Originally posted by Jason2444

God I love the MMO community

 

You all want to be part of the next big MMO SO BAD that no matter what a company does, you'll defend them because you want your MMO to have more players than someone elses MMO

 

Look up cognative dissonance and brand loyalty. Sound familiar?

Perhaps you should review what my opinion actually is of TOR before making an assumption on my point of view.

And I don't see how cognitive dissonance has anything to do with this. I don't feel particularly conflicted on my opinions.

And as for brand loyalty, I again say you really should review what my opinion actually is.

Conclusions are a bad thing to make when you have no logic to base it on.

EDIT: And to Clock.

The main difference is the context. One is on a public forum specifically regulated and screened, the other is on a guild chat where only a finite amount of people operating on a somewhat friendly basis should and could be interacting.

Honeslty I think both places are terrible ones to be making bad jokes in poor taste on, especially if it's one that can be interpreted if taken flatly as breaking a signed agreement, law, etc.

Like another person said, you can't expect a corporate entity to have a sense of humor. They have to take things as they are written lest something get overlooked as they are liable for it.

Originally posted by Drakxii

Your only as good as your last game, car, book, etc..  

 

Also while one team doesn't equal a whole company, EA and their managers and QA did approve that game.   Since they are offically "proud" of DA2 and have bacily posted that anyone that doesn't like just doesn't "get" it, this is their new standard of quaility.   So till they come out and say that DA2 was below their standards and promise to make better games, I don't expect any game to come of EAware to be up to the standards I that I expected of Bioware before they sold out.

I don't care what EA says on that front. I do care what Bioware has published themselves about their opinion on DA2 and their work on DA3 though.

For that matter. You know what my opinion of DA2 was?

I didn't buy the game. 

I knew it wasn't going to be a game I could enjoy as much as other ones and I didn't like the way they built the game to rehash the same content multiple times over. So I didn't buy the game.

I didn't sit around complaining about it. I didn't buy it and then rant my head off on the forum about these issues. I did my due diligence on reviewing what they had told me that game was like before hand and came to a decision on as informed a topic as I could.

Likewise with SWTOR. I put due diligence into knowing what the game was going to be and what was generally happeing with the game as the company had ifnormed me and I came to a conclusion on it.

Now in the case of TOR I did buy the game. I perfectly well knew what I was paying for and I perfectly well know what I have and am getting out of the game.

I can not fault a company for being honest about their products. Feel free to rail on EA for their dumb tactics and actions, but they are not the developers. What they say, unless they enforce a strongarm on the company contractually, does not translate to what the developers themselves say.

And like I said, certainy their last games haven't been as good as people want. Then do the sane thing and reach that conclusion from an informed point of view that lets you do something about it.

And likewise, look at what the developers themselves are saying and, more importantly, doing with their next project (or in the case of TOR, their updates).

Originally posted by Clocksimus

Actually he did not break the TOS. Why? He is older than 13 maybe? No where in the TOS does it say you are not allowed to make a joke, that inflicts no harm or grief on anyone.  Unless you can somehow link "I'm 12" to being verbal abuse towards another player.  This argument holds no solidity at all.  Read the TOS and you see that it states "TOR accounts will not be allowed for minors under 13 years of age, regardless of premission and/or registration by parent or guardian."

 

Since the account in question does not belong to someone under 13.... He was wrongly banned.

After saying explicitly that he was under 13 on the forum.

You forgot that part again.

EDIT: And context goes a long way in these kinds of issues, Headphones.

Originally posted by Sideras

For a company who released some of the best titles ever to fail this miserably it's pretty fair. Not to mention Dragon Age 2. Only good team they have left is the Mass Effect team.

Not really.

Dissapointment is certainly a valid response. But to label the entire company as suddenly becoming the worst is both non sequitur logic and an entirely biased opinion that banks on a quantifiably small portion of their performance record.

Yes, it says they're maeesin' some stuff up at present, but perhaps one should see what else they are doing and assess the company as a whole instead of determingin an entire world view on a segment of something?

It's like that story of the blind men and the elephant. :p

He did one of those mindless 'I'm X years old' internet jokes, it got screened and he got banned because of a dumb joke.

Being harsh I have to say he should have been banned for the terrible joke.

Being fair I have to say he should just appeal the ban.

It is certainly jumpy of them to skip to a permaban, but it's completely within the realm of maintaining caution over the userbase. I'd assume any sane person would find that understandable.

That being said. They are only a section of Bioware and do not represent the company as a whole. The facility itself was setup for the development and operation of the game with people that are new to MMOs and backed by a publisher that proves it's strategies less than stellar...well...most of the time.

Stop mindlessly bashing an antire company and people won't bash your misinformed opinion?

And Tera is one after how many other makes on UE3?

And also how many people are in an area in Tera?

Not to unduly rail on the game, but I also said as much when I pointed out that Mortal Online had other issues that were devloper specific.

By no means do I disagree with you, but I'd rather paint a full picture on the issue.

EDIT: And also wanted to say that AA stated it was switching to cryengine 3. It's not a piecemeal conversion (which is also kinda hard or potentially impossible to do between game engines, even if from the same developers).

Originally posted by skyexile

Vanu is better, fact.

Fixed!

But seriously. Yes, three faction gameplay is both better than two faction, but also suffers it's own issues.

...'now'?

Uh...I guess I should say welcome to the party. I just turn it off.

Originally posted by Chivalry1978

I have to disagree about ur3 in dcuo I was in a massive pvp battle in the open world while npc were also fighting and I didnt really suffer any kind of issues. There must have been over 80 players battling each other as well as dealing with hostile mobs fighting as well and it ran smooth as silk.

DCUO was done by Sony.

Sony also made MAG using UE3.

Sony rewrote the networking layer of the UE3 engine themselves. They refuse to share that code with Epic Games because Epic refused to co-develop the project to rewrite the networking layer.

Good luck getting that code.

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by Deivos

Originally posted by stayontarget

I hear good things from Red Engine and of course UE3 is good also.

No....

For an MMO UE3 is not.

Nor is REDengine for that matter.

 

Neither of those were written to handle themselves as an MMO, and the UE3 engine has proven that fact in real attempt.

 

Well than what's a good Mmorpg engine?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Since WoW engine code isn't available to non Blizzard games. What can other developers use that is just as good?

Well first you have to understand why I say both of those are bad engines for MMOs.

Namely it's the networking layer. It's something that caused a good bit of a kerfuffel about the Unreal 3 engine between Sony and Epic Games.

The networking layer as it is built for the UE3 engine (and REDengine) are not designed for large scale multiplayer activity. It's wahy you see most the MMOs built on that platform done as instance/lobby type games that aren't really MMOs.

Epic Games solution is to create a secondary layer for the network (Atlas) that sits over and plugs into the engine, and it's trials being done to Mortal Online and the issues thay've had can be seen as a direct correlation to the stability of it (not to mention the other issues like writing the game in kismet). They stacked an additional tool onto the system in order to accomodate more players and that means it's extra processes being wasted, more stability issues, and more latency issues.

The REDengine from what I read so far sounded like an engine built for single player games, so I have to read more to find out if it even has a networking layer.

To have a decent MMO engine you need one that can handle the differences for communication between server and client and actually natively deal with the intended player count, otherwise you have to go in and replace the code yourself or make a workaround or hackneyed solution.

Originally posted by Thorqemada

Is there already a MMO life that uses CryEngine3 for it ?

Archeage and a few other eastern MMOs are developing on Cryengine 3.

Originally posted by stayontarget

I hear good things from Red Engine and of course UE3 is good also.

No....

For an MMO UE3 is not.

Nor is REDengine for that matter.

Neither of those were written to handle themselves as an MMO, and the UE3 engine has proven that fact in real attempt.

Originally posted by forest-nl

 

---

Originally posted by DukeTyrion
The 'new' MMOs are catering for the 'new' MMO players, and they are doing it well.
 
Many new MMO player want things quickly and easily. They want fast levelling, they want Looking for Dungeon tools to match them, they want easy access to Epics (even if not top level Epics) and they want instant travelling. That's all fine, there are games there that serve them well and many more on the way that seem to be copying that formula.
 
However, there are a great many MMO players that want something different. That want to travel the lands, that actually enjoy arranging groups, and that want a nice drop they find at level 20 to be worth holding onto because they will use it for a while, not replace it with a 'green' in 30 minutes game time.
 
I really think it's time one of the MMO developers start to realise they have 2 very different fan bases on their hands, and rather than try and cater to both, they need to actually create 2 different games. The WoW / Rift / SW:TOR crowd can then go along their way, whilst those looking for something a bit deeper (Everquest / DAoC / EVE) can also find their own challenge.
 
I am not trying to say either way is better, I am just trying to say we all have a very different idea of what makes an enjoyable game and I am really hoping that one of the latter type appears on the horizon soon. It might even surprise the company that takes the plunge at quite how popular it would be.

---

 

Darkfall a superb sandbox game had all of this but you all trashed the game even before it started endlessly and many still do.

So dont come here and say you want a game that offers what Darkfall already have. and also dont come with pvp and full loot or community becouse you mentioned EVE and community Darkfall is lightyears ahead alot more friendly and helping then majority of these themepark games.

Btw the community who want hardcore back is very small only starter indie developers will try create such games. But when they create a game like that you all start whining its way to hardcore to long travel to much grind or no hold hands lol.

And don't look to soundboard your complaints aganst something that has little to none to do with your rant.

In the same line they mentioned EVE they also listed DAoC and Everquest. It's apparent they aren't talking about strict PvP, full loot, etc stuff. 'Hardcore' maybe, but you're defaulting to a very specific form and implementation that was not specified.

Take a chill pill and reasses the conversation. :p

I take it you didn't actively read the novels, comics, or other media?

Y'know the strangest thing for me is that I've really been enjoying this game.

Which I really find weird given the amount of time I've spent before stating my disfavor of games that have the same basic gameplay that tor uses. Makes me feel somewhat hypocritical because I still don't like that gameplay style.

I definitely chalk that up to a better interactive experience.

Well, that and the agent class both looks and plays well. Much prettier than the smuggler. Too bad I have to work with the sith though. >_>

Like how it has been restated multiple times, and even by EA in that quote I gave from the article YOU posted. You get billed at the start of a new billing cycle, when you pay for a sub you aren't paying upfront you are flagging it to be paid on a schedule.

Like they said. 'you will not actually be billed until your free 30 days are up, at which point, you can cancel the sub before your credit card is billed'

Seriously, if you've played MMOs this long you should know this by now.

EDIT: Also I have commented in the other threads. They've been getting paired down as such.

Oh dear lord.

I can't help it if you you lie Azaria. That's not my problem.

Don't start throwing out debate argument comments like 'burden of proof' as if that provides an intellectual high ground on something. And no true scotsman uses that arbitrary claim of authority 'those of us'.

How about I make an appeal to popularity then? Most people, even those claiming a history of MMO gaming, are claiming this is normal. Majority vote says you're wrong.

I'd be happy to provide a source that lists the history of the way subscriptions worked for each MMO if such a thing existed, but the best I can personally offfer at the time is my firsthand experience, as others have provided.

Also need to correct you that if you cancel your TOR sub before the free time runs out, it doesn't bar your access to the free game time. It runs to the end of the given time to where it would launch the next billing cycle and terminates there.

EDIT: Also have to note how most of us have also pointed out how games like WoW and EVE have changed specifically to doing that post release date. Like in the case of WoW it's because they added an unlimited free trial period a while back now.

Trying to take what eveyrone else has said and ad-lib the opposing argument into it doesn't work well in this case Azaria.

Originally posted by Azaria

http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/bioware-mmo-project/1215364p1.html

Its not illigal but its not ordianry or ethical. This is highly out of the oridiary.

Funny, the comments there are filled with  'That's normal.'

The article even says

'EA quickly points out that this is standard MMO business, and you will not actually be billed until your free 30 days are up, at which point, you can cancel the sub before your credit card is billed.'

XD 

And I repeat myself.

If he gets it, then there's no reason he should be throwing a hissy fit.

There has to be something that he's fundamentally rejecting or can't agree with that cuases him ro react as such. Otherwise he simply has no self control.

And that is hardly any better.