Aldumraan

The Old Republic

Recommended Posts

An awesome game with a bad ending and a programmer doing a review about the game he worked on when user reviews are typically fucking dumb anyway doesn't dent my faith in a company that has released more good games than bad.

Yeap I concur. Overall DA2 is an okay game. It isn't as good as Origins was despite having better characters in my opinion but I think they tried to get a little too experimental with the plot this time and frankly I felt the original DA:O was over rated anyway. Remember on a 10 scale being a 7 or a 8 still means you are a good game just not "great". User reviews on metacritic are a joke anyway so I ignore them regardless.

Meanwhile this game treats jedi fine. Remember there were tons of jedi in this time period, this is not the days of Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader. Not every Jedi or Sith is going to be a billy bad ass, most of them are just going to be padawan level or at best just regular jedi knights. A dude from cover shoots a generic padawan from 500 yards with a sniper rifle he is going down sorry, he just isn't so good with the force yet that he can see it coming and most force sensitives may never be able to reach that level. Not every Jedi has the potential of Obi Wan Kenobi. That is how Bioware explains it and it makes sense to me.

Meanwhile the player character Bounty Hunter starts out by winning the mandalorian Great Hunt, the Imperial Agent is already a respected vet and considered an elite, the Trooper is part of an elite squad of special forces, etc etc. Your sith and jedi? They start as padawans doing leg work for some other dude and going through "training".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile the player character Bounty Hunter starts out by winning the mandalorian Great Hunt, the Imperial Agent is already a respected vet and considered an elite, the Trooper is part of an elite squad of special forces, etc etc. Your sith and jedi? They start as padawans doing leg work for some other dude and going through "training".

That actually has me worried from an RP perspective. Is every Bounty Hunter going to be walking around claiming to have won the Great Hunt? How many Great Hunts are there?

I might be overreacting; after all, how many people here claim to have killed the Lich King? But on the other hand those are 40 man raids. This is your own personal story...in theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That actually has me worried from an RP perspective. Is every Bounty Hunter going to be walking around claiming to have won the Great Hunt? How many Great Hunts are there?

I might be overreacting; after all, how many people here claim to have killed the Lich King? But on the other hand those are 40 man raids. This is your own personal story...in theory.

As it turns out, the Great Hunt isn't that big of a deal. They really hold one every three days or so. They just make it sound big so everyone doing it will feel important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As it turns out, the Great Hunt isn't that big of a deal. They really hold one every three days or so. They just make it sound big so everyone doing it will feel important.

:P It is like every three years. It is a big deal to the mandalorians and various rough necks/criminal society people. That said sure lots of living characters (even npc's) have won it according to the story. Really if you want over the top and ridiculous just read Bowdarr's bio and take into account that he is a companion character for smugglers.

PS: No one is going to be soloing Darth Malgus as a part of their story and even when the Bounty Hunter wins the great hunt he still had a team of npc's behind him. At least they are trying. In WoW Garrosh still talks to me like I am some dumb newb even though I am level 85, have killed so many dragons I have lost count, saved the world at least 5-6 times by now, etc etc. By WoW lore "you" didn't kill jack, Tyrion Fordring killed the Lich King while you just happened to be in the same room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An awesome game with a bad ending and a programmer doing a review about the game he worked on when user reviews are typically fucking dumb anyway doesn't dent my faith in a company that has released more good games than bad.

Somehow I knew you would bite.

An awesome game with a bad ending

Subjective matter being presented as fact.

I didn't think Dragon Age 2 was an awesome game at all. At the same time, I don't think it deserves a 4/10.

A solid 6-7/10 is what I would have given it. It's a decent game on its own, but considering the company it came from, I was expecting a lot more.

I hear a lot of "It isn't a bad game when you don't compare it to DA:O." but I think that logic is kind-of stupid. You can't rate a sequel without comparing it to the original, and quite frankly I feel that DA2 is inferior to DA:O in every aspect, and yes, the fact that I view their most recent game as a step backwards does impact my opinion of future games.

The thing with metacritic just comes off as childish to me. You can say that user reviews are a joke, but really, they're obviously important enough for that developer to make an anonymous user review of the game, and honestly I don't see why they are that much of a joke. Why is the review of an average Joe willing to write a paragraph about a game they played for nothing in return somehow worth less than the review of a paid critic? There are 920 user reviews on that site, and 27 critic reviews yet somehow the 920 are somehow less valid than the 27. You can buy the bullshit all you want, but I will trust the opinion of a large number of average gamers like myself more than I will trust ANY review made by a paid critic.

So far, I feel that there were a lot of bad choices made on Bioware's end with Dragon Age 2, and people are noticing and giving them feedback on it. They can either accept the mass feedback and better themselves from it, or they can choose to ignore it. From what I have seen, I have been given an impression that Bioware can't admit the fact that the negativity regarding their game is somehow their doing, and infer that they are going to ignore any feedback given for future games.

If this is how they treat things, then I cannot within me logically foresee any potential outcome where TOR will be successful in the general market. The question is, however, whether or not this is how they are going to treat things. I have also heard (not seen) about some mention by Bioware that if their game [DA:2] does not recieve a 9/10 avg. that they will be looking towards reviewers and the public for feedback on how they should approach the next one.. Which I feel is EXACTLY the correct response even if the game was flawless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Subjective matter being presented as fact.

It's a fact to me.

The thing with metacritic just comes off as childish to me. You can say that user reviews are a joke, but really, they're obviously important enough for that developer to make an anonymous user review of the game, and honestly I don't see why they are that much of a joke. Why is the review of an average Joe willing to write a paragraph about a game they played for nothing in return somehow worth less than the review of a paid critic? There are 920 user reviews on that site, and 27 critic reviews yet somehow the 920 are somehow less valid than the 27. You can buy the bullshit all you want, but I will trust the opinion of a large number of average gamers like myself more than I will trust ANY review made by a paid critic.

Go look at the reviews and then tell me it isn't stupid.

Here are some gems!

Rated 0.

This is the worst steaming pile of poop i have ever played.

Rated 0.

A horrible, wretched nightmare without end.

Rated 1.

The whole history of hero's family is like "The Bold and the Beautiful" or "Dallas" with dragons.

Rated 0.

With a 16-20 hour long campaign this game can only been seen as a turd in the punch bowl.

Rated 0.

At the time of writing this, the user score (based on 143 ratings) is *3.6*; the critic score (based on 12 ratings (11 "positive")) is 8.4. You could not have a more embarrassingly obvious exposition of the vapid, dead vacuum-of-integrity that is games journalism.

Rated 1.

I felt like developers trolled me with a videogame.

Rated 0.

This game sucks donkey! Who made this version??? Sucks ass. I played this and I feel like maybe a couple of grade 12 students got together and made a game. I mean who made this thing???? I'm confused! Wha happened from the first game???? Why so drastically **** from the first????

Rated 0.

Combat literally consists of holding down a single button, and since that same button conveniently loots everything on screen for you, pressing it is what you do for 90% of the game.

Rated 0.

Quit playing after 4 hours into the game.

User reviews are all extremes. People rate 0 because YO THEY BE MAD BRO. And then Bioware fanboys rate 10 because YO THEY BE MAD BRO. And then the NORMAL PEOPLE rate 5-8 and get bogged down in the bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say it wasn't, but like with every single review ever you have to take a few steps deeper. Look at each spectrum of the extreme, see what they have to say, and then look at the median. Especially with a game like this where there are SO many people who are so incredibly butthurt about the changes they made, and SO many people who are equally as butthurt that the game isn't being praised (see: fanboys)

Lets check out the mixed reviews...

5/10

As someone who deeply enjoyed DA:O, I am immensely disappointed by this sequel. Dragon Age 2 is inferior to its predecessor in basically every way.

6/10

The game on the whole is not BAD. It's just amazingly sub par.

5/10

Dragon Age 2 is praiseworthy in many areas but fails utterly at what should have been its core strength. Compared to DA:O the game falls far short of what it should have been.

6/10

Going to try my best to be constructive here. Dragon Age II is a merely decent game, which had the potential to be quite memorable. It squandered this potential by lukewarm storytelling, an inconsistently entertaining cast of NPCs and--most importantly--repetitive and exhausting level design.

Cut the butthurt on both ends, and you have what are in my opinion the most honest and constructive reviews you can find, completely blowing the critic reviews out of the water in both truth and integrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cut the butthurt on both ends, and you have what are in my opinion the most honest and constructive reviews you can find, completely blowing the critic reviews out of the water in both truth and integrity.

Subjective matter being presented as fact.

Just sayin' broski, any review is a subjective point of view. It gets even more subjective when you cherry pick reviews you feel are full of 'truth and integrity' based on your own subjective vision of the game. Besides, I really don't see how any of this is relevant to the topic at hand besides the fact you wanted to bitch and moan about DA2 summoar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Subjective matter being presented as fact.

Just sayin' broski, any review is a subjective point of view. It gets even more subjective when you cherry pick reviews you feel are full of 'truth and integrity' based on your own subjective vision of the game. Besides, I really don't see how any of this is relevant to the topic at hand besides the fact you wanted to bitch and moan about DA2 summoar.

Bromeo to the rescue.

Forums are a menacing battlefield of "I thinks", "In my opinion", and "I did/didn't _____". The point of this topic is to discuss the upcoming game Star Wars: The Old Republic, not argue about someone else's opinion on Bioware doing a shitty or amazing job on Dragon Age 2. Whether or not you think he tried to elevate his opinion, Ryoku raised a valid point about Bioware releasing a unsatisfactory game to HIS standards that made HIM uncomfortable with the company's next move into Star Wars. Passive-aggressiveness directed towards that post isn't going anywhere except down a dark, often-used road of internet tears.

This is a thread about "The Old Republic", not "Say good things about Bioware or get out" after all. The post he made contained nothing stating 'This is the truth' or 'This is unquestionable'.

That said, I have felt somewhat anxious with Bioware at the reigns of this game. I feel as if the game is coming off as a Single-player RPG with "Multiplayer-tendencies" rather than an MMO by today's standards. I'm still picking up a copy because it's god damn Star Wars, but the lasting effect seems to be waning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thalaromes, I love you and I appreciate you looking out for me, but I can handle this.

Dio, if you look at the post you quoted, I even directly mentioned that what I was saying was in my opinion.

Other than that, I'd generally be paraphrasing what Thal said already. This whole thing about Dragon Age started with a glancing remark by myself explaining that I didn't enjoy the game and that it effects my opinion on how the company might handle future games.

Oh, and your tone is starting to lean towards blatant hostility, which is bordering on making a relatively passive debate into a shallow pissing contest which, I don't know about you, but isn't really what I'm looking for here at all.

I vouch for dropping this, and agreeing to disagree. For the last day the heaviest activity on this thread has been a debate between you and me. A debate that has definitely ran its course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I enjoyed the debate at least. I haven't played anything by Bioware yet, but I do recall Blizzard scuttling Ghost rather than release an average-quality game. That does suggest that Bioware may not be up to the caliber of Blizzard. Then again, just because they publish some games that are less than great doesn't mean this one will be.

Back to SWTOR:

I have two worries that maybe you guys can put at ease:

1). WoW quests disappointed me more and more as I leveled. The early stuff was well tailored to my first character, an undead warrior, cutting up mindless zombies, poisoning people, etc. Then I hit twenty and I'm killing boars in a desert for the love of god. It got worse and worse until the end when all classes/races/factions are more or less doing the same quests. I hate the lack of specialty in WoW endgame. I'm worried that SWTOR storylines will go to crap at the end because they want to pack as much content in as possible. A developer already said something terrible about flashpoints being shared because some threats are so great the two sides work together or some nonsense. Boo! Hiss!

2). Are there going to be RP hangouts at all or are we all going to be in our ships all the time? I heard they will have minigames like Sabbac or whatever inside the game, which I think is a freakin' awesome idea. Hanging out in a bar and gambling is win and gives RPers something to do while we're sitting in our bar. Can we go on each other's ships? Has anyone heard anything else about RP locations and such?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) The quests are going to be, as far as I am aware, tailored for every class. The general idea is that leveling is to be a lot like playing a Bioware singleplayer RPG.. Just not so singleplayer.

So we will be having fully dialogued and voice acted questing tailored to our character throughout the entire game. The objectives of some of our quests might be the same (for example: Go to the ragged-ass cave and get some power crystals), but there will probably be some underlying reasoning within the story as to why we are doing what we are doing. I.E. A Jedi might be sent into that ragged-ass cave to get the crystals for the temple, while a Smuggler might be going into that ragged-ass cave to get the crystals for.. Well.. *shakes credit bag*

2) This one is a bit more tricky to answer. I am not sure if we can go to each other's ships, or how much interaction Bioware is going to encourage between players on a casual basis (hangin' out in town, etc.) This is part of the concern Thalarios made mention of earlier when he said that he feared the game is looking more like a "Single player game with multiplayer tendencies" than an actual MMO.

It's all up in the air at this point. We gotta wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bioware has already commented that Dromun Kaas and Courascant will be the faction's capitals and people will congregate there. Courascant has an active 'night life' and Dromun Kaas isn't any different.

Think of them as Durotar and Elwyn Forest, most people will be there when they're not out questing, doing dungeons, PvPing, or just exploring in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, comparing the alleged vaporware that was Ghost to Dragon Age 2 is a little dramatic. Dragon Age 2 was an enjoyable game with an unsatisfying conclusion. If it can be blamed of anything it would be its ambition. It built itself up to be a successor to a story which was near and dear to a lot of RPG enthusiasts, while in the shadow of Mass Effect 2's presentation style. It took some gambles that probably didn't work out as well as they had hoped. But they gambled. Blizzard's caliber, while having a roster of quality games, is a claim to fame that rests on its laurels (Starcraft 2, anyone?). Personally, I prefer the risk taking to the same old. There's enough stagnation in the entertainment industry.

But out of fear of upsetting the locals any further, I digress!

1). WoW quests disappointed me more and more as I leveled. The early stuff was well tailored to my first character, an undead warrior, cutting up mindless zombies, poisoning people, etc. Then I hit twenty and I'm killing boars in a desert for the love of god. It got worse and worse until the end when all classes/races/factions are more or less doing the same quests. I hate the lack of specialty in WoW endgame. I'm worried that SWTOR storylines will go to crap at the end because they want to pack as much content in as possible. A developer already said something terrible about flashpoints being shared because some threats are so great the two sides work together or some nonsense. Boo! Hiss!

While it may not be a bankable reassurance, the Devs have said throughout the game's development that they always want the questing experience to capture the fantasy of a Star Wars character. Right down to crafting they've been asking themselves, "Would Darth Vader be out doing this?" So they allow your companions to do all the heavy lifting / dirty work. I mean, at the beginning of the Trooper / Smuggler storyline you have them out fighting droves of highly armed Ord Mantell Seperatists. Literally, each mob pull apparently consisted of like three enemies. I'm pretty confident making you feel like a real hero / villain to be reckoned with is too important to them to have them also introduce the poop sifting quests.

As far as diverging paths of content for Republic or Empire, in a fan friday not all that long ago they did an article on flashpoints and pointed out that there will be exclusive flashpoints to both the Empire and the Republic (at least through levelling content if not at end game). That's more than can be said for a lot of faction based MMOs. Hell, even though the classes might have mirror equivalents mechanics wise on each side, they're still entirely different classes aesthetically and thematically in their class stories. There will be flashpoints that both factions will enter, though the context for either side I imagine would change dramatically. Sure, it'd be nice to have everything custom tailored more than that for my faction, but that'd practically be asking them to take on the workload of making TWO MMOs.

And both factions working together? The TOR novel Fatal Alliance is probably a giant love letter to the concept, and having read it, I can see where it's plausible. The book ALSO summed up how strong and lasting that relationship can be (read: not very). WoW in my opinion before Cataclysm always seemed to intentionally skirt around the Horde / Alliance war. The sub-text I often read was: "Maybe if they could unite against this common foe, there'll be a better chance for peace between them?" From the story in Fatal Alliance alone, I don't think even the idealists among the characters had that illusion. The "end goal" of the Republic vs. Empire was always very clear. Horde and Alliance when you break them down both have a potential for common ground through reason. The philosophies of the Sith versus the Republic's were shown as polar opposites that couldn't co-exist. Star Wars in this case wasn't afraid to label one side the clear and undisputed aggressor. So at the end of the day, I wouldn't worry about Bioware trying to make you play nice with the other side. I'm sure they'll give plenty of reasons to rush right back into trying to tear each other's throats out.

2). Are there going to be RP hangouts at all or are we all going to be in our ships all the time? I heard they will have minigames like Sabbac or whatever inside the game, which I think is a freakin' awesome idea. Hanging out in a bar and gambling is win and gives RPers something to do while we're sitting in our bar. Can we go on each other's ships? Has anyone heard anything else about RP locations and such?
I can only make an educated guess from the videos I've seen that there'll be RP hangouts. Name a classic Star Wars scene and they've probably shown a setting for it in a video by now. Cantinas, bustling city streets, hutt dens - you name it. That being said they have referred to your ship as a form of player housing. Customization is a word that's been used to describe what you can do with it, but they've been unclear whether that extends to the interior. And they have said you definitely can bring other players aboard. They wanted it to be a place players could hang out if they so desired. *I'm* curious as to how many can come aboard. It'd be pretty neat to be able to have an entire guild doing a meeting / social event on one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People can like, or dislike, a game or game company, for any reason they want, legitimate or no. That's totally fine, and happens all the time, but that's not whats happening here. Overly obnoxious fan ravings or anti-ravings is where things get annoying.

In any case:

I feel Bioware would be making a very foolish move if they never did a beta test. Despite testings server strengths, it does alot more than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blizzard's caliber, while having a roster of quality games, is a claim to fame that rests on its laurels (Starcraft 2, anyone?).

Couldn't agree with this one point more. Bioware is trying new things, they're experimenting.

They changed the systems of Dragon Age 2 to appeal to a wider audience. Was it successful? Well, I found the game far more fun than the first, so for me it was.

They changed the storytelling to be a bit different. Was it successful? I think it was up until the very end of the game.

Did Bioware make Dragon Age 2 into Mass Effect with swords and magic? Yes. Absolutely. But the system is far more complex than that.

Which brings me to this point.

Well I enjoyed the debate at least. I haven't played anything by Bioware yet, but I do recall Blizzard scuttling Ghost rather than release an average-quality game. That does suggest that Bioware may not be up to the caliber of Blizzard. Then again, just because they publish some games that are less than great doesn't mean this one will be.

Vaporware does not happen because a company doesn't want to release an average game. Vaporware happens because a company mismanages time and resources making that game. Duke Nukem Forever was not vaporware because they were trying to make the best FPS game that ever existed, I promise you. Duke Nukem Forever almost became vaporware because of a gross mismanagement of resources. If you have a game after years of work and money being thrown at it, but you see it as only 'average', you don't turn around and say "Well, lets just flush all those funds down the drain. God forbid we release a game that gets only an average review." You release the average game and make back some of your losses. It might not get any game of the year awards, but at least you'll make SOME money back from your development costs.

If you go look at Blizzard and where they've been at with experimentation, they've been very unwilling to do it. Their systems are typically something they have done before. The biggest experimental thing they've done in recent years was World of Warcraft. Since then it appears they are getting into a habit of releasing sequels that add very little to the original property (Starcraft 2, and I don't doubt Diablo 2 will do the same thing).

Is that a bad thing? It depends on who you ask. This is where Ryoku and other user reviewers on Metacritic find issue with Dragon Age 2. It is not a sub-par game. It is a DIFFERENT game that, to these people, does not achieve what Dragon Age: Origins set out to do. And they - rightfully, I might add - feel let down by it. But this raises the question.

Would you rather a company that takes no risks and releases the same game with different graphics and story over and over again?

Or would you rather a company that takes the occasional risk and fails, but learns something from it? Grows from it?

This is why I have no doubt that The Old Republic is safe in Bioware's hands. Because unlike Blizzard, Bioware has shown with Dragon Age 2 that they are willing to take risks to appeal to a larger audience and try out new things. Not everybody will believe these things work, and that is to be expected. The bottom line is, you don't learn if you don't experiment and fail every now and then.

People can like, or dislike, a game or game company, for any reason they want, legitimate or no. That's totally fine, and happens all the time, but that's not whats happening here. Overly obnoxious fan ravings or anti-ravings is where things get annoying.

In any case:

I feel Bioware would be making a very foolish move if they never did a beta test. Despite testings server strengths, it does alot more than that.

They've been beta testing for months now, just not on a MASSIVE scale (last I saw they've had a few thousand beta testing on and off). That is likely to happen soon however, I wager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd that you say Bioware is 'experimenting' because I felt Dragon Age 2 was basically fantasy Mass Effect.

Now, thats not a negative criticism. I didn't enjoy Dragon Age, but, I also just didn't care (legitimate), because I couldn't get into the IP from DAO, because I felt it rather stale, and was just jumbled up around pretty graphics. I do however, see its actual good sides, but at the same time, do not see it in the hyped view that others do.

At the same time, I feel you're discounting Blizzard abit too much. Blizzard has honestly, rarely 'failed', and so has Bioware. The two are on even keels, as far as I'm concerned. Blizzard DOES experiment, but where I feel their problem is, they're slow to release it, or openly acknowledge it, but again, thats not a fault. Currently from one of my best friends working there, they're working on two 'new' titles (which most people saw when that product plan was released), and with Diablo 3, thats a way of making the same property, completely new. I'm personally, rather excited for it, as it doesn't quite seem completely like Diablo 2, yet you can easily identify with it.

So I have problems seeing your train of thought when you say Blizzard is resistant to experimentation, when Bioware does, in most of its titles so far, the same thing its done in the past. While Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 had some significant changes, it was still, the same basic game. Now, Dragon Age was completely new content, and new game style for them, but then DA2, again to me felt pretty much, a Mass Effect fantasy game. The other problem I have with that is, Blizzard and Bioware? Completely two different companies with two different principals and games they want to release. Blizzard is now (woefully I admit) fully entrenched in the MMO and Multiplayer content market, while Bioware has a strong single player and trilogy/story arch based game market. It would be like comparing Bungie to Bethesda, both serious powerhouse, sure, but not necessarly in the same market.

I am with you though, that I do want to see Blizzard branch out, but I don't want to see Blizzard try and be Bioware, or visa versa (my words completely, I don't feel you were attempting to make that view at all).

*nerd moment* Ghost became vaporware mostly out of Blizzards reliance on a third party in development. From everything I've ever heard and read, it was basically finished and ready to be tested, but legal matters and the other company going bankrupt, fucked that game up completely, and add in that is was also going to be a primarily console game, which was something they've not done in ages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just rented DA:2 hehe, but I wanna talk about ToR!

So, I've been checking out space battles and as amazing as they look what is the greater point? Like if my team whoops some Imperial ass in space, does the Republic gain control over that area? It seems like with the format there going with you really need to have actually territory shifting, (Which I always wished WoW would have but I was disappointed) and I hope it keeps more of a Battlefront type combat system where I can use my what 12 skills? To mount an assault on a fort with my buddies and take it over in a big ole' fight where if I shoot someone like 5 times, they die. Healers aside 1 v 1 between dps I want it to be more of a "I have better aim and hit you more so I win" not "I can mash my buttons better then you hurp de hardy har har"

But, from what videos I've seen I'm not entirely sure what to think, all I know is I want to be a commando and shoot shit. Nuff said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just rented DA:2 hehe, but I wanna talk about ToR!

So, I've been checking out space battles and as amazing as they look what is the greater point? Like if my team whoops some Imperial ass in space, does the Republic gain control over that area? It seems like with the format there going with you really need to have actually territory shifting, (Which I always wished WoW would have but I was disappointed) and I hope it keeps more of a Battlefront type combat system where I can use my what 12 skills? To mount an assault on a fort with my buddies and take it over in a big ole' fight where if I shoot someone like 5 times, they die. Healers aside 1 v 1 between dps I want it to be more of a "I have better aim and hit you more so I win" not "I can mash my buttons better then you hurp de hardy har har"

But, from what videos I've seen I'm not entirely sure what to think, all I know is I want to be a commando and shoot shit. Nuff said.

Uh this is not Dark Ages of Camelot or Eve Online, there will be no shifting territory in game. There will be high level pvp where you do battlegrounds and fight over objectives like WoW has Wintergrasp and Tol Barad but that is likely going to be it. One example we already know will be "Tol Barad like" is the planet of Alderaan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you have a game after years of work and money being thrown at it, but you see it as only 'average', you don't turn around and say "Well, lets just flush all those funds down the drain. God forbid we release a game that gets only an average review." You release the average game and make back some of your losses. It might not get any game of the year awards, but at least you'll make SOME money back from your development costs.

That's exactly what you do when you care about your company's reputation. How much money is it worth to not have a crappy (i.e. average) game next to your name in people's minds? I'm just basing this on an interview with a Blizzard guy who said Ghost was basically finished but it wasn't up to their standards. He might have been lying, I suppose, but businesses absolutely make that call all the time. Anyway, I suppose it's beside the point because I haven't played DA 1 or 2...

Someone talk to me about space combat. Last I heard it was just a rail game where you click on stuff or something... you dont' actually get to fly your ship. Is that still true?

On a larger topic, I don't see why different classes can't have different strengths outside the usual arena-like balance system. For example, in WoW, why can't engineers or warriors or whatever be better at siege vehicles, and rogues scale walls or something... I sometimes think Blizzard is so focused on balancing absolutely everything that they miss out on the feel of different classes. Siege combat should be really cool, but it's absolutely not. I would love it if SWTOR had smugglers be downright better fliers...and maybe troopers and bounty hunters better gunners. Give the jedi some kind of force power they could use while flying... I mean outside of person, "I stand here and you stand there" combat, there don't appear to be any differences in WoW classes (no mounted combat; siege interaction, limited movement differences like druid flight form, and so on).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Someone talk to me about space combat. Last I heard it was just a rail game where you click on stuff or something... you dont' actually get to fly your ship. Is that still true?

Space Combat is essentially like Star Fox. It's not a rail shooter, it's a tube shooter. You're set on a path, but you can control your ship and fly around along that path to avoid obstacles and weapon fire, and to get a better angle on a target. But it is not flying around space freely.

On a larger topic, I don't see why different classes can't have different strengths outside the usual arena-like balance system. For example, in WoW, why can't engineers or warriors or whatever be better at siege vehicles, and rogues scale walls or something... I sometimes think Blizzard is so focused on balancing absolutely everything that they miss out on the feel of different classes. Siege combat should be really cool, but it's absolutely not. I would love it if SWTOR had smugglers be downright better fliers...and maybe troopers and bounty hunters better gunners. Give the jedi some kind of force power they could use while flying... I mean outside of person, "I stand here and you stand there" combat, there don't appear to be any differences in WoW classes (no mounted combat; siege interaction, limited movement differences like druid flight form, and so on).

The main reason for Blizzard not adding class specific stuff like that is because it is a major balancing issue. The moment Rogues can climb walls, the side with more rogues might have a benefit. It's much easier to balance abilities when they are not required or not massively beneficial for something. Which is why I never understood the justification for Druid flight form being better than mounted flying. That's a benefit that class now has over others where movement is concerned. However, there's nothing saying that (especially with the different ships every class flies in TOR) they don't have different capabilities. The Trooper Ship might be more heavily armed, and the Smuggler ship might be more responsive. It's worth noting that one of the ways they are making each class feel different is with the overruling storyline you experience; A smuggler has different reasons for doing the cooperative content than a Trooper or Jedi and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose what I really am after is something that the Star Wars movies did very nicely, namely have different styles of combat. It may sound silly, but one of the magical things about SW movies was that there was hand-to-hand lightsaber combat, gun fighting, and vehicle combat. And they had all 3 in all the movies. Warcraft will likely never have any kind of combat that isn't a warrior with a sword, a mage casting a fireball, etc. The limited forays into other areas have been completely divorced from stats/class...i.e. tonk fights, seige vehicles, etc. Part of that is because of the genre...fantasy games just don't have vehicles and such.

Star Wars has a great chance to do something different here. What if combat took place in at least 2 levels, personal (gun/sabre) and vehicle (starships/speeders/walkers, etc.) You could spec your character somewhat differently depending on what you wanted to be good at. So the best fighter pilot would actually suck a little bit more at hand to hand. Classes wouldn't have to be equally good at both, though I suppose they could. Some items would help with one or the other...you could have two sets of gear maybe.

I don't know...I'm just rambling now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt they'll ever have an MMO like that. There are games out there where classes are balanced around using vehicles (Star Wars: Battlefront) but in an MMO it's difficult to set up vehicles for every circumstance to allow somebody use of them as constantly as speccing into them would warrant.

That said, the use of guns and melee weapons in the game is very interesting (e.g. the smuggler having a cover mechanic, the Bounty Hunter actually being able to use his jetpack, etc). They're steps in the direction of a truly interactive world, but the game you want is of a level of complexity that we're unlikely to see in games for a wide audience. It sounds cool, but in practice it is simply too much to balance.

EDIT: I should really expand on the WHY.

Imagine there was a class that was particularly good with vehicles and classes that were pretty good as ground troops. When your vehicle oriented troop is out of his vehicle is he as effective as a ground troop? No, because then any reason for being a ground troop is removed. So without a vehicle you are gimped. So say you make the guys with vehicles able to be in vehicles all the time during the game.

But then there's another problem. You expect there to be as many people playing as guys with vehicles as there are people that are ground troops. So then to balance your trooper with the guys driving vehicles, you have to make your ground troops as effective as the guys driving vehicles when they're in vehicles. So then the guys in vehicles can never, ever risk leaving their vehicles because they will be eaten alive by the ground troops which are now as powerful as vehicles without being in vehicles at all. Ground troops now have the upper hand.

That is why vehicles are divorced from stats/class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I doubt they'll ever have an MMO like that. There are games out there where classes are balanced around using vehicles (Star Wars: Battlefront) but in an MMO it's difficult to set up vehicles for every circumstance to allow somebody use of them as constantly as speccing into them would warrant.

I feel like arguing, though you almost certainly right as everyone making every MMO appears to have not used the idea I'm advocating...

Still, what I'm saying isn't that they can be balanced, it's that I don't care if they're balanced or not. There are some circumstances in WoW that are like that...mages, for example, are no good when there is easy cover to be had. In arenas you can seriously cut down on mage's damage by going around a corner. Whereas warlocks are less hindered because they have instant cast DOTs. Blizzard took a lot of time and energy to make sure different arena stages have some cover but not too much or too little. The desire to keep EVERY battle zone balanced has wasted a lot of fun environments and creativity.

For example, how cool would it be to have two boats next to each other firing back and forth like that WOTLK dungeon... where hunters and mages stand on the side blasting at each other. We can't do that because rogues and warriors would be bored. Or a tiny underground area with sharp turns everywhere, making the fight claustrophic. Can't do that because hunters would be useless and warriors would dominate. Or a ledge that runs across a sheer vertical cliff wall...where if you step to the side you fall to your death... These things aren't perfectly balanced, so we simply don't see them outside of world PvP (and practically not there either; unless you count rooftop firing). But they would be fun, different and reward creative strategies.

I'd love it if SWTOR had a level with a chasm between you and the enemies so you were firing back and forth...but they won't do that because Jedi would be useless on one side. This constant need to make everything perfectly balanced for everyone just sucks...it drains the specialness out of the classes, limits the creativity of the developers to create interesting terrain and scenarios, and basically requires everything boil down to the exact same pattern of attacks and button presses from level 20 to 85.

Making vehicle-stats would be like making 2 overlapping MMOs, I guess. That's a bit much to ask for WoW certainly, but a SW MMO could aspire to that. Maybe in an expansion they'll try it. I see your point about balance but it's not hard to balance a fight, you just put negative feedback loops into a system and people will balance out themselves. You can also limit the number of vehicles in a fight, or put everyone in vehicles for one part of the Flashpoint/BG and out of them for the second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead