Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

SWTOR. Too much theme park?


Page 18 of 25 « First < 816 17 18 19 20 > Last »

DalrisThane's Avatar


DalrisThane
03.30.2012 , 04:12 AM | #171
Deleted. No point. Everyone is TLDR these days. +See Sig.
I still miss 1990s FMV. I miss Wing Commander 3-4. I actually don't want a game. I’d prefer CYOA interactive movies any day. Until then, video games are the closest I can get...

eclipce's Avatar


eclipce
03.30.2012 , 04:14 AM | #172
It's way to much theme park.

But I dont see any troubles creating more sandbox features in general without stepping on any "casual" player toes.
"you cannot kill what you did not create"

DalrisThane's Avatar


DalrisThane
03.30.2012 , 04:19 AM | #173
Deleted. No point. Everyone is TLDR these days. +See Sig.
I still miss 1990s FMV. I miss Wing Commander 3-4. I actually don't want a game. I’d prefer CYOA interactive movies any day. Until then, video games are the closest I can get...

Goretzu's Avatar


Goretzu
03.30.2012 , 04:58 AM | #174
Quote: Originally Posted by ConradLionhart View Post
If the most successful MMO game in the world happens to be themepark, then themepark works.

No....... it only means it worked (exceptionally well) once.





It doesn't therefore follow that it is the only idea that will work or can work (although you're right up their with most film and gaming executives if you believe it is).

There have been so many themepark failed MMORPGs since WoW (and a few before), an awful lot more failed Themepark MMORPGs than Sandbox ones in fact.

Which is why indy games are the new fashion, because many of them have been huge successes, yet still the suits don't get that it is their orginality that made them, copying them will only diminish them.
Real Star Wars space combat please, not Star Wars Fox! Maybe some PvP and flight too?
Goretzu's Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving "Entitled" approaches 1

mattgyver's Avatar


mattgyver
03.30.2012 , 09:33 AM | #175
Quote: Originally Posted by TwwIX View Post
Themepark isn't the problem. The lack of socializing and incentives for grouping, however, is. This game doesn't put much emphasis on co-op at all. What's the point of continuing paying for a subscription when all i do is soloing? This game feels very contained and singleplayerish. It's KOTOR with a chat window. "Join a guild!" Oh, please, don't give me that ******** excuse. I've joined multiple guilds but that nothing to improve my co-op experience nor did it increase grouping. Not to mention that half of the people that were in my current Guild left just within this month alone. BioWare better start addressing this before it's too late.
think you are right to some degree. The station was a bad idea because it's a boring locale to congregate. should have been a city as the hub.

thominoh's Avatar


thominoh
03.30.2012 , 09:43 AM | #176
I miss my sandbox elements.. The ability to have all my alts to grow up differently. (so to speak).. I'm not talking pure sandbox like Eve or SWG, but mini sandbox like original EQ1 (pre PoP).. Every single one of my 8+ toons had a different bio.. When I mean bio I mean career in leveling.. Different zones, different groups, different mobs.. I had more freedom (paths) to level..

What I find interesting is how much players LOVE to "mix and match" their skill points and/or talents, but when it comes to actual game play, they prefer 1 themepark ride.. I would gladly trade in less character development for more character content.. Meaning.. Instead of giving dozens of different ways to customize my character skills, give me dozens of ways to level my character.. EQ1 touched on this slightly, and for that game released in 1999, we didn't go very far since.. In my opinion..

Goretzu's Avatar


Goretzu
03.30.2012 , 09:47 AM | #177
Quote: Originally Posted by thominoh View Post
I miss my sandbox elements.. The ability to have all my alts to grow up differently. (so to speak).. I'm not talking pure sandbox like Eve or SWG, but mini sandbox like original EQ1 (pre PoP).. Every single one of my 8+ toons had a different bio.. When I mean bio I mean career in leveling.. Different zones, different groups, different mobs.. I had more freedom (paths) to level..

What I find interesting is how much players LOVE to "mix and match" their skill points and/or talents, but when it comes to actual game play, they prefer 1 themepark ride.. I would gladly trade in less character development for more character content.. Meaning.. Instead of giving dozens of different ways to customize my character skills, give me dozens of ways to level my character.. EQ1 touched on this slightly, and for that game released in 1999, we didn't go very far since.. In my opinion..


This is why I wished they put in some optional zones without voice acting, just with text dialogue (making them quicker, easier and cheaper to develop).

No main story quests in them, but if you wanted a different levelling path for your Nth alt you have one.

Although I guess SWTOR is always going to feel a bit disjointed compared to say EQ1 as, of course, it uses planets rather than large landmasses broken into zones.
Real Star Wars space combat please, not Star Wars Fox! Maybe some PvP and flight too?
Goretzu's Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving "Entitled" approaches 1

mattgyver's Avatar


mattgyver
03.30.2012 , 09:52 AM | #178
Quote: Originally Posted by ConradLionhart View Post
What might makes right argument? Why are you trying to insinuate something that isn't there? I'm just explaining that themepark = working formula. Rather than ask me to come up with yet more proof that it is true, sandbox people have to show me that sandbox is a guaranteed market. Eve Online doesn't even have one million subs, and this is a game that encourages people to have many accounts each, further reducing the number of real players.

If the most successful MMO game in the world happens to be themepark, then themepark works.

If WoW is slowly dying, it is less to do with the themepark formula being outdated and more to do with the fact that it is the same game for 8 years. For argument's sake, lets pretend that we are in an alternate universe that you are right, that themepark is a dying formula. You cannot change the fact that for 8 years, themepark works. You only look at the end stages of WoW, but you cannot deny themepark has never stopped WoW from entertaining people for 8 years.

Do you tell companies to stop creating RPG games because no one plays the original Zelda game after 8 years?
Do you tell companies to stop creating FPS games because no one plays the original Wolfenstein after 8 years?
Do you tell companies to stop creating puzzle games because no one plays Tetris after 8 years? (trick question, people still play tetris)

Yeah what a surprise, after 8 years people are bored of WoW. But that doesn't mean themepark is suddenly outdated, or sandbox, the unproven concept, is starting to thrive.

Why do some RPG/FPS/puzzle games fail? Because they are terrible, not because the genre is outdated.

Themepark is proven to be a guaranteed formula not just from WoW, but from the predecessor that it copied, Everquest.


Your post was an argument for This formula is greater so all other formulas are weaker and not viable. That's an outcome that limits the variety for play. You say the theme park option is the biggest financially and therefore it wins. Thus Might makes Right.

You are the one that used WoW as an example and for whatever reason, it is in decline, so the market is shifting a bit as developers try to find out what may differentiate their product from the industry standard. To oppose this shift is to embrace a homogenous design approach for MMOs. I don't think that even needs to be explained as to why it is bad for all games to be the same but with different skins.

mattgyver's Avatar


mattgyver
03.30.2012 , 09:59 AM | #179
Quote: Originally Posted by DalrisThane View Post
I’ll start right off by saying that my suggestion will never happen… but I wish it did. I’ll explain why it won’t happen later. However, I’m going to do a seemingly random tangent first.

TL;DR = Putting Sandbox / Themepark / Single Player with Co-OP / etc… descriptors on the retail box / DL Website as mandatory would allow for different styles of online games that you’d know right out of the gate what you’re getting. Sad that I can’t see it happening.
I likedthis post, and I agree. There was a lot of secrecy before the game came out, and I wasn't in beta til November. I knew the game was largely themepark but I still made the emotional decision to keep playing because it is Star Wars and I though it was a cool idea to use the ancient times.

Now I still play because I'm hoping there will be more to the game later. The flavor of many of the posts suggests that I am a minority in this on the mass scale, but in a sizeable group amongst disgruntled forum users.

thominoh's Avatar


thominoh
03.30.2012 , 10:02 AM | #180
Quote: Originally Posted by Goretzu View Post
This is why I wished they put in some optional zones without voice acting, just with text dialogue (making them quicker, easier and cheaper to develop).

No main story quests in them, but if you wanted a different levelling path for your Nth alt you have one.

Although I guess SWTOR is always going to feel a bit disjointed compared to say EQ1 as, of course, it uses planets rather than large landmasses broken into zones.
I agree completely.. In fact I wouldn't even bother with "quest" all that much.. Make the zones more like "camp" locations for singles and groups.. And use NPC's for item trade ins instead of quest rewards.. You get item turns in rewards instead.. Toss in some repeatable heroics and let the players choose their own paths..
Page 18 of 25 « First < 816 17 18 19 20 > Last »

Reply
STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
Terms Archive | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | FAQ | EUALA | Rules of Conduct | Online Safety | Contact Us
LucasArts, the LucasArts logo, STAR WARS and related properties are trademarks in the United States and/or in other countries of Lucasfilm Ltd. and/or its affiliates. © 2011-2012 Lucasfilm Entertainment Company Ltd. or Lucasfilm Ltd. All rights reserved. BioWare and the BioWare logo are trademarks of EA International (Studio and Publishing) Ltd. EA and the EA logo are trademarks of Electronic Arts Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.