thread addressing that, so thanks for bringing this up.
Comments
Again, regarding the SWTOR article, it never said the game wouldn't make it through the year. It referenced the rumor that it wouldn't, and stated clearly that it isn't likely that the game would close any time soon.
Based on your responses, it doesn't seem like you're reading what you're replying to fully or at all. "Listen (read) to understand, not to respond." would be the advice I would give, in this situation.
It's especially bad to push a false narrative about one game and then promote another in the same category. It seems to reveal some other type of agenda.
Its clear at this point that the OP didn't read any of what was said here or in the articles. Its been pointed out at least three times now that the SWTOR article never claimed the game would close within the year (rather the opposite, actually), yet they continually assert that it does.
" That is not to say something drastic could happen in the next few months. It could for sure. Moving new resources in a studio onto a game is nothing new for EA, several studios help with bigger projects over time and this is pretty common. However, if Bioware Austin is beginning a new product, then more limited resources will be put toward SWTOR for the future. Which, so far into 2018 we have not heard much from the franchise. With Star Wars changing so much in these last few years, we certainly hope the game stays. Still, it would not be a major surprise if less and less is done with the title. "
That narrative is speculative and likely to be false. Pursuing that type of theme will dissuade people from trying the game. It makes the reader think twice about investing time into something that "something drastic could happen to" in the next few months. The reader trusts the author because the site is backing what they say. The site has merit in the industry.
Your own bias is showing here.
No disrespect but every article reads like a fluff piece (in between OP EDs that seem to purposely incense the readers), and I'm not knocking it because I've been here long enough to know what it is.
There's games that have been exposed as vaporware but if you didn't know any better and read about them HERE they were all potentially great titles that just magically disappeared.
I just treat it like some cool folks who are/were fans of MMORPGs made a website and don't want to step on any toes and lose behind the scenes access.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I am trying to get this site back on the train tracks it's gone off course.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/The great part about it is that when you have a different opinion about a subject than the author you are able to express that in the forums which are always linked. If you make a good case you have people agree with you. If you make a poor case then people will disagree.
In general do the articles slant positive? Sure. Can it be frustrating at times? Sure... it’s always a bit frustrating when you think you see or know something that the author doesn’t. So you create a post explaining why... and thus maybe a good debate occurs.
I think the posters here have the skeptic side covered pretty well
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
You are wrong though. The Big Budget AAA MMORPG is in decline. There are absolutely plenty of MMOs in development. Last year was a bit of an off year, but there are more MMOs in the works now then there has ever been. You could also argue that even some big budget games tip their toe into the water enough for some players (Games like Destiny) and plenty more smaller companies making waves with tip toeing in the territory as well. (Path of Exile, Warframe)
Also, as to the discussion regarding bias towards certain titles..everyone has a bias. You can't avoid being biased towards things, this is human nature. You can try your best to remain as unbiased as possible, but you can be influenced in any way shape or form. If I tell you a movie is bad, then you go see it, I will have influenced you in some way. That is how bias works. You can't just avoid it. If you treat someone's opinion as invalid because you think they like something too much for whatever reason then you might miss some valid information. The thing is, they could be completely unbiased, so by you thinking someone is bias you are literally creating a bias towards that information.
It is best not to think that way..
Seems to me I've expressed opinions at odds with this site over a number of threads recently.
If someone says i hate this game because it has a hard learning curve, that is inherently different than someone saying, i hate this game cuz it is full of bugs. The first is a feature that is good or bad based on taste, second is 99% bad.
My point is, use your brain, and the site will have the necessary impact that it should have. Which is just another piece of the puzzle in deciding what to play.
In addition to this site, i look at the comments on the forums and then steam reviews and finally i look at gameplay on youtube, then i decide if i want to play it or not. If i have to purchae the game, i wait for a sale usually but not always.
Cryomatrix
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
" I think that is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that I feel like really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
Yet for some reason, you're acting as if it says:
"That is where Dragon Knight gets screwed the most, they have an amazing skill tree dedicated to tanking in a game that really doesn’t NEED a tank to succeed. "
Now, if it were written as you seem to believe it is, you'd have a fair point because it comes off as a statement of fact. However, the words I've italicized in the sentence as it was actually written clearly delineate it as a statement of opinion, and in an article very plainly labeled as an opinion piece at that.
Or in other words, you're seeing something which simply isn't there, at least in that particular instance.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
#IStandWithVic
Compared to Twitter, Facebook, Metacritic, Steam Player Reviews; I doubt any forum has a huge effect on player choice.
I think like the OP that this site is a bastion of MMOs, but there we part, the staff should not refrain from calling a turkey a turkey.
Also when you talk of what the review got wrong, I don't think your examples support your concerns. The examples would not have made players decided to not play the game, they may have been factually incorrect but the issues you point out don't seem to be deal breakers.
But I do think we should recognise this sites importance to MMOs and what that means, I rarely see a thread addressing that, so thanks for bringing this up.