Originally posted by Moaky07

Originally posted by RefMinor
Great quote in the comments beneath it

 

"If SWG was like the original trilogy, then SWTOR is like the prequels."

Actually SWG wasnt like the OT. I sure dont remember "Uncle Own price wars", nor do I remember "Lets decorate our house".

 

Had SWG actually captured the essence of Star Wars.....you know the exciting action.....then folks would of played the game, and the few that did like it wouldnt of saw it cancelled.

 

The OT is still being rereleased to theatres, and the only thing SWG shares with it is burnt n crispy Owen. Which is basically what SWG is these days.

Yeah, because the Original three filmns succeeded by their 'exciting action' alone. Thats what defined them, sure dood.

How was John Carter?  Got your ticket for Wrath of the Titans yet?

Give me a break.  the original trilogy is remembered for a plethora of reasons, and their action... was probably the smallest of these reasons.  Its that thinking that lead to the shallow Prequels to begin with.  Its the Lucas Way of Thinking.

Originally posted by CujoSWAoA

Originally posted by Moaky07

Originally posted by RefMinor
Great quote in the comments beneath it

 

"If SWG was like the original trilogy, then SWTOR is like the prequels."

Actually SWG wasnt like the OT. I sure dont remember "Uncle Own price wars", nor do I remember "Lets decorate our house".

 

Had SWG actually captured the essence of Star Wars.....you know the exciting action.....then folks would of played the game, and the few that did like it wouldnt of saw it cancelled.

 

The OT is still being rereleased to theatres, and the only thing SWG shares with it is burnt n crispy Owen. Which is basically what SWG is these days.

Yeah, because the Original three filmns succeeded by their 'exciting action' alone. Thats what defined them, sure dood.

How was John Carter?  Got your ticket for Wrath of the Titans yet?

Give me a break.  the original trilogy is remembered for a plethora of reasons, and their action... was probably the smallest of these reasons.  Its that thinking that lead to the shallow Prequels to begin with.  Its the Lucas Way of Thinking.

HAHAHA exactly

Originally posted by Moaky07

Originally posted by Creslin321

 

Look, all I'm saying is that without Raph Koster, there would likely have been no EQ.  Hate the man or not, you have to admit that.  It was UO's success that paved the way for other MMORPGs.

Also, what makes me a sandbox worshipper just because I recognize that the founder of the genre is obviously an important person is the genre's history?  I'm honestly surprised at how much you seem to hate Raph Koster...it's kind of odd, almost seems like he personally wronged you or something.  I don't harbor any zealout admiration for him, but I definitely respect him for his place in the history of the MMORPG genre.

And yes, I do think UO was a good game if you were wondering.  But I could never get into SWG.

EQ launched about 8 months after UO....there would be MMOs without Koster.

 

Koster took amazing backing for SWG, and put up a damn stage for roleplayers. It wasnt bad enough that he screwed the pooch.....Then we have gotten to listen to how great he is, and yet his ideas dont sell, so he went off to a realm that old time gamers simply look down upon....facebook apps.

 

I remember Uncle Owen wars, and those who still cant comprehend what a screw up it was to make SWG the way it was. Instead we have had to hear about the "PRECioUs" for yrs now. Especially in this forum.

 

You see him as someone to respect.....I see someone who beat the competition to market, and once an alternative was available, his work was relegated to the niche status it deserved. If you want someone to thank for MMOs, then look to someone like Brad McQuaid.

EQ launched 18 months after UO...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultima_Online - Launch Date 9 Sept 1997 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everquest  - Lauch Date 16 Mar 1999

I really don't see what you have against UO.  Did it kill your dog or something?

Originally posted by CujoSWAoA

Originally posted by Moaky07

Originally posted by RefMinor
Great quote in the comments beneath it

 

"If SWG was like the original trilogy, then SWTOR is like the prequels."

Actually SWG wasnt like the OT. I sure dont remember "Uncle Own price wars", nor do I remember "Lets decorate our house".

 

Had SWG actually captured the essence of Star Wars.....you know the exciting action.....then folks would of played the game, and the few that did like it wouldnt of saw it cancelled.

 

The OT is still being rereleased to theatres, and the only thing SWG shares with it is burnt n crispy Owen. Which is basically what SWG is these days.

Yeah, because the Original three filmns succeeded by their 'exciting action' alone. Thats what defined them, sure dood.

How was John Carter?  Got your ticket for Wrath of the Titans yet?

Give me a break.  the original trilogy is remembered for a plethora of reasons, and their action... was probably the smallest of these reasons.  Its that thinking that lead to the shallow Prequels to begin with.  Its the Lucas Way of Thinking.

It's sad and paradoxical that the creator of Star Wars seems to understand its success and appeal less than anyone.

Originally posted by CujoSWAoA

Originally posted by Moaky07

Originally posted by RefMinor
Great quote in the comments beneath it

 

"If SWG was like the original trilogy, then SWTOR is like the prequels."

Actually SWG wasnt like the OT. I sure dont remember "Uncle Own price wars", nor do I remember "Lets decorate our house".

 

Had SWG actually captured the essence of Star Wars.....you know the exciting action.....then folks would of played the game, and the few that did like it wouldnt of saw it cancelled.

 

The OT is still being rereleased to theatres, and the only thing SWG shares with it is burnt n crispy Owen. Which is basically what SWG is these days.

Yeah, because the Original three filmns succeeded by their 'exciting action' alone. Thats what defined them, sure dood.

How was John Carter?  Got your ticket for Wrath of the Titans yet?

Give me a break.  the original trilogy is remembered for a plethora of reasons, and their action... was probably the smallest of these reasons.  Its that thinking that lead to the shallow Prequels to begin with.  Its the Lucas Way of Thinking.

Yep it really revolved around Owen and his 10 mins of screen time in approximately 6 hrs total for the OT. /sarcasm off

We get it....you enjoyed the RP stage. Most didnt, which is why it had piss poor retention, and is currently a smoldering heap.....much like  Owen, and Koster's time making MMOs.

Although as stated, all isnt lost....Koster games are available at your local Facebook app store. /golfclap

Originally posted by Chieftan

"It was a staggering insight into the development of what will surely be the last big subscription MMO."

-PC Gamer

 

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!  Oh yes from here on everything's free!

 

 

 

PS

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Actually; free makes MMO's better. You pay a premium for quality monthly, if it was free, wouldn't you reduce your heightened sense of the critical qualities of the game and look from an optimistic perspective. I feel that way with any free game honestly. If TOR was free, wouldn't you lower your guard and accept the 'fun' things about the game accepting that the flaws are just natural?

I still have my SWTOR account (Payed for 6 months), but I haven't touched it since early Feb. Eve has grabbed my attention. Like everyone else, once TOR fixes/improves some core features (graphics on high-power machines for me) I'll be back. 

Originally posted by Chieftan

"It was a staggering insight into the development of what will surely be the last big subscription MMO."

-PC Gamer

 

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!  Oh yes from here on everything's free!

 

 

 

PS

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

While I thought the article provided useful insight into just why TOR sucks so badly, I have to say that that quote by the author kind of calls the whole thing into question. Can that idiot really believe that F2P is the direction all MMOs will go from here on out? What a tool.

Unless you're guildwars, all F2P means is that you don't believe enough in your product to charge for it.

Originally posted by Humphrie

Originally posted by Chieftan

"It was a staggering insight into the development of what will surely be the last big subscription MMO."

-PC Gamer

 

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!  Oh yes from here on everything's free!

 

 

 

PS

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

While I thought the article provided useful insight into just why TOR sucks so badly, I have to say that that quote by the author kind of calls the whole thing into question. Can that idiot really believe that F2P is the direction all MMOs will go from here on out? What a tool.

 

Unless you're guildwars, all F2P means is that you don't believe enough in your product to charge for it.

That used to be the case before the main MMOs went F2P, now they are all turning F2P with P2P optional

F2P is never really free, and can cost more than being P2P, so even F2P they charge you for the game, and they still offer a monthly subscription model.

P2P means the companies charge EVERYONE for the same content, even if some people do not want that content. None of the content that Bioware are offering I would pay for if had the choice, as do not care for Flashpoints and Operations and PvP. F2P means you get to pay for the content you want to pay for. If you like the game completely and finding yourself paying more for the individual content per month than what you would pay for the monthly fee and enjoy virtually everything chucked at you then you sub up and pay them monthly.

F2P used to be associated with cheap low class MMOs, but not the case any more. Every game that has turned F2P, has ended up giving the companies more revenue. F2P is done for the $

P2P games nowadays do not have a chance with virtually all the games going F2P. Soeither have to move with the times, or get left behind. If STO was not F2P, I would probably be subbing and paying to SWTOR, than playing STO.

LOTRO is the one that started it all off, and it seems they only did it as DDO became a success with it and WB took over and made it on the same payment scheme, otherwise it was still doing good and could have stayed as P2P.

Originally posted by Humphrie

Originally posted by Chieftan

"It was a staggering insight into the development of what will surely be the last big subscription MMO."

-PC Gamer

 

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!  Oh yes from here on everything's free!

 

 

 

PS

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

While I thought the article provided useful insight into just why TOR sucks so badly, I have to say that that quote by the author kind of calls the whole thing into question. Can that idiot really believe that F2P is the direction all MMOs will go from here on out? What a tool.

 

Unless you're guildwars, all F2P means is that you don't believe enough in your product to charge for it.

You do realize the only difference between a subscriber MMO that goes F2P and the Guild Wars B2P model is that the subscriber game got extra money from subscriptions before becoming a B2P game. Both games you have to buy the game up front, the B2P goes directly to no monthly subscription while the other soaks in cash monthly for a while before going B2P. 

And yes, all F2P have cash shops, just like the infamous B2P games have/will have. Again, no difference. 

So if you say all MMOs that start as subscription based, and then turn to F2P dont believe enough in thier product to charge for it anymore, then you should use that same line for the B2P Guild Wars models too. Since Guild Wars obviously never thought itself good enough to charge a single monthly subscription before becoming F2P after you purchased the game.

The only true F2P games are ones that start as a F2P and never charge you for the game up front. Once you have to pay for the game up front it is not a F2P...it is a B2P.

 BW made big mistake by going with EA thats the fact.  Its the same reason we wont see UO Daoc Warhammer F2P b/c the top guys are making the call.

Originally posted by Games888

 BW made big mistake by going with EA thats the fact.  Its the same reason we wont see UO Daoc Warhammer F2P b/c the top guys are making the call.

Originally posted by Humphrie

Originally posted by Chieftan

"It was a staggering insight into the development of what will surely be the last big subscription MMO."

-PC Gamer

 

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!  Oh yes from here on everything's free!

 

 

 

PS

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

While I thought the article provided useful insight into just why TOR sucks so badly, I have to say that that quote by the author kind of calls the whole thing into question. Can that idiot really believe that F2P is the direction all MMOs will go from here on out? What a tool.

 

Unless you're guildwars, all F2P means is that you don't believe enough in your product to charge for it.

F2P is the direction MMO's are heading for like or not. I believe Blizzards next MMO is already rumored to be F2P and with the whole WoW cash shop, it's probably going to happen. There are a few MMO's that will probably be sub driven in the next few years but the majority of the market is going to F2P. Just look at the market now, only a handful of MMO's are making it as a subscription MMO. The rest are F2P or in the process of converting to it. EQ, EQ2, AION, AoC, LOTR, DDO, and more have gone F2P. It isn't because WoW has taken all the subs, it's because players no longer want to spend $15 a month while waiting 3-4 months for content. Now that brings up the Themepark vs sandbox debate where players depend on developers for content vs giving players tools to make content, but lets save that for another time.

The only game that could really change the current direction would be Guild Wars 2 with it's B2P model and we won't see that impact until at least a year or 2 from now. It will need some big numbers and profit to influence other investors. Until then more and more of the market are heading to F2P because it puts the game in more hands and makes them more money than the limited subscribers they would get going P2P.

Originally posted by Coltaine00
They do act for the shareholders, must be why their stock is taking such a beating as even they don't even agree with the direction of the company.

The stock is slowly sinking because, for all the ballyhoo drummed up by the extremely professional EA marketing team, the revenues show that the flagship games they're churning out - like SWTOR and ME3 - just aren't bringing in the right amiount of bucks from the customers.

Originally posted by Coltaine00
They do act for the shareholders, must be why their stock is taking such a beating as even they don't even agree with the direction of the company.

Originally posted by Magnetia

We can hope that they learned a valuable lesson from all of this. I can't say for certain that TOR will ever be what everyone hoped it would be but I am pretty sure they won't let such an asset slip away from them so easily. If they listen to the right people and work at it do you think they can polish this unwieldy beast into a trophy animal?

edit - how convenient!

http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/03/09/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-old-republics-future/

will it be enough? Only the playerbase can tell us.

This makes me think that TOR will be really good in 4-5 years at the rate they are going. i hope they take risks with the post-development phase and get the suits off their backs.

Originally posted by raistlinm

Originally posted by noncley

Originally posted by ElderRat

The reason why no one makes a good game anymore is that no one is interested in making a good game, they are interested in making money.  Apparently making a good game and making money are incompatible options.

 

My Opinion.

What they seem to forget is that if they do make a good game, they will make more money.

If SWTOT had not been such a linear grindfest with no post-50 game, I'd still be playing it.

That means I'd have willing paid the purchase price twice over, in terms of subs I would have paid them.

As it was, I cancelled when my free month ended and returned the game to Amazon.co.uk for a refund, saying it was 'unenjoyable'.

I'm still trying to figure out how people pour in the time it takes to reach max level in any mmorpg (I don't care if it's an hour or a month) to decide once reaching max level "oh this game is no good".  Maybe it's just me but when I realize I really don't like a game it isn't getting any more of my money or time maybe that's the old school in me.

Your last statement makes me a bit more sure the problem isn't with the devs but with players like you who are so coddled and empowered that you think it's ok to play a game to max level spending the equivalent of some days in that game and racing to reach max so that you can return it to the place you bought it from and declare it "unenjoyable".

Don't you ever blame a bad game on the customer. That's ridiculous - and it's also the reason we players continue to get shit shovelled down our throats and told it's sugar.

I ground to L50 through a bad game  for a number of reasons:

- I hoped it would get better:

- I hoped the end-game would be different:

- I thought perhaps there was something wrong with my character and it might be fixed.

But none of this was worthwhile. The game was 'unenjoyable'. Sorry if that hurts your self-esteem, kid.

Originally posted by ktanner3

Originally posted by raistlinm

Originally posted by noncley

 

What they seem to forget is that if they do make a good game, they will make more money.

If SWTOT had not been such a linear grindfest with no post-50 game, I'd still be playing it.

That means I'd have willing paid the purchase price twice over, in terms of subs I would have paid them.

As it was, I cancelled when my free month ended and returned the game to Amazon.co.uk for a refund, saying it was 'unenjoyable'.

I'm still trying to figure out how people pour in the time it takes to reach max level in any mmorpg (I don't care if it's an hour or a month) to decide once reaching max level "oh this game is no good".  Maybe it's just me but when I realize I really don't like a game it isn't getting any more of my money or time maybe that's the old school in me.

Your last statement makes me a bit more sure the problem isn't with the devs but with players like you who are so coddled and empowered that you think it's ok to play a game to max level spending the equivalent of some days in that game and racing to reach max so that you can return it to the place you bought it from and declare it "unenjoyable".

Yeah I don't get it either. It doesn't take me long to figure out whether or not I like a game. With an MMO it should only take a few days at best for a player to know if this is the game for them. If I was amazon.com I'd send back a NO after I was done getting off the floor from laughing. We are definetly living in the ME generation.

Well, it's not the rest of us' fault if you're too prepared to put up with mediocrity and too timid to ask for your money back.

Originally posted by noncley

Originally posted by ktanner3

Originally posted by raistlinm

 

Yeah I don't get it either. It doesn't take me long to figure out whether or not I like a game. With an MMO it should only take a few days at best for a player to know if this is the game for them. If I was amazon.com I'd send back a NO after I was done getting off the floor from laughing. We are definetly living in the ME generation.

Well, it's not the rest of us' fault if you're too prepared to put up with mediocrity and too timid to ask for your money back.

I'm not timid, I just don't like to look ignorant. Playing a game from beginning to end and then expecting the company to give you your money back just because you didn't like it is the very height of ignorance. 

relevant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-mkp-hMu8I