An SPG with a Facbook-type connection for the community aspect would have been a much better option, since ressources spent on the MMO part could have gone to making a better SPG, IMO.

Originally posted by hubertgrove

Originally posted by dubyahite

Originally posted by hubertgrove

Originally posted by Yamota

 

"Massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) is a genre of role-playing video games in which a very large number of players interact with one another within a virtual game world.

As in all RPGs, players assume the role of a character (often in a fantasy world) and take control over many of that character's actions. MMORPGs are distinguished from single-player or small multi-player RPGs by the number of players, and by the game's persistent world (usually hosted by the game's publisher), which continues to exist and evolve while the player is offline and away from the game."

 

What part of this is SWTOR diametricly opposed to. 

You can say all you want about the story, but none of that contradicts the basic definition of an MMORPG. A role playing game that uses a persistent world to allow many players to play together at the same time.

It's obviously not single player as many thousands of people play together at the same time. Its obviously not a coop rpg because it has a persistent world that is on a central server that everyone shares.

Again I'll ask, what part of this definition does SWTOR violate?

Dude, you seem to think that every game that has many people together in the same zone is an MMOPRG.  That's not so. For example, they can be SRPG's with netwoking features, like Diablo.

I didn't say that at all.  Diablo isn't an MMO because it doesn't have a persistent world.  Here I'll get you the definition of persistent

Definition of PERSISTENT

Poll is a bit misleading to be honest.

Your header is 'would it be better' - my answer is no (more later)

Your poll states a different question 'Would it be just as good' - my answer is yes, it would also be good. I've played KoTOR 1 & 2 and would enjoy a 3+ and the stories in ToR would fit well with a solo game.

I've played through the last beta weekend in a group of 3 (linked on Vent) and it was a great experience. I'm waiting a new headset, so listened and communicated via the party text in game. We ran our class quests solo of course, but grouped on others. We had some great banter due to the conversation choices (as we all went Republic and I played 'light' against the other two's mostly 'dark'). We played heroic content, flashpoints etc and can honestly say we had a fun time.

None of this would have been possible never mind as enjoyable on an offline single player game. Hence no to your topic header question.

Originally posted by DarkPony

This discussion boils down to the same old bias from the detractors:

Swtor replaces the boring grinding and generic questing from the cookie cutter themepark formula with voice overs, meaningfull story, choice and alignment and people start lining up to dismiss it as a sp-rpg.

*wonders when people will get it in their heads that SWTOR is ADDING something to the RPG bit, rather than taking something away from the MMO aspect of the typical themepark formula*

Listen to the frickin' Pony. MMORPGs are still RPGs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_world

A persistent world (PW) is a virtual world that continues to exist even after a user exits the world and that user-made changes to its state are, to some extent, permanent.[1][2] The term is frequently used in the definition of the massively multiplayer online video games and can be considered synonymous with that class of games,[3] including other narrative forms of a media franchise.

The persistence comes from maintaining and developing a single or dynamic instance state of the world in the game around the clock shared and viewed by all players. Quite unlike other types of games, the plot and events in a single permainstance world game continue to develop even while some of the players are not playing their characters. That aspect is similar to the real world where events do occur regardless if they are directly or indirectly related to a person, as they continue to happen while a person is asleep, etc. Conversely, a player's character can also influence and change a persistent world. The degree to which a character affects a world varies from game to game. Since the game does not pause or create player-accessible back-up files, a character's actions will have consequences that the player must deal with.

Yeah. SWTOR has that. 

This thread baffles me, but that happens alot sooo...,

I voted no because the game mechanics woould be so much different you wouldnt be able to tell the games apart besides from the cosmetics.  Thats the only thing I could come up with though so I was leaning to yes most of the time.

Basically it would be an entirely different game from zones in the game world, to the storys, everthing literally would be different, there for it would be an entirely different game and that makes this discussion  moot since you cant compare the two in any way. its like apples and oranges.

People bring up stuf that doesnt need to be brought up in life mostly for there own self amusement and satisfaction. This topic is one of them, who would think enough to bring up a topic about a game that has been deveolped for 7 years in this great mmorpg site we have that it all of a sudden isnt a mmo anymore and has nothing to do with what this site even is here for in the first place.  Now brining this up on some crazy site that that has nothing to do with mmorpgs, yea maybee, but here? cmon, its beyond naive, anyway thats how I feel about it. 

I would rather have seen them design a single player game as a sequel to the KOTOR games.  Or something like ME2 that has multiplayer options.  Or something designed for small group co-op perhaps.  The game makes a lot of sacrifices that I don't think are worth it to aim for WoW-like success on subscription profits.

It will be interesting to see how the subs go the next 6 months.  I have two friends that are going to play TOR, but neither thinks they'll play it for more than a couple months or so for the single-player story.  My brother, in fact, preferred playing the beta by himself.  I have no idea how big of a group people like that are, however.

The difference between SWTOR and KotOR is that you get to grind and travel for dozens of hours between the cool bits.

The advantage, beyond getting to sit in front of the screen for much longer, is that you get to share the experience with friends, but limited by an inferior MMO paradigm. It's a game that would have been fantastic in 2004 - but as an MMO, it's far behind the top themepark MMOs as of 2011. Pretty much every non-singleplayer oriented feature is inferior to the same in another MMO. Combat is slower, crafting is dull, PvP is weaker, and so on.

Well, in my opinion.

Originally posted by DKLond

The difference between SWTOR and KotOR is that you get to grind and travel for dozens of hours between the cool bits.

The advantage, beyond getting to sit in front of the screen for much longer, is that you get to share the experience with friends, but limited by an inferior MMO paradigm. It's a game that would have been fantastic in 2004 - but as an MMO, it's far behind the top themepark MMOs as of 2011. Pretty much every non-singleplayer oriented feature is inferior to the same in another MMO. Combat is slower, crafting is dull, PvP is weaker, and so on.

Well, in my opinion.

Funny, I thought all of the MMO features were done better than other themepark mmos to date. 

I used to sit and play off line games all day long then i discovered EQ and that game spoiled my enjoyment off single play games i can never go back .Damn you EQ

Originally posted by hercules

weird nearly 30% said yes but not 1 single person posted on why they said yes,think trolls have hijacked the poll.

To me,no it would not .simply put there is a lot of  multiplayer options running side by side with the solo content.

Also fact is you probably spent twice longer clearing to your objecive ifnot for players running around the area.

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by hercules

weird nearly 30% said yes but not 1 single person posted on why they said yes,think trolls have hijacked the poll.

To me,no it would not .simply put there is a lot of  multiplayer options running side by side with the solo content.

Also fact is you probably spent twice longer clearing to your objecive ifnot for players running around the area.

 

I voted yes, because the game could work out as a single player or CORPG game. Doesn't need the MMO part. ThTs optional

Actually the mmo part isn't optional.  An mmorpg is an rpg that is played in a persitent world. Since this game is designed around a persistent world, then the only way to play it is in that persistent world. There is no "offline mode" or "corpg mode."

It is an MMO through and through, and that is what it will always be. No amount of misinformation on these boards can change that. 

Originally posted by dubyahite

Originally posted by DKLond

The difference between SWTOR and KotOR is that you get to grind and travel for dozens of hours between the cool bits.

The advantage, beyond getting to sit in front of the screen for much longer, is that you get to share the experience with friends, but limited by an inferior MMO paradigm. It's a game that would have been fantastic in 2004 - but as an MMO, it's far behind the top themepark MMOs as of 2011. Pretty much every non-singleplayer oriented feature is inferior to the same in another MMO. Combat is slower, crafting is dull, PvP is weaker, and so on.

Well, in my opinion.

Funny, I thought all of the MMO features were done better than other themepark mmos to date. 

 If that's the case, then you're sure to enjoy the game. I wish I could share your opinion, as I've been looking forward to this game for a long time.

No, SW:ToR needs to be online, for all the reasons people before me mentioned.

I'm not a Star Wars fan, nor a Bioware fan, but this would be a completely different game if it was a SPRPG.

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by hercules

weird nearly 30% said yes but not 1 single person posted on why they said yes,think trolls have hijacked the poll.

To me,no it would not .simply put there is a lot of  multiplayer options running side by side with the solo content.

Also fact is you probably spent twice longer clearing to your objecive ifnot for players running around the area.

 

I voted yes, because the game could work out as a single player or CORPG game. Doesn't need the MMO part. Thats optional

Well, we should not ignore how the desire to make a game that could get WoW-like subscription profits changes how the game is designed.

Let's be honest, if you took out the multi-player and just made it Co-op or single-player, then the game would be judged to be crap compared to other RPGs out there (like Dragon Age: Origins, Skyrim, Mass Effect 2, Witcher 2, etc).

Originally posted by dubyahite

Originally posted by hubertgrove

Originally posted by dubyahite

Hmmm. Persistent world. SWTOR has that. 

 

Persistent world with thousands of players all sharing the same game world. SWTOR has that.

 

How is it a single player RPG and not an MMORPG again?

 

What part of the definition of MMORPG does this game not fit?

 

I'll be holding my breath until I get a reasoned answer starting now...

Dude, I don't think you know what a persistent world is.

A persistent game world is one which you can change - and the changes persist. So, for example, if you drop a block of wood in a forest, when you come back, the block is still there.

In SWTOR, you can't pick up or put down anything. You can't even sit down in a chair.

First of all, you can sit in a chair now. So you can stop spreading that lie right now. 

 

Second persistent doesn't mean that it can be changed, it means that it is still there when you log off.  I think you don't know what persistent means. 

 

Persistent means it persists, it continues, it doesn't go away.  The world doesn't dissapear just because I log off. That's all it means.

 

 

Hah priceless. It is no wonder that there is such an opposition against anything and anyone that says something critical about this game. Damn haters they dont know  the "facts"  .

Oh I need to copy this somewhere, this will change the mmo genre: the on/off button on the server.

No...

Bioware went to do something with SWTOR, and that was to make a traditional singleplayer RPG in online enviroment.

They largely suceeded. And should be comended for it.

Alas, not without problems...

1. They buckled under pressure and invited to many mmorpg practices, like level grind.

2. They buckled under EA (or their own) greed, and introduced subscriptions in what is generally single player rpg (online)

Why would single player fan pay monthly fee, or go trough mmo level grind. I can not imagine.

So as they say: OPERATION SUCCESSFUL - PATIENT DEAD

Originally posted by 41eX

Hah priceless. It is no wonder that there is such an opposition against anything and anyone that says something critical about this game. Damn haters they dont know  the "facts"  .

In this case, it appears that they don't.  But I wouldn't write all of them off so easily.

I am confident that SWTOR will be an impressive MMO that will satisfy many people, including myself. However, i also know that if they had made Knights of the Old Republic 3 instead, it would have made a spectacular RPG that would have been GOTY material again.

Originally posted by DKLond

The difference between SWTOR and KotOR is that you get to grind and travel for dozens of hours between the cool bits.

The advantage, beyond getting to sit in front of the screen for much longer, is that you get to share the experience with friends, but limited by an inferior MMO paradigm. It's a game that would have been fantastic in 2004 - but as an MMO, it's far behind the top themepark MMOs as of 2011. Pretty much every non-singleplayer oriented feature is inferior to the same in another MMO. Combat is slower, crafting is dull, PvP is weaker, and so on.

Well, in my opinion.

" Do you think SWTOR would have made a better off-line game ( poll ) "

Didn't fancy the thread topic then?