Originally posted by dynamicipftw

Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

it reduces my exp/hour and makes 100% map completion slower. I'm not a stop-and-smell-the-roses kind of player.

So you complain about features which actually serve your "not stop and smell the roses" playstyle.

What I read on those forums never ceases to amaze me.

No, handholding and making everything easy isn't serving my playstyle. I want to be challenged. Fully pre-explored maps are no challenge.

It's not pre-explored. If you look at a map of a state, lets say Texas, does that mean you have already been to all the cities and sites?  Of course not. 

My friend you are contradicting yourself.  You talk about exp/hour and how you don't like to stop and smell roses.  That's fine, I know plenty of people with that playstyle.  However, having these things marked on the map for you to go means you know where to go get the exp instead of looking around blindly, thus increasing your exp/hour.  If going to these pre-determined points slow you down, then don't do them.  If you feel you HAVE to do them to min/max then you are simply complaining that Anet has given you another option/way to get more exp/karma (increasing exp/hour) etc and this is no where near an immersion issue.

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

 

Never heard of MinMaxers? There are different ways to play MMOs you know.

people who play for an immersive experience probably aren't the same who want to hit max level as fast as possible and get the best stuff asap.. we are talking immersion.. turning off the markers helps with immersion which is why it was brought up

Well I must be special then...

Originally posted by rodingo

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

it reduces my exp/hour and makes 100% map completion slower. I'm not a stop-and-smell-the-roses kind of player.

So you complain about features which actually serve your "not stop and smell the roses" playstyle.

What I read on those forums never ceases to amaze me.

No, handholding and making everything easy isn't serving my playstyle. I want to be challenged. Fully pre-explored maps are no challenge.

It's not pre-explored. If you look at a map of a state, lets say Texas, does that mean you have already been to all the cities and sites?  Of course not. 

My friend you are contradicting yourself.  You talk about exp/hour and how you don't like to stop and smell roses.  That's fine, I know plenty of people with that playstyle.  However, having these things marked on the map for you to go means you know where to go get the exp instead of looking around blindly, thus increasing your exp/hour.  If going to these pre-determined points slow you down, then don't do them.  If you feel you HAVE to do them to min/max then you are simply complaining that Anet has given you another option/way to get more exp/karma (increasing exp/hour) etc and this is no where near an immersion issue.

I'm not like the people you know, because I don't want easy games that tell me where to go and what to "explore".

And yes it is an immersion issue. If I can play your game efficiently without having to think just by following the marks on the map I will not be immersed, and sooner or later I will get bored.

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

Originally posted by rodingo

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

it reduces my exp/hour and makes 100% map completion slower. I'm not a stop-and-smell-the-roses kind of player.

So you complain about features which actually serve your "not stop and smell the roses" playstyle.

What I read on those forums never ceases to amaze me.

No, handholding and making everything easy isn't serving my playstyle. I want to be challenged. Fully pre-explored maps are no challenge.

It's not pre-explored. If you look at a map of a state, lets say Texas, does that mean you have already been to all the cities and sites?  Of course not. 

My friend you are contradicting yourself.  You talk about exp/hour and how you don't like to stop and smell roses.  That's fine, I know plenty of people with that playstyle.  However, having these things marked on the map for you to go means you know where to go get the exp instead of looking around blindly, thus increasing your exp/hour.  If going to these pre-determined points slow you down, then don't do them.  If you feel you HAVE to do them to min/max then you are simply complaining that Anet has given you another option/way to get more exp/karma (increasing exp/hour) etc and this is no where near an immersion issue.

I'm not like the people you know, because I don't want easy games that tell me where to go and what to "explore".

And yes it is an immersion issue. If I can play your game efficiently without having to think just by following the marks on the map I will not be immersed, and sooner or later I will get bored.

Yes, if you a play a game for effeciency instead of fun you are bound to get bored.  I guess if I played GW2 that way I would be bored too.

I'm curious to what the other games are that have rewarded you with exp and loot for exploring.

Originally posted by rodingo

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

Originally posted by rodingo

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

it reduces my exp/hour and makes 100% map completion slower. I'm not a stop-and-smell-the-roses kind of player.

So you complain about features which actually serve your "not stop and smell the roses" playstyle.

What I read on those forums never ceases to amaze me.

No, handholding and making everything easy isn't serving my playstyle. I want to be challenged. Fully pre-explored maps are no challenge.

It's not pre-explored. If you look at a map of a state, lets say Texas, does that mean you have already been to all the cities and sites?  Of course not. 

My friend you are contradicting yourself.  You talk about exp/hour and how you don't like to stop and smell roses.  That's fine, I know plenty of people with that playstyle.  However, having these things marked on the map for you to go means you know where to go get the exp instead of looking around blindly, thus increasing your exp/hour.  If going to these pre-determined points slow you down, then don't do them.  If you feel you HAVE to do them to min/max then you are simply complaining that Anet has given you another option/way to get more exp/karma (increasing exp/hour) etc and this is no where near an immersion issue.

I'm not like the people you know, because I don't want easy games that tell me where to go and what to "explore".

And yes it is an immersion issue. If I can play your game efficiently without having to think just by following the marks on the map I will not be immersed, and sooner or later I will get bored.

Yes, if you a play a game for effeciency instead of fun you are bound to get bored.  I guess if I played GW2 that way I would be bored too.

I'm curious to what the other games are that have rewarded you with exp and loot for exploring.

I played DAoC for 3-4 years and didn't get bored for a second. The exping was very social (grouping only), and it was fun trying to make the perfect group (fastest exp - safe from wipes and key members leaving - having replacements ready and waiting just in case) which was extremely difficult to accomplish and never lasted long. I managed to get about 20-25 chars to max level and trust me it was way slower than GW2. Also DAoC didn't have a minimap and the map was very basic(I didn't even need it since I had memorized the landscape). By far the most immersive MMO (in both PvP and PvE)

WoW was also fun for about 2 years. It was more immersive in vanilla but the quests were a lot more fun in cataclysm. Never cared for its endgame though (except maybe arenas for a while). I ended up with 7-8 chars at max level.

In GW2 I was bored after 1-2 weeks and 1 level 80.

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

I played DAoC for 3-4 years and didn't get bored for a second. The exping was very social (grouping only), and it was fun trying to make the perfect group (fastest exp - safe from wipes and key members leaving - having replacements ready and waiting just in case) which was extremely difficult to accomplish and never lasted long. I managed to get about 20-25 chars to max level and trust me it was way slower than GW2. Also DAoC didn't have a minimap and the map was very basic(I didn't even need it since I had memorized the landscape). By far the most immersive MMO (in both PvP and PvE)

WoW was also fun for about 2 years. It was more immersive in vanilla but the quests were a lot more fun in cataclysm. Never cared for its endgame though (except maybe arenas for a while). I ended up with 7-8 chars at max level.

 

In GW2 I was bored after 1-2 weeks and 1 level 80.

We are really lucky GW2 is not like that games and is truly immersive because those 2 games was sooooo boring and opposite of immersive.

How can you immerse yourself when theres alarm "orcs are attacking" and you go out there and poor orcs just stand there picking daises and chatting about the weather :) (generic example instead of orcs insert mob you like)

Originally posted by tintilinic

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

I played DAoC for 3-4 years and didn't get bored for a second. The exping was very social (grouping only), and it was fun trying to make the perfect group (fastest exp - safe from wipes and key members leaving - having replacements ready and waiting just in case) which was extremely difficult to accomplish and never lasted long. I managed to get about 20-25 chars to max level and trust me it was way slower than GW2. Also DAoC didn't have a minimap and the map was very basic(I didn't even need it since I had memorized the landscape). By far the most immersive MMO (in both PvP and PvE)

WoW was also fun for about 2 years. It was more immersive in vanilla but the quests were a lot more fun in cataclysm. Never cared for its endgame though (except maybe arenas for a while). I ended up with 7-8 chars at max level.

 

In GW2 I was bored after 1-2 weeks and 1 level 80.

We are really lucky GW2 is not like that games and is truly immersive because those 2 games was sooooo boring.

How can you immerse yourself when theres alarm "orcs are attacking" and you go out there and poor orcs just stand there picking daises and chatting about the weather :) (generic example instead of orcs insert mob you like)

Different strokes I guess...

WoW was more immersive because the whole game wasn't based around the minimap/map, it didn't have portals in every zone, I played on a PvP server so the world felt dangerous and unpredictable (unlike GW2), in vanilla you had to actually explore the world to finish most quests (even when you had to get help from thottbot). I guess you had to think more to exp. GW2 doesn't leave much room for improvisation, just go where the minimap tells you to go.

And not to forget that in WoW (especially after cata) each zone had a unique story that drew you in, in GW2 open world exping has no story at all.

Originally posted by jpnz
Probably because the world is setup as boxes with fixed portals. It just feels artificial and small.

+1

My issue since the beginning... To be honest, I couldn't believe it the first time I rolled a human and got to Lion's Arch so fast by feet...Guild Wars 1 always felt like an EPIC adventure to get there in the first place, but in GW2...I don't know...the world feels small, at least that's the feeling I get :/

Originally posted by Elfahiar

Originally posted by jpnz
Probably because the world is setup as boxes with fixed portals. It just feels artificial and small.

+1

My issue since the beginning... To be honest, I couldn't believe it the first time I rolled a human and got to Lion's Arch so fast by feet...Guild Wars 1 always felt like an EPIC adventure to get there in the first place, but in GW2...I don't know...the world feels small, at least that's the feeling I get :/

gw1 had the same portal system as its part of the lore of the game. I never understood how people say gw1 felt bigger and more immersive when it was a lobby game... i dunno.. i could see when compared to a game that doesn't offer instant ports but gw1 you could do the exact same thing..

Originally posted by Aerowyn

gw1 had the same portal system as its part of the lore of the game. I never understood how people say gw1 felt bigger and more immersive when it was a lobby game... i dunno.. i could see when compared to a game that doesn't offer instant ports but gw1 you could do the exact same thing..

Maybe because GW1 had too many mobs and you spent a longer time fighting (maybe too much time IMHO, areas were crowded with monsters everywhere) on these maps, also, travelling with your mates helped with immersion (loved the "fellowship of the ring" vibe when travelling with my party NPC's / Heroes) all I know is that GW1 "felt" bigger but I can't explain why, it's only a feeling and sometimes feelings are difficult to turn into words...

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

Different strokes I guess...

WoW was more immersive because the whole game wasn't based around the minimap/map, it didn't have portals in every zone, I played on a PvP server so the world felt dangerous and unpredictable (unlike GW2), in vanilla you had to actually explore the world to finish most quests (even when you had to get help from thottbot). I guess you had to think more to exp. GW2 doesn't leave much room for improvisation, just go where the minimap tells you to go.

 

And not to forget that in WoW (especially after cata) each zone had a unique story that drew you in, in GW2 open world exping has no story at all.

lol

GW2 is NOT based around minimap/map. You CAN turn it OFF.

PvP servers are not dngearous and unpredictable. You lose nothung from dying and its very predictable you will get ganked (by no lifers at launch/griefers later)

Thanks the heavens i dont have to think much of xp in GW2 and can just immerse myself in the game and play, instead whacking "best xp/hour" stuff (thats the least immersive thing i can think of (its full anti immersive) along with standing in queue for quest monster). GW2 is ALL about improvisation, immensly more than DAOC and WoW.

In GW2 zones have stories, which have stories within which have stories withing and then it has hundreds if not thousand(s) stories apart form that. And not in "wall of text" format. Kinda beats WoW lol

Originally posted by Elfahiar

Originally posted by Aerowyn

gw1 had the same portal system as its part of the lore of the game. I never understood how people say gw1 felt bigger and more immersive when it was a lobby game... i dunno.. i could see when compared to a game that doesn't offer instant ports but gw1 you could do the exact same thing..

Maybe because GW1 had too many mobs and you spent a longer time fighting (maybe too much time IMHO, areas were crowded with monsters everywhere) on these maps, also, travelling with your mates helped with immersion (loved the "fellowship of the ring" vibe when travelling with my party NPC's / Heroes) all I know is that GW1 "felt" bigger but I can't explain why, it's only a feeling and sometimes feelings are difficult to turn into words...

i will agree many areas in gw1 were way overcrowded with mobs..  i won't argue the porting(lore or not) does make the world "feel" a bit more confined and smaller than a game without this sort of thing. In effect its like wow when they added flying mounts which took a lot of that big world feeling away imho. But when inside the zone i can wander and wander for a VERY long time and not hit the edge of a zone in almost every map in gw2 this to me makes the zones at least feel very larg and not "boxed in" at all which wasn't my experience in games like swtor for example where many planets felt way to boxed in for my taste.

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by elocke

Originally posted by jpnz
Probably because the world is setup as boxes with fixed portals. It just feels artificial and small.

^^^This.  I have the exact same issue when playing AoC or TSW, heck even EQ2.  It's that stupid non seamless world design, it just ruins the immersion.  Only one game ever broke that mold and that was FFXI, for some reason, those instanced zones were almost overly immersive, lol(not really, but you get the gist).

Every "zone" is basically a filled square/rectangle of content.  The content is fine, but the layout makes it feel confined and fake.  Of course another horrible way would have been the WAR way, 2 linear paths running perpendicular to each other with a big space in the middle for PVP.  Crappy world/zone design there as well.  Gotta have crap cross over and in and out and be more geographically sound.  In other words more haphazard and non shape specific.  I think Lotro and WoW handle this fairly well.

even in wow though what does it matter if it was seamless or zoned with loading screen? everything that happens PVE wise  is contained to that specific zone things didn't spill over and effect multiple zones(at least during vanilla didn't play much after that) I didn't play lotro much so can't comment on that... overall i never found it mattered if the games seamless zones or not as everything was contained within the zone anyway so it didn't make a whole lot of difference overall in that aspect.. now what goes on in the zone is another matter.. are there battles going on are there constant skirmishes between npcs and faction wars going on inside each zone that makes them feel alive.. to me this is where gw2 nailed the immersion feeling for me

You know what they need in terms of zones. I find seemless zones to be the way to go...kind of like vanguard. However to piggy back on your point about containment. I would approach zone creation like the world we are living in now. Say for instance if you go from one city to the next , sometimes the only way you know its a diff city is of course via map or signs. TSW could have used this concept. I think they have it where you ahve a loadign screen I feel that takes away from teh game. It should feel that there is no break in going from one place to the next. 

There is a problem however when dealing with a seemless world and that is resource allocation. I would think having a seemless world would be more intensive for the devs and the players. Personally I think if one MMo company that had say 300+million would do very well if they took their time, and say used graphics that looked like Aion or Tera. Had teh combat of Tera or GW2, but had lore like Everquest.  Also somewhere in there it would need some sanbox elements but with a heavy penalty that would almost virtually keep people from griefing...I think wushu has something liek that where you can get thrown in jail for actual days.

Immersion wise certain things would have to spill over to other "zones" and have effects in that zone. For instance if you didnt put out a fire in zone A it could potentially spread to Zone B. Also what should happen is taking the reins from the devs and having a program make up play withing boundaries for the consumer. Adaptable play is what I would call it...I feel that is where games are going to have to go. People awnt a challenge and they need unpredictability in their games. Give them that and I think people would come in spades.

Originally posted by Graey

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by elocke

Originally posted by jpnz
Probably because the world is setup as boxes with fixed portals. It just feels artificial and small.

^^^This.  I have the exact same issue when playing AoC or TSW, heck even EQ2.  It's that stupid non seamless world design, it just ruins the immersion.  Only one game ever broke that mold and that was FFXI, for some reason, those instanced zones were almost overly immersive, lol(not really, but you get the gist).

Every "zone" is basically a filled square/rectangle of content.  The content is fine, but the layout makes it feel confined and fake.  Of course another horrible way would have been the WAR way, 2 linear paths running perpendicular to each other with a big space in the middle for PVP.  Crappy world/zone design there as well.  Gotta have crap cross over and in and out and be more geographically sound.  In other words more haphazard and non shape specific.  I think Lotro and WoW handle this fairly well.

even in wow though what does it matter if it was seamless or zoned with loading screen? everything that happens PVE wise  is contained to that specific zone things didn't spill over and effect multiple zones(at least during vanilla didn't play much after that) I didn't play lotro much so can't comment on that... overall i never found it mattered if the games seamless zones or not as everything was contained within the zone anyway so it didn't make a whole lot of difference overall in that aspect.. now what goes on in the zone is another matter.. are there battles going on are there constant skirmishes between npcs and faction wars going on inside each zone that makes them feel alive.. to me this is where gw2 nailed the immersion feeling for me

You know what they need in terms of zones. I find seemless zones to be the way to go...kind of like vanguard. However to piggy back on your point about containment. I would approach zone creation like the world we are living in now. Say for instance if you go from one city to the next , sometimes the only way you know its a diff city is of course via map or signs. TSW could have used this concept. I think they have it where you ahve a loadign screen I feel that takes away from teh game. It should feel that there is no break in going from one place to the next. 

 

There is a problem however when dealing with a seemless world and that is resource allocation. I would think having a seemless world would be more intensive for the devs and the players. Personally I think if one MMo company that had say 300+million would do very well if they took their time, and say used graphics that looked like Aion or Tera. Had teh combat of Tera or GW2, but had lore like Everquest.  Also somewhere in there it would need some sanbox elements but with a heavy penalty that would almost virtually keep people from griefing...I think wushu has something liek that where you can get thrown in jail for actual days.

Immersion wise certain things would have to spill over to other "zones" and have effects in that zone. For instance if you didnt put out a fire in zone A it could potentially spread to Zone B. Also what should happen is taking the reins from the devs and having a program make up play withing boundaries for the consumer. Adaptable play is what I would call it...I feel that is where games are going to have to go. People awnt a challenge and they need unpredictability in their games. Give them that and I think people would come in spades.

We all want that, but while we wait for it to happen we have to stay in realm of possible nd be satisfied with the next best thing.

And i much more prefer larger zoned world than smaller seamless world.

And Vanguard...thats example how not to build a game world. Huge world...BUT....lot of nothingness in it, huge problems with chunks, no server capacity to fill that world. It was extremely redundant. There is such think as too big and Vanguard is prime example of it (along with SWTOR...and LOTRO....and WoW...and SWG)

And no, mobs standing on a meadow is not content.

Originally posted by Aerowyn

i will agree many areas in gw1 were way overcrowded with mobs..  i won't argue the porting(lore or not) does make the world "feel" a bit more confined and smaller than a game without this sort of thing. In effect its like wow when they added flying mounts which took a lot of that big world feeling away imho. But when inside the zone i can wander and wander for a VERY long time and not hit the edge of a zone in almost every map in gw2 this to me makes the zones at least feel very larg and not "boxed in" at all which wasn't my experience in games like swtor for example where many planets felt way to boxed in for my taste.

GW1 was far from perfect, although I spent years of my life playing it and loved it, I ended up hating it after EOTN. I mean, it became so ridiculous...the worst I can remember was those busy areas filled with packs of mantids. Also 4 level 28 giants attacking your level 20 party, yeah right lol (ended up rushing some zones like a Mario Bros game) I have fond memories of GW1, but GW2 is a better "game" IMHO - I always thought the more important thing in a game is gameplay, and GW2 is not as frustrating as GW1 was. There has never been a game that frustrated me as much as GW1 did. On the opposite, I am feeling like it's a smaller world (again only a personal feeling) that's why I think both GW1 & GW2 complete each other, they both have their positives/negatives...now I wish Guild Wars 3 could take the best of two worlds lol :)

Originally posted by Elfahiar

Originally posted by Aerowyn

i will agree many areas in gw1 were way overcrowded with mobs..  i won't argue the porting(lore or not) does make the world "feel" a bit more confined and smaller than a game without this sort of thing. In effect its like wow when they added flying mounts which took a lot of that big world feeling away imho. But when inside the zone i can wander and wander for a VERY long time and not hit the edge of a zone in almost every map in gw2 this to me makes the zones at least feel very larg and not "boxed in" at all which wasn't my experience in games like swtor for example where many planets felt way to boxed in for my taste.

GW1 was far from perfect, although I spent years of my life playing it and loved it, I ended up hating it after EOTN. I mean, it became so ridiculous...the worst I can remember was those busy areas filled with packs of mantids. Also 4 level 28 giants attacking your level 20 party, yeah right lol (ended up rushing some zones like a Mario Bros game) I have fond memories of GW1, but GW2 is a better "game" IMHO - I always thought the more important thing in a game is gameplay, and GW2 is not as frustrating as GW1 was. There has never been a game that frustrated me as much as GW1 did. On the opposite, I am feeling like it's a smaller world (again only a personal feeling) that's why I think both GW1 & GW2 complete each other, they both have their positives/negatives...now I wish Guild Wars 3 could take the best of two worlds lol :)

yea i reinstalled gw1 little bit before gw2 came out to try and get the halls stuff.. lasted a couple days and uninstalled:P game is just way more frustrating than fun imho.. 

Originally posted by Elfahiar

Originally posted by Aerowyn

i will agree many areas in gw1 were way overcrowded with mobs..  i won't argue the porting(lore or not) does make the world "feel" a bit more confined and smaller than a game without this sort of thing. In effect its like wow when they added flying mounts which took a lot of that big world feeling away imho. But when inside the zone i can wander and wander for a VERY long time and not hit the edge of a zone in almost every map in gw2 this to me makes the zones at least feel very larg and not "boxed in" at all which wasn't my experience in games like swtor for example where many planets felt way to boxed in for my taste.

GW1 was far from perfect, although I spent years of my life playing it and loved it, I ended up hating it after EOTN. I mean, it became so ridiculous...the worst I can remember was those busy areas filled with packs of mantids. Also 4 level 28 giants attacking your level 20 party, yeah right lol (ended up rushing some zones like a Mario Bros game) I have fond memories of GW1, but GW2 is a better "game" IMHO - I always thought the more important thing in a game is gameplay, and GW2 is not as frustrating as GW1 was. There has never been a game that frustrated me as much as GW1 did. On the opposite, I am feeling like it's a smaller world (again only a personal feeling) that's why I think both GW1 & GW2 complete each other, they both have their positives/negatives...now I wish Guild Wars 3 could take the best of two worlds lol :)

What?

Jotuns are pushovers.

The thing with GW1 is that the difference between bad builds and good builds is immense, which isn't surprising with the amount of skills present.

I mean, monks with ressurect or rebirth?

Anyone with self heals?

Degen builds for PvE?

Originally posted by Aerowyn

yea i reinstalled gw1 little bit before gw2 came out to try and get the halls stuff.. lasted a couple days and uninstalled:P game is just way more frustrating than fun imho.. 

Yeah, loved GW1 but it had too many "balance" issues and gameplay was so frustrating...attacking, targeting, clicking properly etc. was a chore sometimes, GW2 is a way better "game" IMHO. But I still miss that world and atmosphere from GW1, especially adventuring with my own heroes, following me ^^

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

What?

Jotuns are pushovers.

The thing with GW1 is that the difference between bad builds and good builds is immense.

Yes, a bit too much...I'm not an expert player, I don't think I was a bad player either but the game was unbalanced for sure.

 NOW BACK ON TOPIC...

Sorry but OP what did you think of Divinity's Reach? Must be the most immersive virtual place I've ever visited...honestly DR must be the most awesome virtual city EVER created!

Originally posted by NL-Rikkert

Immersion is up to the player, not the game.

 

/thread

It's a mutual balance of both.

The design and tools provided by the developers, plus the user, equals quality immersion.  /thread

Originally posted by FromHell

Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

Originally posted by observer

Originally posted by FromHell

It´s about as immersive as any Super Mario 3-D game.

High fantasy cartoony look and different playfields to run around and kill stuff. There is nothing "realistic" about this game to get immersed in.

 

GW2 is "cartoony"?  Seriously?  You're just hating on it because you lack any meaningful objectivity to back up your claims.

Oh, and let's not forget your "Best MMOs played" list in your signature, and you dare to call GW2 "cartoony" and unrealistic. lol.

Yeah, that kind of answer makes me wonder if the person even ever logged into the game.

I don´t care if you call the style "cartoony" or not, perhaps it´s "anime", I just don´t like to have things like these in my gaming experience. Same reason I don´t play TERA. As for my signature, you see I don´t like any high fantasy T rated MMOs. It´s a matter of taste.

 

Ah, the old "realism" argument.  Argued and debated to death for decades.  The fact that you "immerse" yourself into a video game, and then complain about "cartoony/anime" styles, is ironic in it's own right.  Those games listed in your signature are far from "reality".  Mythical creatures, space ships, aliens, ewoks, and wookies; compared to one race (asura) is your only argument?  If anything, star wars is a "space-fantasy", which is arguably rated T, for teen.