I enjoyed the original greatly, although part of the charm was the character models.  I'll give it a look at least.

Oh, and for those bitching about it being linked to FB, if you're that concerned about what people might think of you because you play a game, well, maybe it's time to find a new hobby.

Nope, there is no lore really.  They just exist.  Kind of dumb if you ask me, but doesn't make the game less fun.

Just go the Order and Chaos Online route.  They're just there.

Originally posted by Vyeth

Since they, themselves, have become a full blown genre (which does not make them MMORPG's, as the name of the site suggests) the developers of this site should do what they have done for other genre's and make a site seperate from this with nothing but news and information about those games..

OR, they could even include them on RTSGuru.com, being that they resemble those a little more closely than mmorpg's.. (With the exception of ones that do not have the traditional control, like LOCO online)

This is definitely the best suggestion here.

I dislike the fact that the game isn't out yet, so there's no way for me to know if I dislike it yet.

Second review in a row where this particular writer lowers the score from a previous review while praising the improvements to the game since the last review.  What I've gathered from this: Ignore all future reviews by this writer.

Originally posted by Osmanthus

Eh, maybe if open beta "testers" actually tested the game instead of using it as a glorified free trial, I might agree with you.

Lol. You are clearly not an experienced MMO beta tester.  I have done a few dozen betas and there is one common thread of all MMO betas: the developers never listen to beta feedback.  Oh, sometimes it appears that way because the stuff the devs talk about and fix do correlate to actual things beta testers find.  However, this is basically a hoax.  The actual developers do what they feel like and the PR guys we call the 'Devs' try to paste logic onto the results.    

It is an absolute rule of beta testing that at some point an announcement will be made that the developers hear the testers complaints and this next release will fix it all, and then it will go on to list a bunch of stuff not one beta tester ever reported: meanwhile egregious problems reported from day one will linger from alpha to beta, beta to release.

TL;DR it is not beta testers fault that betas don't improve gameplay, the developers do not listen

http://www.mmorpg.com/showFeature.cfm/loadFeature/5332/Why-Youre-Not-a-Beta-Tester.html

Originally posted by romanator0

Originally posted by Kyleran

Open betas today are largely a marketing tool to generate player interest in an MMO.  TOR needs no such thing, millions will pay them the box price sight unseen to give the game a go and they know it. 

Eventually there will be a free trial, you might want to wait until then.

As a consumer I would want to try the game before I buy to make sure that the devs delivered on all their promises or even to see if I end up liking the game.

Sure they developers can make a lot of money from people who are dead set on buying the game whether its good or not, but I don't want a developer to make money off of their game if it ends up being utter shit.

No open beta = good for developers.

Open beta = good for consumers.

Games are for the consumers. I'm very skeptical of a developer who decides not to use a tool that most others use that puts more power in the players' hands.

Yes, I'm sure not having a free trial period before launch will keep them from selling several million copies of one of the most hyped games since WoW . . .

Originally posted by coxyroxy

open betas are aways nice tho :0

Eh, maybe if open beta "testers" actually tested the game instead of using it as a glorified free trial, I might agree with you.

Originally posted by cukimunga

Another reason why I think it has nothing to do with LA is there is another Star Wars MMO out there. Granted its geared for kids but still wouldn't you think LA would have tried to shut down SWG for that if what you suggest is true?

Play Clone Wars, then come back and look at that quote again.  It's a lobby of multiplayer games completely designed for kids, not an MMO, and in no way a competitor to SWTOR.

Lucasarts only cares about profit.  They, and Lucas himself, stopped caring about the core IP years ago, and now they will do anything they can to monetize it.  Shit, Phantom Menace is being re-released in 3D.  Star Wars is all about making a buck, so why have a divided player base between 2 Star Wars games?  Was a very simple decision for them, I'm sure.

Originally posted by Dewm

 

There is a thread up that started talking about a game, and it quickly moved into microtransactions. And I guess I was wondering what most of you thought about it?

 

I personly don't like it, I think its cheating and just a bad idea in general, but on the otherhand I think that its good business sense. But I do long for the days when it was just a 13.99/mo sub fee.

Great, because we need, like, 50 more topics started about how much people hate paying for games.

Originally posted by Kalay

Originally posted by zeowyrm

Originally posted by Kalay

Originally posted by zeowyrm

{mod edit}

Did you read the rest of my post?  That is not my only concern with the "City Of Heroes Freedom".

{mod edit}

Hey I guess it doesn't bother you when your stuff goes trashy.   NP.  Bugs the piss out of me.

If you were right, then yeah, you'd have a leg to stand on.  Come back 6 months after the change and bitch about it, then you might make sense.  Having been through 3 of these changeovers, I can safely say that going freemium has not hurt these games, and has, in fact, improved them.  And considering this is just one of the 3 games changing over to freemium this year, I can't be the only one who thinks so.

Originally posted by Chaotic16

Originally posted by zeowyrm

Originally posted by madroxy

World of Warcraft is #1 by about 10 million players world wide. Now begins the flammmiinnnggg.

Do you one better.  Look up how many active accounts Farmville has . . .

That's not an MMORPG nor a game. 

It is a game, in as much as any kind of simulation game is a game.  As for being an MMO, neither is WoW.  Fortunately, the OP was not specific.

Would also like to add, I think this is the first time this site has re-reviewed a game and given it a much lower score.

I would heartily recommend LOTRO, but keep in mind that it's not overly sandbox.  I duo it with my wife all the time.  

Originally posted by BillMurphy
Hey folks. I just wanted to chime in remind everyone that Lori's opinion is her own and she's entitled to it. When you say to review a game for what it is, we do. But what something is can and will be different for just about anyone.

We are announcing a brand new system for our reviews in July that will hopefully help us all clarify our thoughts in a numerical fashion easier.

That's all well and good, but that doesn't change the fact that, according to her review, it should have been 7.5-8.5 and she graded it a 6.5.  Now, I've read many reviews where a game gets a higher score then the review itself suggests, but to outright say she'd grade it 7.5-8.5 for kids, and then post a different score is just sloppy, on the editor's end as well.

Originally posted by madroxy

World of Warcraft is #1 by about 10 million players world wide. Now begins the flammmiinnnggg.

Do you one better.  Look up how many active accounts Farmville has . . .

If you're not having fun, do something else.  Pretty simple concept if you ask me.

Originally posted by Mimzel

Im sorry, but I have a feeling that some of the advocates here for f2p models arent really grasping something quite essential that is happening these days: New F2P MMORPGs are NOT the games that were previously P2P and went "free" to play. It's a whole BUNCH of games that were made to accommodate the F2P model from the ground up. Lotro has a rich storyline, and it has depth. I still find it booring, but that's me and it's a matter of taste. It going F2P has nothing to do with me not playing it. I am currently playing a lil of D&DO, and Im quite enjoying myself. I have of course subscribed so I dont have to have my GAMING experience be hindered by those pot holes in the road they've made for freebies. It still irritates me that spell point pots ("manapots") are rarely found in dungeons and you end up still having to buy them from the cash shop even after you subscribe.

What I am asking in my OP isnt really so much having previously P2P games going F2P. Most of the ones mentioned in this thread are hybrid, and you can subscribe. What I am asking is if you really want the new generation of MMORPGs that are made from the ground up as a F2P. Pot holes and all. If you really want this, then I'm getting the hell out of this litterbox.

It comes down to choice.  Do you want to invest time, or money.  You favor time, while the F2P proponents favor money.