Originally posted by Avathos

Planetside 2 and The Secret World are 3 factions

And so is Dominus.  3 games, though Dominus is more Sandparky than the other 2, that might do quite well.  http://www.dominusthegame.com/

I'd include Dominus on that list; http://www.dominusthegame.com/

Originally posted by wormywyrm

If it makes you feel any better, SWTOR and Rift share a similar fate, the fate of LOTRO and NGE SWG and any other MMO that sought after the casual gamer base.  But these games can survive as LOTRO has shown it is doing well :-)

There is something to be acknowledged here.  Rift is by far a more superior massively-multiplayer game that encourages community involvement and commeraderie around an open environment effect with their game-play features.  That while TOR is undoubtedly a single-player game with a multi-user component for cooperative small-party instanced play with a rich cinematic feature.

Neither game is going to die, however, the casual gamer community should be rejoicing with what they have access to, while we've watched 60-70% of the remaining subscriber base leave said games 3-6 months post launch out of sheer boredom and bewilderment as to why their paying $15/month for something so rudimentary.

Originally posted by Storman1977

I was a huge fan of SWG...and then they did the NGE and ruined months of work on becoming a Jedi.  After NGE, I gave up. 

Look at it this way; now everyone's a winner with TOR welfare game-play entitlements. Bright-side, right?

I've found that League of Legends does it best. Non-stat gain shop where you can delight in skins and additional build slots.  And its one of the greatest success stories in on-line gaming as a result.

Originally posted by free2play

MMOs are pay to play. They are called cash shop MMOs. It's free to watch but try and do anything and you spend upwards of $2/ hr.

They get to send spam to our junkmail, say they have millions of subscribers but most people only play them for a few days at most.

Guess this is where I step-in to bring up ArenaNet and a buy-to-play model of rich content without the pay-to-win cash-shop.

Wrong is wrong, though most mmo consumers don't know that.

Choice does not matter in this game, really, other than from a humerous and entertaining single-player /character build story standpoint. For a cinematic rpg, that's great.

I would like to have more plot, story and game-play features, consequence and unique rewards that distinguish me from a massively-multiplayer standpoint as a Republic Character that makes dark choices, though.

Originally posted by white_wolf22

I've heard a lot of people complain that this game lacks group content or it isn't an MMO.  I have to ask, are we playing the same game? I really don't understand this complaint, because I have grouped more in this game than I have in any MMO I've played.  For instance, today I spent about an hour doing heroic quests with a random group of people.  Speaking of heroics, I think they are much better done than the group quests in other MMOs I've played before. They almost feel like mini dungeons.  So why are people complaning about lack of group content?

I have never heard anyone say it doesnt have group content, but TOR doesn't have enough massively multiplayer content and features to make it a mmorpg; its' emphasis is that of a a solo rpg / cooperative online rpg, not a massively multiplayer game.  That I've heard.

The only feature today is being able to host 100's of players simultaneously on a server cluster as those players complete single-player quests while shouting in chat "lfg for a 4-player instance"; having 95% of conent that is single-player and cooperative play doesn't make for massively-multiplayer; a term coined by Richard Garriott, the creator of Ultima Online in 1997.  And a term that has been dumbed-down since then by other publishers to gain more attention for their deceptively simple single-player / multi-user / corpg game-play products.

As with other developers with misleadingly promoted supposed mmo's, and written about by the less intellectualy honest, Bioware’s interpretation of massively-multiplayer is not about community-centric and community encouraged and reliant large-scale engaging, interactive, cooperative and competitive organic game-play, it is not about the massively-multipler factional struggle of the Empire Community vs the Republic Community with features that encourage community incentivised cooperative game-play, but about being in a way-station lobby with our avatars “looking” for another 3 players to play along-side with for a 4-person instanced flashpoint against artificial intelligence.

Bioware hasn't demonstrated keystone massively-multiplayer elements, unless it is mingling in a lobby with 50 other players or placing a crafted item on a auction house that is undermined by single-player PvE drops.  It isnt world pvp either, aside from giving one the impression that their worldly factional conflict is WoW’s instanced Wintergrap 2.0.

I like the idea of Necro. :)

Originally posted by Margulis

There was another topic about this here but it got locked for whatever reason - so I'm bringing this one over.  I think this is one of the biggest problems with SWTOR right now and it doesn't seem to be getting the attention it deserves. The simple fact that the world just FEELS lifeless and static. Let me give a few examples:

1. Cities and social hubs - Running through these feels like a library or graveyard, not a bustling hub of activity.

2. Mobs - A very high percentage of mobs just stand in place.

3. Critters / world creatures - Where are they? It's something you don't even really notice till they aren't there, but this game is severely lacking in them.

4. Music / sound effects - There are large amounts of time with no music, which I think should be increased.

All of this combined = a very static and lifeless world.

The argument that "this is how all mmo's are" doesn't work at all, as many AAA mmo's over the last 5-8 years have had great ambient atmosphere, npc acitivty, npc conversations, and lots of creatures running around. 

Hopefully Bioware addresses this.

What you mentioned is not how mmo's are.  This is why that TOR is largely considered a single-player / cooperative online rpg; not a "massively multiplayer"game.

It will not be addressed by Bioware. It would take another 5-years to turn this skeleton into a mmo.

Its a game, man. Its not even a PvP game, so any correlation to that which makes any point utilizing it (pvp) a moot one.  Just be appreciative that there is another quality game on the market and go with it.

Originally posted by Ozmodan

This is funny, I bought this game for my niece and already have a pre load notice, but she won't get the game until xmas on the 25th.

Pre-load her and get a name and server that you think she'd like :)

Dont care.  Im glad TOR launched.  it is not a pvp game, never will be.

We have, we have, we have....promise, promise, promise.  Time is up...what you see is what you get.  Do not bet on futures.  It never works out, and this kind of false anticipation just ends in tears.

Just be happy the game launched.

Pre-tram Ultima Online has to be on every sandbox list.  Come to think of it, there would be no mmorpg.com if it weren't for Richard Garriott, who coined the term.

Originally posted by tixylix

to me it was clearly made by someone who hadn't played most of these MMOs and gave no info of what each MMO did differently really. It was just boring to watch, I could have just read it on Wiki or a forum..

Not sure about that, but there is a clear disconnect and clear remiss of the de-evolution or dumbing down of mmo's from UO -> EQ -> WOW ->SWTOR.  From massively-multiplayer games being massively-multiplayer in a single persistent world, with more open-world and community-centric organic content & rich features, to being single / cooperative online role-playing with heavily instanced redundantly confining maps and inorganic content with limited features.

Todays so-called mmorpg's, a term first introduced and coined by Richard Garriott with Ultima Online, are nothing more than inorgaic repetitive cooperative online multiplayer games that are void of player interactivity, influence and replayability.

Originally posted by Lobotomist

Its because in Skyrim we see natural evolution of games : Daggerfal -> Morrowind -> Oblivion ->Skyrim

While in MMO we are seeing de-evolution : UO -> EQ -> WOW ->SWTOR

Excellent perspective.  From massively-multiplayer games being massively-multiplayer with more open-world and community-centric organic content & rich features, to being single / cooperative online role-playing with heavily instanced redundantly confining maps and inorganic content with limited features.

OP...run away from TOR. Based on "your" likes and dislikes, and knowing that PvP is probably horrid and lacks no replay value compared to WoW or Rift, and seeing as though you really disliked Rift, there is probably a 0.0 chance you'll have any appreciation for TOR.

Nice.  Hope it gets on steam soon. I'd like to get this as part of my familiarization with the mmo.

Originally posted by Paragus1

I think the timeless problem with MMO's that are made through this theme park type formula is that developers will never be able to create and launch content at a speed faster than players can consume it.  It's not a knock at this game specifically, it's just the reality.   If subscribers get through the content and constantly find themselves waiting for the next content to come out, there is a high likelyhood people will get bored and lose interest.  I'm not sure I believe that somehow "this game will be different" in this regard because it has never been the case with any game to date using this formula.

Absolutely right. Which is why the fact of the matter is that most people do not have fun repeatedly doing similar content over and over and over again.  Evident by ~60-80% of origonal box purchasers to past themepark mmorpgs not re-subbing 3-6months post launch.

Lets see if the content does transcend that of a single-player or redundantly played third-person shooter.  Many are skeptical, but we'll see if this subscription-based cinematic story themepark online game "retains" more of their audience at the 3, 6, and 12-month mark. 

So, yea, I hope massively-multiplayer content is pushed through regularly.