Originally posted by Entris38

Originally posted by Muppetier
I would not expect to ever see a Sony, EA or Blizzard game in the Top 20 on this site if it is done by user votes.

/Agree........

 

On topic: I believe SWTOR is a 7, maybe 7.5. As many have stated, far to many people on this site have an agenda, everything is a 10 or a 1, a big zero if they could. Gaming companies don't help themselves by making games that casual players(which I am) can max level in a month with limited play time and the always trying to stick the content at end game................what happened to the journey? People would complain about that also. Multiple paths of leveling, larger worlds, slower leveling(but have the content to support it).

 

Gaming companies have caught on that the console gamer is the biggest gaming consumer now. They can put out games with limited content and we run like idiots to give them are 60 bucks, burn through the content in a month, or most times a week for the hardcore players and then everyone screams.

6.6 for this site is high if you think people have an agenda against the game.

Other sites have rated it 4: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-11-26-star-wars-the-old-republic-re-review

 Games TM magazine when mentioned the F2P system their opinion was: AVOID

it is not just this site, it is everywhere

Originally posted by Entris38

Originally posted by Muppetier
I would not expect to ever see a Sony, EA or Blizzard game in the Top 20 on this site if it is done by user votes.

Gaming companies don't help themselves by making games that casual players(which I am) can max level in a month with limited play time and the always trying to stick the content at end game...............

Not sure if you're including SWTOR in the list of games that you can max level in a month... and how casual that makes you.

I have a few hours to play every day at most, and I don't see myself hitting 50 in a month... then again, I'm mostly soloing a new alt through the stories, I assume you're doing flashpoints + the matching daily quests on the Fleet?

---

Originally posted by BadOrb
Just noticed the user review rating went down over night from 7.2 to 6.6 and I feel that's a bit harsh. Considering the game is picking up and there are some great updates / expansion coming up. What do you guys think ? People really do have it in for this game it seems.

Cheers ,

BadOrb.

---

This is definitely not a harsh rating.  The game was horrendous on release in numerous aspects.  It ran terrible on some machines- high end / low end  nor setings appeared not to be the factor.  It ran as well on my low end machine as it did my high end.  The Warzone PvP was actually pretty decent for a release in my opinion.  Huttball was fairly innovative.  However, Alderan was horrendously bugged and slaughtered FPS.  Open world "PvP" was horrendous.  I've never seen something designed so incompently in a game as Ilum with the exception of Ilum 2.0 where the bafflingly stupid apparently done with no forethought turned it into a spawn camping fest.  Oh... and the loot bags for PvP... worst idea ever.  I had three pieces of PvP gear I could wear and six extra PvP boots...  Complete failure.  The change to tokens was much better, but the continued reliance on random chance was an extremely poor decision by the Devs.

The instances were OK.  They weren't hard.  Nor were the raids.  They were extremely buggy, but I let that slide.  It took way too little time to get completely geared up and fly through all the instances.  My friends and I were doing PvP exclusively pretty quick because of the lack of PvE content (and a preference for PvP anyway).  There was literally nothing to do once you hit level cap after about a two months. 

The F2P transition as others have said was terrible.  I did have some fun in PvP and reinstalled the game to check it out.  I lasted two minutes or so once I realized the severity of the limitations.  And I'm one of those players who buys cosmetic shit out of a cash shop.  I'm not going to pay in a F2P game for PvP.  That's just insulting.

I still do recommend this game to my friends.  It's a good game if you know what you are getting yourself into- which is not a real MMO.  While I think that the terms themepark and sandbox are highly overused and misused, this game is pure themepark.  It's not a real MMO.  It's a single player game with some multiplayer aspects.  If it was labeled as such, I could justify a 8 or even 9 score for the game.  This is KOTOR3 not a Star Wars MMO.  As such, it really deserves an even lower score.

No the rating is not harsh, it is still a bit high.  I think folks are just figuring out that the content is going to be more and more sparce, and you really cant trust anything ea has to say at this point. 

I would mark the game a 5.0 rating,  other sites has it as 4.0 and worse. 

Originally posted by Entris38 

On topic: I believe SWTOR is a 7, maybe 7.5. As many have stated, far to many people on this site have an agenda, everything is a 10 or a 1, a big zero if they could.

an agenda? lol.. you sound like a 9/11 conspiracy guy

Fine, look at Metacritic, there are far more "zeros" than "tens", it could be the other way around if the game would be as great as we hoped. For a Star Wars IP game it is simply a disappointment.

Personally, I feel 6.6 is a generous score. I would have scored it around a 5.0

I also agree that 6.6 is still way too high. At least Final Fantasy had the fortitude to admit they messed up and put the effort to correct and redesign their failure.

I will add my voice to those who say ratings here are useless and the amount of people here who care about them always astounds me,I personally don't evne look at them anymore.

Now in my opinion the initial levelling process in SW:TOR  deserves a 8 unfortunately once you reach the end game or start another alt that number starts falling rapidly to a generous 5.

This game had the easiest and shortest end game content I've encoutnered in PvE,the open world PvP stuff was a joke which they eventually just abandoned and the instanced PvP was fun for awhile but their massive delay in getting ranked PvP up and running hurt that a lot as well as the alck of variety for months after launch.

Whislt the game had many updates int he months after launch the actual content of those updates didn't amount to very much but hey the were constant and frequent!

Originally posted by FromHell

Yeah, the art direction is certainly "interesting" although they tried to be somehow like the old movie trilogy and put a little twist on the styles, but in my taste not enough. Sith Empire looks like the (Republic) Empire 3000 years in the future! What the hell?  "Republic" looks like the "Rebels" 3000 years in the future? They did not have enough balls to go: "Ok, how could the Star Wars universe and factions REALLY look like, 3000 years ago?", let´s create something completely unique, archaic, different, just with a hint on how the future will look like. So overall, the art direction seems scared and not "brave" enough

I did, but that didn´t make the game more diverse either. Only have one char, the other one is stuck somewhere between 20-30

Yes, I dislike GW2, in my opinion SWTOR and GW2 are the worst MMOs I´ve ever played

NPCs which have some sort of activity like populating cities, look around, the NPCs are stuck in 5 second time loops since release, almost no one moves, they are time frozen, like the troopers shooting from behind barriers forever on every planet

Speeders have no feeling of gravity, don´t feel dynamic, no g-forces, no acceleration, no sense of speed, it´s just a faster walk with a speeder mount animation. Completely lame, for Star Wars standards.

SSD and 8-core Xeon, every other MMO I play loads zones in about 5-10 seconds. SWTOR up to 30 seconds or more.

SWG2 is the synonym for a great Star Wars MMO we never got, if adding/fixing the problems mentioned above makes SWTOR SWG2, then so be it, yes I want SWG2

 

From most of these above replies, it is clear to me that ToR (and incidently GW2) are not your type of MMORPG. That is fine, not every game is likeable by everyone, but to rate ToR down because you expected it to be something that it is not is pretty harsh.

I have hated a game for what it had to offer, but given a good score because I acknowledge that the features it offered were still done well. For example, I utterly hate Counter Strike. I find it one of the most boring games I have ever tried. However, I would be completely off the mark to say that the game is a turd because what it has to offer is definitely great for those who like that sort of game. So I would rate it at a 9. I know full well what Counter Strike is so I would not ask Counter Strike to become Tabula Rasa, for example.

It seems like a lot of the hate pointed at ToR is based on some strange idea that it was the improved version of a game made by another studio rather than an expanded version of KoToR.

I want to see SWG2 in another world and done by a different studio. I want to see similar tools that the devs implemented in SWG in a new sandbox but I want to see them improved 100 fold because there were tons of problems (like the crazy doc buffs). I do not want to see SWG2 in ToR though.

Originally posted by Azaron_Nightblade

No game will ever please everyone, and I agree that they should focus on their strengths rather than try to emulate SWG and go out of business due to developing massive systems while the game dies due to lack of new content.

It would be awesome if they could add some of that stuff in the future, something they are working on on the side, but I don't see it happening...

Yep, this. I overall enjoy this game for what it is. It should be taken for what it is. I wonder if ToR would have such a bad rep if SOE had not closed SWG down. People have got it in their heads that ToR is the successor when it is clear to me that ToR has nothing to do with SWG. They are two completely different games so how can one compare them ?

As I have said elsewhere, there is one big flaw with ToR's development and that is the reliance on lots of VOs and cutscenes. Any new content, rather than game systems such as housing or player vendors let's say, will be expensive for them to produce, because they have to cutscene and VO every single quest. If they don't, I am sure players will notice and bitch.

Perhaps adding more game systems would cost less, but tacking on sandbox elements to a heavy themepark like ToR might not work out too well.

Originally posted by MurlockDance

Originally posted by FromHell

 

 

From most of these above replies, it is clear to me that ToR (and incidently GW2) are not your type of MMORPG. That is fine, not every game is likeable by everyone, but to rate ToR down because you expected it to be something that it is not is pretty harsh.

I have hated a game for what it had to offer, but given a good score because I acknowledge that the features it offered were still done well. For example, I utterly hate Counter Strike. I find it one of the most boring games I have ever tried. However, I would be completely off the mark to say that the game is a turd because what it has to offer is definitely great for those who like that sort of game. So I would rate it at a 9. I know full well what Counter Strike is so I would not ask Counter Strike to become Tabula Rasa, for example.

What if I expected it to be better? I knew it was going to be a themepark. I knew it had few classes with WoW-like trees for builds. I knew all of that but what I didn't know was how anemic the systems would be, and how stripped down the whole game would be (static lifeless worlds, quick progression to an empty endgame, meaningless open world PvP). None of this has changed either.

I don't think the comparison to Kotor is a good one either. SWTOR does not have any kind of meaningful dark side/ lightside progression resulting in changes to abilities. The D20 system is used in Kotor for skills, giving it a more RPG feel. Every breath you take in SWTOR is on rails, and short ones at that.

People on this site hate SWTOR. that's the truth of it.

Way before it came out people here trashed it because EA were funding it.  Trashed it because Bioware were making it.  Trashed it because it wasn't going to be SWG 2.0.  These same people wish it dead because if that happened mystically the industry would be, 'better', and games they like would get produced,(?!).

You need to understand that this site has a strong vocal group of people who are, 'old timers'. They think MMOs should indulge their nostalgic fantasies regarding DAOC or SWG.  They hate the way the industry has gone and boy do they have to tell everyone about it.

SWTOR has plenty of problems which these people barely mention.  It's sheer existence is an insult to them.  If you looking for a more balanced view this isn't the place to find it.

I was one of SWTOR's biggest supporters before I bought and played it. I waited years from when it was first a rumour till release with great anticipation only to find it one of the biggest letdowns in all my years of gaming and that is since the days of the Atari 2600.

SWTOR does not deserve a high score as it has not earned it.

Originally posted by MurlockDance

As I have said elsewhere, there is one big flaw with ToR's development and that is the reliance on lots of VOs and cutscenes. Any new content, rather than game systems such as housing or player vendors let's say, will be expensive for them to produce, because they have to cutscene and VO every single quest. If they don't, I am sure players will notice and bitch.

Perhaps adding more game systems would cost less, but tacking on sandbox elements to a heavy themepark like ToR might not work out too well.

Yep, that one's been a concern of mine ever since I first heard of the game... how difficult it will be for them to expand on things given costs and availability of the voice actors.

In some ways they've already started skipping this, when I came back to the game I noticed that Section X's dailies were pretty much all pick up quests from some terminal, with no dialogues - something they've largely done in the Black Hole too.

It doesn't matter much since they are dailies, but still...

Here's to hoping Makeb will be awesome, and that it'll come out in March rather than June.

Originally posted by MurlockDance

Originally posted by FromHell

Yeah, the art direction is certainly "interesting" although they tried to be somehow like the old movie trilogy and put a little twist on the styles, but in my taste not enough. Sith Empire looks like the (Republic) Empire 3000 years in the future! What the hell?  "Republic" looks like the "Rebels" 3000 years in the future? They did not have enough balls to go: "Ok, how could the Star Wars universe and factions REALLY look like, 3000 years ago?", let´s create something completely unique, archaic, different, just with a hint on how the future will look like. So overall, the art direction seems scared and not "brave" enough

I did, but that didn´t make the game more diverse either. Only have one char, the other one is stuck somewhere between 20-30

Yes, I dislike GW2, in my opinion SWTOR and GW2 are the worst MMOs I´ve ever played

NPCs which have some sort of activity like populating cities, look around, the NPCs are stuck in 5 second time loops since release, almost no one moves, they are time frozen, like the troopers shooting from behind barriers forever on every planet

Speeders have no feeling of gravity, don´t feel dynamic, no g-forces, no acceleration, no sense of speed, it´s just a faster walk with a speeder mount animation. Completely lame, for Star Wars standards.

SSD and 8-core Xeon, every other MMO I play loads zones in about 5-10 seconds. SWTOR up to 30 seconds or more.

SWG2 is the synonym for a great Star Wars MMO we never got, if adding/fixing the problems mentioned above makes SWTOR SWG2, then so be it, yes I want SWG2

 

From most of these above replies, it is clear to me that ToR (and incidently GW2) are not your type of MMORPG. That is fine, not every game is likeable by everyone, but to rate ToR down because you expected it to be something that it is not is pretty harsh.

 

I love love LOVE this sentence, and I have read it two dozen times whenever someone has valid critizims.

So I expected speeders which are in some form similiar to what speeders are like in the movies? Yeah, harsh.

I expected suns setting on Tattooine, like the movies had, like SWG had? Yeah, harsh, different game.

I expected space combat not to be 1992 Starfox? To be at least of equal quality than 10 year old "Jump to Lightspeed", or 20 year old "X-Wing"? Yeah, harsh critizism.

I expected some sort of "life" on the planets, not randomly placed plastic troopers behaving like action figures in a toy park.

and so on. Yeah I want a different 200$ Dollar Star Wars MMO, put this game out of its misery, so another developer can get the license, give it to ANY developer, and do it quick.

It simply fell behind the industry standard, which is disappointing considering its budget. If you examine the game from a broader spectrum you can understand why it was forced to a F2P model in less than a year. After slumping down to a free to play status it lost even more of the player's faith by adopting an awfuly greedy and restrictive free to play model. It also doesn't help them that they are associated with EA, a company that supported SOPA.

If you're looking for online reviews posted on the internet about a company that hates the internet and everything that it stands for, then you should expect that anyone that said company sleeps with will also receive flak. I believe this is called common sense?

*Disclaimer* This is not a /pol/ arguement, this is a simple explanation.