How can one say that the game doesnt have replayability?  MikeB and mmorpg.com have put their heart and soul into ensuring that the market gets the message that this game is scored at an 8.7overall, and even its' (the game) Innovation that it brings to the market and the Longevity one should have with this "Massively'Multiplayer" game is an 8.

An 8 folks! An 8.  Thats on a scale of 1-10 as opposed to 1-100 the last time I checked.  Maybe I could be wrong, or someone else is. 

Originally posted by InFaVilla

Originally posted by TruthXHurts

Because computers are in every household, and the average person is an idiot.

Do you know for sure that the average IQ of the old MMORPG population was much higher than the average IQ of the current MMORPG population?

Yes, we know for sure.  Ad-Site reviews that are lead by and contributed-to by old women and entitlement folks that which post-vanilla wow was their first so called mmo give higher-ranked reviews to welfare-state game-play with single-player rpg's called mmo's of ~85, while the mainstream consumer market of mmo enthusiasts give the same products a 5.9 average score.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic

The dumbification of mmo's will probably rebound in the next couple years starting with GW2.

Originally posted by Cuathon

Originally posted by Khors

Originally posted by Cuathon

Originally posted by MMOExposed

The major complaint around here is that MMO are becoming easier and more casual.

well on the flip side of things, does making MMO more hardcore, actually make these games more successful?

taking WoW for example. MMO Champion did a sample size on the Fireland Raider population. it shows only a tiny percentage of the player base have completed HardMode Rag, and a small percentage beat normal Rag.

 

 

but word around here in WoW has become a Casual easy game, and has spread this Casual easy trend to new aged MMO.

But if the games are becoming easier, than why so few people can beat the contents.

 

this is when I have to question, what the MMORPG community consider to be "EASY"......

 

WoW has been the top MMORPG in the west, but it started dropping subs as they changed to cater more to the Hardcore community which been crying out. But it seem to have backlashed on Blizzard.

And I notice this same kinda crying out here from the MMORPG community. these Hardcore players as we call them, seem to be the vocal minority, which are driving the development of present and future MMO down hill.

People are not talking about artificially inflated raid difficulties man. They are talking about the game.

Right.

 

Im baffled by the op.

 

Hard mode instanced raiding that one washes repeats and does continuously over and over again has never been and will never be recognized as something similar to hardcore, let alone mmorpg enthusiast-like.

 

Reason why 50% of subscribers seem to leave a subscription-based mmorpg within the first few months has little to do with that and more to do with the realization that one is paying $15/month for what amounts to a lobby-system cooperative online rpg with very little to no content that resembles what a massively-multiplayer open and organic player-involved and influenced world should.

Finally someone agrees with me. I have been fighting the good fight for years but its so hard when no one else weighs in on your side.

Oh they're there.  The thing is that mmorpg.com mods and the establishment usually permanently bans their accounts, so there "appears" to be this casual soft-core themepark majority on forums when that isn't the case at all.

Originally posted by Cuathon

Originally posted by MMOExposed

The major complaint around here is that MMO are becoming easier and more casual.

well on the flip side of things, does making MMO more hardcore, actually make these games more successful?

taking WoW for example. MMO Champion did a sample size on the Fireland Raider population. it shows only a tiny percentage of the player base have completed HardMode Rag, and a small percentage beat normal Rag.

 

 

but word around here in WoW has become a Casual easy game, and has spread this Casual easy trend to new aged MMO.

But if the games are becoming easier, than why so few people can beat the contents.

 

this is when I have to question, what the MMORPG community consider to be "EASY"......

 

WoW has been the top MMORPG in the west, but it started dropping subs as they changed to cater more to the Hardcore community which been crying out. But it seem to have backlashed on Blizzard.

And I notice this same kinda crying out here from the MMORPG community. these Hardcore players as we call them, seem to be the vocal minority, which are driving the development of present and future MMO down hill.

People are not talking about artificially inflated raid difficulties man. They are talking about the game.

Right.

Im baffled by the op.

Hard mode instanced raiding that one washes repeats and does continuously over and over again has never been and will never be recognized as something similar to hardcore, let alone mmorpg enthusiast-like.

Reason why 50% of subscribers seem to leave a subscription-based mmorpg within the first few months has little to do with that and more to do with the realization that one is paying $15/month for what amounts to a lobby-system cooperative online rpg with very little to no content that resembles what a massively-multiplayer open and organic player-involved and influenced world should.

Where is League of Legends?!

Believe it or not, its far more entertaining than the afformentioned games.

The game feels like WoW, but extremely more confining and single-player-like, while my sword was replaced with a flashlight.

Bioware did a great job at Trolling the Ad Revenue reviewer and less intellectually disciplined into spending 15$/month for a single-player rpg. Kudos to them.  Though aren't there laws against taking advantage of the mentally handicapped?

SW:TOR.

This game and it's complete lack of Massively-Multiplayer elements in favor of single-player rpg elemets at $15/month just perpetuates the dumbification of the genre. 

Metacritic consumer reviews support that, though the reviewers that receive Ad Revenue would disagree.

http://www.indiegamethemovie.com/

IGTM participants are big gamers, supporters of gaming and individual developers.  There are sources that say that IGTM has been optioned for an HBO series.  I think if could be a very interesting one.  Seeing as how big studios are becoming less and less popular and trusted for gaming entertainment longevity for one reason or another, a series like this would not only continue to raise awareness of the trials of independent game creation but continue to re-direct attention away from the establishment studios that re-heat products and concepts while continuing to increase the respect and legitimacy of the Indie industry.

Its a trending indication of how appealing the game is to mmo enthusiasts, where you might see a high score from an advertising site for sake of maintaining revenue-stream, for example, real people that have an appreciation for Massively Multiplayer entertainment for $15/month aren't convinced.

What I've found is that players dont want to pay $15/month for a heavily isntanced single-player or cooperative-online rpg, which is why we've experienced mass exodus from these STO & SW:TOR types of games within the forst 3 months.

Your right that these gaming sites are out of touch.  Its more about the individual behind the curtain of the site that is out of touch, like MikeB, in most cases, vs the Market. One who guages a mmorpg by his first experience being WoW, without any intellectual depth about where mmorpg's came from or what should be valued within the context of traditional Massively-Multiplayer, people get false information with a dumbified impression that a product is entertainment-worthy when it actually falls-short.

This site isn't alone in their mis-representation of products, but a clear example of their review impressions being on the losing-end of audience appeal who are interested in these types of products.  One who can seriously infer that SW:TOR is innovative as a subscription-based mmorpg is soon recognized for what they are; ill-informed and lacking credibility.

Im perplexed at the question of the article in context to what was delivered.  The OP's origonal thought is backwards imho.  The elephant in the room is the lack of acknowledgement that this is a single-player rpg/corpg and giving it passing grade as a subscription-based mmo. 

The origonal question should remain how to improve this game as a mmorpg first, but by trying to address this bolt-on pathetically deliverd arena third-person shooter pvp while making belive fixing PvP should take foreground conversation is silly.

What did you expect from a cinematic single-player rpg studio in terms of pvp, let alone mmo.  Now some are going to spend the next year "hoping" the game turns into what it will never be. . .like STO all over again, and again.

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by ctacconi21

bye dude have fun on gw2

Don't tease :(

Seriously...dont tease.

Bad enough I cant get my hands on GW2 yet. . .what might be worse is folks actually paying $15/month for a single-player RPG. . .aka TOR.

Bah...to each their own.  As TOR is almost as shallow a supposed mmo as STO, it should be buy-to-play, at a minimum, but I feel uncomfortable even saying that when GW2 will be buy-to-play with 100-fold more mmorpg content at their launch than TOR has today.

Originally posted by acidworm

Originally posted by Ponico

SWTOR is CRAP

STO is CRAP

 

There, fixed.

In support of both games being crap, this is supported by the consumers thinking both are crap as seen by the metacritic score of consumers @ STO and TOR here: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-trek-online

and TOR here http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic

. . .but for some odd reason, reviews from sites that have lost credibility, like mmorpg.com, have still scored TOR with a passing grade, though it is an expensive, though shallow, $15/month single-player rpg.

7086

Ok. I'll book-mark it. Will probably sit in my book marks for the next 2-years as I occasionally follow the progress. 

This is great information, Chel, and thanks for shariing.

Everyone should be scratching their heads as to how ANet can privide so much more PvE and PvP entertaining massively-multiplayer mmorpg content, which they will, compared to most falsely advertised subscrption-based mmorpgs, but as a buy-to-play model.

For those that are familiar with ANet, already know the answer.  But many more with this information are hopefully more inclined to begin questioning and researching it.

A great game commith.

The game, TOR, would be better received if it were priced as a CORPG, since that is what it is at its' most glorious level, and a single-player rpg at its' most shallow.

As others will admit to, other than a paid advertising site, is the reason that these questions are being raised continuously is due to the rapid decline in in-game population due to $15/month in a week, for what esentially amounts to a single-player rpg or corpg.

So yes....I do think that even though TOR will bleed subs profusely, Bioware would have had more credibility by merchandising it, the game, as what it is with content purchases as opposed to whoring the Bioware name and promising a mmorpg, which is something that wasn't delivered.  It was fabulously successful with ANet, but with Bioware, they will falter.