What if swtor had...

[Psychlon]

I hate being "locked"... I don't play car games in 1st perspective wachting all my interior while having 0 visibility of the road around me... I prefer perspective. I prefer to look around, see my character and look wherever I want. I don't really get what is your beef with swtors combat system but I like it, I like kicks, I like pulls..... I like the animations though they could be crispier and I'd like to shot whoever is responsible for giving me a shockwave cooldown but being knocked back and the other not... but I like the fights.

[Vargur]

I'd rather they expand the space content to that of EVE's and DUST 514.

[Chickat]

EA doesn't want to spend a dime on SWTOR. It's a cash cow at this point. I wouldn't count on any big changes.

It's just so irritating. SWTOR could've been the best MMO ever made, but nope.


Also is there an MMO that's 3d person action game like TERA, but with guns? That would be so awesome. It needs to happen.

The Secret World was close to it, but they opted for hotkey combat.

Titan anyone?

[RoninaThorstone]

Re-read again. The 10mil subscribers is a highlight of how successful the game is in the western hemisphere.

I think that's part of the confusion. At peak, the western hemisphere had 4.5 million subscribers and the east had about 6 million PPH accounts.

[RoninaThorstone]

But still, as far as western style MMOs go, its the single most successful one, not saying by a LONG shot its the most successful one period, just the most successful in the West

Yep. And I don't think that's going to change for a while. Which is why I doubt that any breakthrough MMO is going to be similar to WoW.

[Kelimbror]

Warning, before reading this, know that the post will be HEAVILY CRITICIZING the OP. You have been warned.

Giving a warning isn't a license to be a dick.

Give me 3 examples of such MMOs. And do note I am not asking for action RPG multiplayer games. I really do mean MMORPGs.

Really? more than that was already named in the thread, you then named 2 more later on, proof that you just wanted to argue. GW2, Tera, Firefall, Defiance/Planetside 2, Blade and Soul, 100 other Asian MMOs. Maybe you should do research before trying to win the internet.

Of course, because everyone must like the same and it's impossible to create different games to please different crowds, right?

Trends in the industry seem to differ with your view. For someone wanting lots of facts, you like to use lots of speculation and opinion to prove your points.

Comparing a JRPG with a regular RPG is not a good idea. Also, you use SKYRIM as an example of quality RPG? Riiiiiiiiight...

Says OP needs to learn what subjective is, precedes by using subjectivity as a basis for an argument. Riiiiight.

I want you to provide one single factual and well substantiated evidence why that particular game play is "more engaging game play". Now, please. And no, what works for you doesn't work for everyone. I advise reading up on the concept of subjectivity and realizing the world does not orbit around you.

Take your own advice. Also, engaging might not have been the best word. But you should have clearly known he meant games with more features/more things to accomplish. Pokemon was engaging, as shown by it's popularity and resurgence. But do you know what the single largest contributing factor to its popularity was? A TV show.(warning: use of common sense to form an opinion, please do not alert the fact checker alarm) No game since the mid to late 90's has even come close to selling 20 million like the 2 big hits they had. Sure they are one of the best franchises, but do you know how many copies of other games have been sold since then? More...way, way, way more. Clearly the whole world isn't satisfied with just pokemon, which is kinda the entire point that you missed.

Gee whizz I wonder why that is? What could be the cause of people going against this "evolution"? Maybe because it's NOT EVOLUTION? It's change?

Two concepts are not mutually exclusive. A fact that you both recognized and dismissed in one statement following this. Does.not.compute.

You feel that people who aren't you, people you don't understand, will do something, even though you don't really understand them. Wow. And you take that as a fact, do you?

How do you know he isn't a psychologist in the real world? Maybe he teaches video game theory. You make a lot of assumptions that you like to assert as fact. Pots and kettles.

I don't think I know what you mean by "there were many pokemon clones"... There have been plenty of collector-oriented games, yes. Plenty with great success. Do you know what is the most sold franchise of all times in gaming? Super Mario. Why? Because it was here first. Being the first is an advantage. Would you use the same argument that pokemon was evolution?

So is this a fact? It only sold because it was first? It couldn't be because it's always bundled with a new system, or because the games keep innovating themselves and are actually good, that would make too much sense.

My brain cells have already devolved from reading this far, I'll just leave you with some more of your own advice:

And why do you view that? Why? Come on man, some reasoning, justification, facts, substance, ANYTHING ?!?!?

[Derah]

Nobody answered me the first time, so I'll just post this again

And SSSP in 2014? You're optimistic : P

what's SSSP?

[RoninaThorstone]

Nobody answered me the first time, so I'll just post this again



what's SSSP?

super secret space project.

(not to be confused with SPSS.)

[Derah]

and that's what? a revamp of the space minigame? (or is it unknown atm?)

[notorious98]

and that's what? a revamp of the space minigame? (or is it unknown atm?)

It's unknown. All they've done is call it the "Super Secret Space Project". Other than that, they've given us no indications of what it may or may not be.

[Kelimbror]

and that's what?

Just another tease. Oh Bioware, you silly tramp!

[Snorkle]

Really? more than that was already named in the thread, you then named 2 more later on, proof that you just wanted to argue. GW2, Tera, Firefall, Defiance/Planetside 2, Blade and Soul, 100 other Asian MMOs. Maybe you should do research before trying to win the internet.

In that case, I have to ask what is an "action RPG" then, because I wouldn't classify any of those other than tera as a MMORPG with action rpg tendencies.

Trends in the industry seem to differ with your view. For someone wanting lots of facts, you like to use lots of speculation and opinion to prove your points.

Which trends? Over how many years? I'd ask for facts again then.

Says OP needs to learn what subjective is, precedes by using subjectivity as a basis for an argument. Riiiiight.

Indeed I see you recognized my objective here. I can only hope the OP did the same!

Take your own advice. Also, engaging might not have been the best word. But you should have clearly known he meant games with more features/more things to accomplish.

I don't think that is what he meant, if he did, then he used completely wrong terms :/ ...

"more things to accomplish" and "action RPG tendencies" to me are opposites. I'll require more information from the OP.

Pokemon was engaging, as shown by it's popularity and resurgence. But do you know what the single largest contributing factor to its popularity was? A TV show.

Yup I am aware of such.

No game since the mid to late 90's has even come close to selling 20 million like the 2 big hits they had. Sure they are one of the best franchises, but do you know how many copies of other games have been sold since then? More...way, way, way more. Clearly the whole world isn't satisfied with just pokemon, which is kinda the entire point that you missed.

I don't get it. What does "the whole world" being satisfied with a game or not have to do with evolution or abandoning traditional mechanics in a totally different game genre? Other than as a very light analogy, it makes no sense to me. If that really is the entire point, it's a bit frail, don't you think?

Two concepts are not mutually exclusive. A fact that you both recognized and dismissed in one statement following this. Does.not.compute.

Of course they are not mutually exclusive. I'm just saying it is not certain. Why does it not compute? It's so hard to understand that he classifies something as evolution when it is not certain that it is so? It could as likely be atavism...

How do you know he isn't a psychologist in the real world? Maybe he teaches video game theory. You make a lot of assumptions that you like to assert as fact. Pots and kettles.

If he were a psychologist he would understand the players. If he had a firm grip into game design theory he would understand the game design motivations. He did neither. Yes, I'm inferring something, but it doesn't mean I'm wrong. If I am, I expect the OP to tell me.

So is this a fact? It only sold because it was first? It couldn't be because it's always bundled with a new system, or because the games keep innovating themselves and are actually good, that would make too much sense.

I did not say it was the only fact. I said it was one of the main facts. If you read correctly, you will notice I said "being the first is AN advantage." and not "the only" or even "the" advantage.

Please disagree with the points I made, not points I didn't make. The thing I hate the most is seeing people shove words up my mouth. Thank you.

[Kelimbror]

In that case, I have to ask what is an "action RPG" then, because I wouldn't classify any of those other than tera as a MMORPG with action rpg tendencies.

Then you should probably quit preaching on everyone else's lack of knowledge when you clearly have none of your own. Your entire post reeked of contradiction, hypocrisy, and avoiding a meaningful discussion. Your responses were much of the same. I think the only one who needs to do some research is yourself. I suggest using a good amount of time away from these forums to do such.

Well reasoned, rational individuals will be waiting for you when you return...should you wish to have an actual conversation instead of pelting down veiled insults from the clouds. Please don't mistake the eloquence of detailing your behavior as flaming you. I wish you no ill will, but your arrogance and lack of discussing what was presented was poor form. Insulting the poster, claiming the poster has no facts so their whole post should be dismissed, and then using the same method for stating why we should take your questioning on good faith is beyond absurd.

I'm sorry, that is not how you communicate here.

[Deleted]

I think fresher combat would've helped and ME3 combat is one idea that already proven itself in some way (ME3 will soon be getting 5th MP DLC, all thanks to continued interest). But that wouldn't change much that the end game is still based on 1 thing - gear grind. One of the big mistakes they made IMO was not leaving all planetary bonus series for lvl 50 end-game. It would solve variety of issues immediately - incentive to revisit old planets, a HUGE number of repeatable missions all around the galaxy, large story content for post Act 3's end etc. It's not fixable at this point, but wouldn't cost anything to change earlier in the game's production.

[notorious98]

Less than half of those customers are located in EU and NA....so no more than 5. Mio. Probably closer to 4 Mio. Now compare that to GW2's 3 Mio. players and gain some perspective. WoW isn't nearly as dominant as people make it out to be.

That's a misleading stat. Comparing a P2P game like WoW to a B2P game like GW2 isn't fair to WoW. I understand that it's just a sample size, but you can just look at the "viewing" part for each subforum on this site and notice that GW2's number has dropped significantly since launch. Yes, it sold 2 mil and change copies, but it doesn't have the retention of players. Also, their players can hop in and out of the game as they please without having to throw down a monthly fee. This allows the MMO penny pinchers who refuse to pay for more than one subscription (like myself) to continue paying Blizzard while ALSO playing GW2. If anybody needs to "gain some perspective", I think it's you.

---------- Post added 2013-02-18 at 12:31 AM ----------

I think fresher combat would've helped and ME3 combat is one idea that already proven itself in some way (ME3 will soon be getting 5th MP DLC, all thanks to continued interest). But that wouldn't change much that the end game is still based on 1 thing - gear grind. One of the big mistakes they made IMO was not leaving all planetary bonus series for lvl 50 end-game. It would solve variety of issues immediately - incentive to revisit old planets, a HUGE number of repeatable missions all around the galaxy, large story content for post Act 3's end etc. It's not fixable at this point, but wouldn't cost anything to change earlier in the game's production.

I never thought of that before, but it's pretty brilliant. The sheer number of dailies you could choose from in a day would allow you to do something fresh every day for at least a week. As long as it wasn't implemented in the same way it was in MoP, I would have been impressed.

[Marxman]

d) The HERO engine was the worst MMO engine I've ever witnessed. Poor performance, poor visuals, lag with 15+ people on screen, long load times despite desolate maps.

This is the biggest offender and the primary reason the game failed. They used a crappy, poorly optimized engine that caused combat lag, extremely poor performance on even high-end rigs, and mediocre visuals at best. If they had used a quality game engine with emphasis on performance (both FPS performance and lag-less combat) the game might have actually succeeded. But Because the first few months at least were plagued by lag and poor performance, the game didn't feel very good, even if it had some fun mechanics.

The other big reasons have been talked to death (end-game failures, focus on story in a genre that demands end-game focus, unsustainable content model with voice-acting).

[davispunx]

Reason for SWTOR's failure was toxic mix of hubris, greed, ineptitude and stupidity. Nothing short of addressing all four of these would have saved it.

Throw in the factless conjecture of this post and you have a straight flush!

[Mormolyce]

Then there was the archaic space combat system. I thought I was playing starfox on a SNES.

Don't you dare say bad things about Starfox!

But I do broadly agree that SWTOR cleaved way too close to WoW's gameplay system. You can't be revolutionary while playing follow the leader. And yeah, like most people I see the future of MMOs like most games being more action oriented. An MMORPG/FPS fusion with a cover mechanic would've been quite interesting, and would allow Bioware to dispense with the Holy Trinity. Because by god, healers make no sense in the Star Wars universe... especially not when they can be any class!

[apepi]

Blizzard should have made multi-player pvp space combat, it would have been so awesome....

[Azalis]

I'm getting sick of this argument. SWTOR didn't fail because people don't like traditional MMORPGs anymore, it failed because it was build on a terrible engine. If SWTOR was on an engine as fluid as WoW it would almost certainly have millions of players today.