Originally posted by OkhamsRazor

To me Rift while far from perfect is the only mmo worth paying a regular monthly sub for these days

+1

Originally posted by Judasace

 

DCUO has a different feel alright...It feels like SoE is grabbing me by the hair, bending me over and violating my personal space in a very impolite manner.

Other "feelings"...

Bugs go unfixed for months

Limited content (3 - 4 days of play time TOPS)

Charging for extra raids/powers when the content is so limited and the game has only been out 8 months

Not releasing promised content updates, which was their whole basis for charging a sub fee.

 

Sorry, but the whole game is a con job. If it was F2P it might be something to spend a little on and mess around in the DCU, but to have a box price and sub fee that's the same as AAA MMOs that are much better from both a technical and content point of view?

No thanks.

 This. In short I liked the game and would of stayed with it if SOE wouldn't insist on being a POS company.

by Gibbonici "True, the game was far from perfect before the CU and NGE, but it only needed fixing and fleshing out, not tearing to pieces and rebuilt as something completely different."

Except it was obviouse that SOE didn't have any idea how to fix SWG. One of the biggest problems with SOE is that they are horrible at identifying and prioritizing what needs to be fixed and how to do so with the least disruption to their player base.

Originally posted by Malcanis

Originally posted by Gdemami

Only people on internet forums care if the game is 'sandbox' or 'themepark', anyone else just play a game they find fun and worth their time/money...

God dambit, you condensed my 200 word post into a single sentence.

I hate you!

 Except it'd not true. Others might not use the same labels or analyze theire playing experience, but they still have preferences. As such asking if there are enough people that enjoy the sandbox experience is a valid question.

Originally posted by Baikal

 

---

Originally posted by demiqus
Not to mention that in the lore itself , there is only ever 2 sith : a master and apprentice . No more, no less. So the idea that you could have loads of sith with light sabers running around , while obviously a wet dream to some , is a non starter.

---

 I laughed, that's pretty funny.

The fact that there are only 2 Sith is not part of the "lore." The Sith were an actual civilization. The statement that you are referring to was an acknowledgement of cause and effect. The identification that if there is one Sith there must be other Sith to teach him.

Originally posted by stayontarget

Originally posted by deadhope

Cool. If you want mounts, go play World of Warcraft, Guild Wars is mainly a PvP game. ( Hence Guild Wars name )

Whaatt ? 

GW2 is mainly a pvp game ?  disregard the fact that GW2 does not have owpvp ?

 that's because it's focus is guild to guild PVP. Not all PVP is centered around ganking noobs

Originally posted by Alot

*Cough* I don't see why some people are so dead set ON mounts. There are hundreds of MMORPGs out there WITH mounts.

 I don't see anyone dead set against mounts; I mean I don't think that anyone isn't going to play the game if they have mounts. People just think it's a waste of dev time becuase it's not needed.

Originally posted by mmogawd

There is perfectly good reason to have mounts in this game... People want them. 

 that in of it's self isn't a good reason; devs have to balance demand with their resources and it aeems pretty obvious that as long as there is some form of fast travel that the people who won't play/like the game due to lack of mounts is an insignificant minority.

EQ

Originally posted by firefly2003

Originally posted by SaintViktor

It still amazed me that people still think this game will get millions. Pesonally, I thnk it will be lucky to have a  million, maybe a million and a half. I don't think it is going to revolutionize anything considering there is nothing revolutionary about it. SWG never had millions of Starwars fans go play a Starwars game before, why would they do so now ? Just alot of hype, nothing more.

SWG never had millions due to at the time not everyone had a pc as they were still out of the reach price wise, then you had to have a decent to great rig to play the game, then internet back at the time was not great either with plenty still using dial-up , and finally just because it was a Star Wars game and your right on with this statement "SWG never had millions of Starwars fans go play a Starwars game before, why would they do so now ?" There are people out there that like Star Wars but don't like gaming in general, so why is TOR so different that people will just drop whatever their doing and play TOR cause it's Star Wars is the question to all the rabid TOR fans out there?

SWG didn't come out that long before WOW and WOW did fine reguardless of computer limitations. The reason SWG didn't do well is that it had a horrible launch, the game was barely reminisant of Starwars, the game was buggie,  and SOE kept jerking the player base back and forth with nerphs/changes long before NEG.

As for Saints statement SWG may not of had millions of players at one time, but that was due to lack of player longivity. SWG certainly had millions of people who played the game even with the very public critism of the games launch and poor managment.

All that being said Firefly's general assumption I think is correct that a decade ago simply wasn't the base of players willing to play an MMO. It had taken WOW some time to build their numbers into the millions as well. Today however there is more cross over gaming, MMOs/computer gaming is more socially acceptable, and computers are a bigger part of peoples lives. So it should actually be easier for a game to reach that level of success, but that doesn't mean that a any POS game can do it. It'll take a game with a large pre-following that delivers in content and quality.

Champions online

Prototype

Dragon Age 2

Back to the future the game

Originally posted by TUX426

I won't argue your points, they're both valid. But that's surely not where their errors ended. Hell, had they even just been on top of the exploits from day-1, they'd probably have twice as many players still playing (if not more).

 yup, exploits and bugs is why I stopped playing. Actually more to the point, SOE's failure to address exploits and bugs. I actually liked the game and would of continued to played if SOE hadn't been typical SOE and make throwing more crap a priority over fixing the problems that the game has.

Originally posted by Fibbin

Originally posted by Furor

You people never get why wow was such a huge hit. I mean even today you guys cant figure out what makes themepark mmo like wow so successful. If you had taken a look over at blizzard forum, many many playerbase are adults playing with their families, friends co workers. Those players who have hold a full time job enjoys running dungeons in wow for 3-4 hours a day makes up majority of player base. Those kind of players enjoy the factors knowing that there is fun doing wow quests, runnin dailies for couple hours of their time is warrant enough to stay subcribed to world of warcraft. Make no mistake themepark mmo isnt going to die any time soon, especially it is catering toward players who have a professional life to deal with that is the majority of wow playerbase.Blizzard caters to these type of people or consumer.

 

Sandbox will not be able to compete against themepark due to requiring a players imagination, time consuming.

People just want to log on into a themepark mmo to be able to accomplish progression of their characters with few hours a day and not coming home to do what was required of sandbox games. Sandbox games are niche market now and always forever. Stop being confused as to why wow is such a successful themepark mmo compare to all the games out there. the explanation is on top of this thread. You need to know why sandbox wont have as much impact as a themepark mmo does.

What WoW did was eliminate a lot of timesinks while still keeping some. This allowed you to have more fun when you logged in.

It had low requirements

It was building on a successful existing IP.

It was made by a company that had nothing but successful titles behind them.

 

In truth there are a lot of reasons why Blizzard has gotten the success with WoW like they have. Sandbox is a niche genre and always will be. There's a market for it for indie developers but that's about it

 +1

Originally posted by Daffid011

Originally posted by popinjay

SOE didn't 'ruin' Vanguard. Sigil pushed it out too fast because they had money problems and the game wasn't finished.

Soe cut the funding which forced sigil to release the game.  Even ignorning how the game launched SOE has owned vanguard for almost 4 years and the game is basically just in a state of being ready to release.  I doubt you will find many vanguard players who applaud soes efforts with the game and don't feel upset with how they managed the game once they took over. 

That's not true Daff. SOE never funded Vanguard's development; SOE just agreed to publish the game. That being said my problem with SOE is that I felt they should of offered to fund Vanguard's development to a more complete state or should not of agreed to publish it. SOE agreeing publishing Vanguard in the incomplete state that is was in was nothing but immoral and a continued illustration how they have no consideration for their player base or providing a working quality product. I agree with your over all sentiment about SOE, but it's important to be intellectually honest (not that I think you weren't being so, I think you were just mistaken).

Originally posted by therain93

Originally posted by bverji

Originally posted by therain93

 City of Heroes, City of Villains, and City of Heroes: Going Rogue are far better than CO and DCUO ( ' :

 

Better in some ways and not in others, it depends on what you are looking for out of the game. DCUO isn't going to provide a replacement for COX (for most plkayers) because currently their focus is very different.

 Of course.  Had you not trimmed the other quote, you might have appreciated that my reply was merely counterpoint to it.

 It didn't come across that way to me. It sounded a lot like..."of course you have the right to like the inferior product, but COX is better game.

Originally posted by therain93

 City of Heroes, City of Villains, and City of Heroes: Going Rogue are far better than CO and DCUO ( ' :

Better in some ways and not in others, it depends on what you are looking for out of the game. DCUO isn't going to provide a replacement for COX (for most plkayers) because currently their focus is very different.

First you have to define “fun” because it has different connotations for people, but “fun” in the sense of being spontaneous enjoyment I think DCUO is more fun. It's faster, more responsive, has better PVP, and does a great job of placing the player in the DC universe and allowing the player feel super-powered.

COX is a better MMO and RPG. COH has better character creation and customization allowing players better tools to create story with their characters, much better tools for allowing the community to interact and feel like they are playing with other players, gives a better sense of accomplishment, and more over all longevity as player are more likely to identify with their characters.

I don’t see how many can think that DCUO isn’t more fun to play, I mean it’s set up as an action game, but COH is a better value and has the potential to be more satisfying for many players. i think people get these two dichotomies understandably confused (not that some people can't enjoy COX's game-play more as well). Without some pretty major changes to DCUO I expect it to be free-to play within two years, as people will play it as a very extensive action game, while COH maintains it’s audience (assuming it weathers the first 3-6 months of DCUO).

Originally posted by Warjin

Bottom line, I will no longer listen to people on the forums because It came to my understanding the ones that bash the games really don't like any MMO or they would be playing a MMO instead of posting lol.

I feel that they will never be happy no matter what MMO comes out, they will fine the negative.

A lot of people didn't like the game while a handful do ,including you. I say this in no way to invalidate your own enjoyment, but when you say that you won't listen to others opinions because they bash all MMOs that's being overly myopic. I say this for two reasons: first, that many of the reasons that people didn't like the game were consistant and not the reasons that you say you enjoy the game. Opinions on this site should ultimatly help people to make decisions about game purchases, buit that doens't mean that you can just take every opinion at face value. You find the complaints that are consistant and then compare those complaints to your values.

Secondly,  It's not fair to accuse everyone who didn't like the game as haters because you failed to filter the information correctly. I mean SWG failed to keep most of the player base that played the game, so there must of been some validity to the problems that many of the nay sayers had said the game had. I don't mean to isolate you I'm just trying to add a little temperance to your statment.

Don't shortchange EQ on name recognition

I don't want to be argumentative or dismissive, but it's not anywhere near comparible. You're to young to of had the exposer of the phenomenom that the warcraft franchise was. I'm not suggesting that you don't remember the game, but at age 6 it's unlikely that you could of understood how far reaching the warcraft games were. Not only in the amount of people that played, or it's expanding a wide gambit of age groups, but the fanaticism of so many that played day and night for years on end. With MMOs that doesn't sound so far-reaching but at that time it was about unheard of.

It's about money Rennfield. Wow is the most financially successful US produced MMO. Although I mostly agree with you that WOW is much like EQ what wow had that EQ didn't was brand recognition. Wow had millions of players biting at the bit to play it because it was a spin off of the previous warcraft games.

The financial success is also why people refer to games copying WOW when in fact WOW may of copied a certain game mechanic from another game; the connection is that the game "copying WOW" is attempting to cash in on WOWs success through immalation not necessiarly on WOWs brilliant design.

Now a solid release is an ambiguous term, but i felt that WOW was a very smooth release. I have seen where a couple of WOW haters have made the claim about WOW having a bad release within the last 2-3 years, but no chatter at the time and have gone back before and search for articles and forums that still exsist from when WOW was released and failed to find anything very negative. Obviously, WOW was able to capitalize on their brand and keep a lot of people playing for a long time so the release had to of been good enough to not discourage many players.