Originally posted by jugularvein

Only 1 more wave today prob means I have to spend time with the fiance tonight.  Woohoo another night of freakin Glee

Wait till you get started on the Twilight series... You are gonna love that..

Originally posted by Redcor

Originally posted by crysent

Not a surprise - I'm sure more then a few people that canceled their pre-orders will log into the early access and realize they want to play the game and re-pre-order.  Not a bad move on Biowares part.  Also I'm sure they had no way of tracking pre-order keys with actualy orders.

I would, but after beta I have no interest. Imo Star Trek online looks and plays beter and I'm a SW fan. Sad but unfortunatlly true.

I know exactly how you feel... I cancelled my Battlefield 3 pre-order after beta.. DOOM was just the superior game. Looked and played ten times better..

Ya know, they should add a feature where faction change is possible for force users since so much hangs in the balance of light and dark.. If someone really dedicates themselves to being a dark jedi then they should eventually just get the title of Sith and same for a Sith who gives gifts and food to homeless jedi, just make them jedi..

But I guess with all the storytelling in place that this wouldn't be much possible unless major changes were made.. But I think as long as they have the light/dark system in place that it SHOULD mean something and actually play a decent role in the game, if not, why even bother?

I think its kinda cool for people to be able to SEE the effects of your story (such as a dark jedi using red sabers) and tbh it's not that bad of an idea considering MOST mmo's have faction "reputation" points anyway that give access or remove access to certain items or areas..

That's basically what this system is, but it seems that it is obviously more impactful but not too impactful (like KOS guards and such) on the way your career plays out.. Why would anyone (who even played or known what a KOTOR game was all about) dislike this feature? It's kinda obvious that if you play a Jedi just to do "evil" things that you would be willing to accept the consequences (else you should just play a Sith, we are talking about mirrored classes here).

Thus is the way of the Force, its an extension of who you are inside..

So umm.. Which server is the "Briarcliff" of SWTOR?

These are always fun to read.. All the "I cancelled.." threads that pop up pretty close to launch... The ones for Rift were the most amusing, lets see if SWTOR can top it..

They usually are something along the lines of..

"I pre-ordered a year ago and somehow did not know what the game was like until a week before launch and now that it looks too much like WoW even after al the videos I watched and sometimes even Beta's I participated in, I finally have made my decision to tell you guys that I am cancelling my pre-order in hopes that you too will agree with me and cancel yours as well.."

Originally posted by Loekii

Originally posted by popinjay

 

I'm thinking this too. STO launch was horrid. The space travel was broken. The Klingons wasn't even in the game I dont' think, or if they were they only had a scant of content. The ground missions sucked and were buggy as hell.

I am certainly not saying STO was a great game by any means.   I was even more critical of STO that I am of TOR -- and I was in testing from F&F.

 

The point is that as poor as an Space Misison Instance was in STO, it had more freedom of movement, had more active NPCs and objects,  and even more 'abilities' than an instance of the TOR rail shooter.

Compmaring the 2 side by side:

Movement:

• STO:  'Submarine Movement' with in Zone.  Can move in most directions freely, and free to go in multiple directions if desired.
• TOR:  sliding through a pre-laid tube trail through Zone.  Can slide up/down/right/left, but unable to change direction and must follow 'rail' path.

Enemy Ships:

• STO:  NPC Ships with AI and ability to attack from most directions
• TOR:  Ships that simply fly in and out along the tube

Ship Customization:

• STO:  Players can use multiple ships, change the look, and colors
• TOR: 1 ship per class

Objects:

• STO:  Able to circumnavigate objects like asteroids, ships, bases, etc (ie 3D objects)
• TOR: Most elements are painted on scolling back matt (ie 2D objects)

Mouse Look:

• STO:  360' Mouse Look w/ zoom capabilities
• TOR: Camera locked behind Ship in chase cam mod (might have zoom feature?)

 

Again, not saying STO is a good game, but it is pretty clear which system offers more features and abilities.  

 

Claiming that just because STO sucked as a game, says nothing about amount of elements that their system contained compared to what TOR has.  

 

 

But wait, i thought the avatar land combat was horrid over in the land of STO? I'd go digging through the STO forums of MMORPG.com for evidence but I am pretty sure some of you already agree?

Folks don't understand that having the best of both worlds is very difficult because you simply cannot please everyone and trying to do everything makes you great at nothing but average at everything...

Pirates of the Burning Sea had great sea battles.. Great... But who actually enjoyed the avatar combat out of the box?

Originally posted by Katrisa

 

I really couldnt care less about the space combat.  I'm playing for the MMO part. Not the space combat.

I mean really.... who wants a black sky with two ships shooting each other? Nothing sounds more boring. Anything to make the space combat more arcade like is fine with me :)

 

/Meow

/signed..

But apparently it cant be Star Wars without "freeform" space combat..

Perhaps they should have just made a space combat sim an THEN added avatars like EvE? 

I wonder would that have been a more popular route to take?

Saga Of Ryzom had "atnosphere" and an alive world..

/thread

Originally posted by sanosukex

Originally posted by Vyeth


While I agree on your points, I feel that it's okay for day and night and weather to get left out if they have no effect on gameplay.. The only game that somewhat got it right was EQ in that at night the view distance and actual lighting got very very dark requiring a torch in some areas or night vision.

 

If the night and day look basically the same save the sky texture, and weather effects don't effect any kind of skills or stats, then its unnecessary imo..

BUT if done right it add so much to a game. For me it's not the gameplay its the story and this game is mostly about its story and how better immerse your customer in your story then have a "real" feeling world. For me the type of gamer who would not care about atmospheric effects or anything I have been talking about is the same who play this game and hit the space bar through all the story segments. If you are just here for the pvp and the flashpoints and don't care about anything else then yes i can see how nothing I have brought up would matter(and thats fine its how you wish to play the game). But people who like rpg's for the story and like to be part of the world I really don't understand how a lot of whats been left out of this game in this respect doesn't bother you.

Immersion huh? Would you agree that certain things are more difficult to do in the rain than fair weather?

Would you agree that it is harder to see naturally at night than it is during the day?

Trudging through the snow would be somewhat more exhausting than walking on a paved road, would it not?

These are the things I was referring to, and all of these are factors that could and should affect gameplay. Truthfully if weather and day cycles DID exist and did not do something remotely close to it's real world counterpart it would be immersion breaking for me..

It would be like playing a driving game where it rained yet the tires and car handled the same as if it were sunny and dry conditions.. What would be the point?

"YOU almost spilled my drink. And I almost had to wipe it up with your face!"
Looks good.. I still pretty much hate fast travel in MMO's these days.. Mounts and community travel seem like a better alternative.. Gone are the days of community travel (think the boats in Everquest) where you could take a break as you head to your destination and socialize with the people on board.. And mounts of course would make a long "walk" pretty short and in the case of Vanguard's flying mounts, you wouldn't even mind taking in all the sights..
But I still think GW2 will be a good game.. Despite all the E-Sports attention they got from GW1 they opted to take the MMORPG route.. Kudos to them as this could of been like Fury, an arena combat game only..

---

Originally posted by Maquiame
1. No fish in the water, no swimming, no squirrels birds rabbits anything, the bestiary was a very cool feature, but the beasts all take three steps and turn around, WTF is that? Imagine how cool the beastiary would be if the beasts had migration patterns and you had to find them to get the xp as a sort of xp side game? Guess I am never going to play Kit Fisto or Akbar's race.
2. No day and night cycle, ridiculous, wow had this eq1 had this
3. Weather read above
4. Ambient sounds where are they
5. NPCs being nothing but pretty placeholders, I hope this changes on release, I mean sheesh guys you didn't have to voice them, simple one sentence text responses would have been enough
6. Packs of animals stay in one place, they don't do anything at all. wth is that?

---

If the night and day look basically the same save the sky texture, and weather effects don't effect any kind of skills or stats, then its unnecessary imo..

Originally posted by Skuz

My opinion is that SWTOR is a very straightforward formulaic MMO from a "the basics are just good enough" point of development.

The big expenditure went into story-telling, writing, scripting, voice-acting, but take away the story that has been bolted on top of what is a very basic by the numbers MMO & the game is nothing but a reskinned clone of its predecessors.

Playing through Beta-test weekends I enjoyed what it offered, I love the SW universe & I have pre-ordered & intend to play it through because of the story, the rest of the game, the actual meat & bones of it leaves me pretty unsatisfied, I feel that so much emphasis was put into the story that the end-game, i.e. once the story has been played through, that I will only then begin to question is it good enough to keep me playing, or will I pretty much HAVE TO play through the other classes, even if I really didn't want to, just to stay entertained long enough for BioWare to come up with the next phase of the game, the next installment of story-arc questlines.

I'm kind of leaning towards thinking that despite the 150mil price tag, how much development cost would it take to maintain the story-telling emphasis of the game beyond release, will we end up with expansions or DLC being churned out of a vastly inferior quality ? I think it's inevitable, I think that past the game's 1st year things will either truly get mold-breaking in terms of quality content-delivery, or it will be a bitter pill players will have to swallow. I don't see it being possible to maintain the quality of the present game's storylines into the future. So will we just get yet-another hamster-wheel gear-grinding end-game? I hope not, but I can't see it going any other way at this point.

I'll play it & enjoy what is there, but the long-term futire doesn't look great, I think much greater emphasis should have been given to the core gameplay mechanics & to upping the ante in those areas at least a little, I feel that the lack of that direction will seriously harm the game's longevity.

Sadly, during beta I already seen the PvP gear vendors which means that there more than likely will be a gear grind. Hopefully it is not on a schedule like WoW where the only new thing to do at max is grind various "tiers" of gear.. To be honest I know not everyone like PvP and prefer that the Republic and Empire just hold hands and play nice, but with a universe at war you would imagine that in the future they would flesh out the war and really give the impression that the sides are truly at war with one another over certain bases on planets (like Hoth) or centralized resource points spread across the galaxy..

Basically I hope they focus on player interaction and their interactions with the universe as a whole..

Universal story archs would be nice as well, something like the Matrix Online did when it ran..

Originally posted by meccariello

i like it personally. 

i think a lot of people are suffering from mmo burnout and frankly are complaining about things being "same ole same ole" because they are getting older themselves. 

 

stwor is not a WOW clone in my opinion. its a typical mmo and typical mmos have a lot of the same features. ford and chevy are both good vehicles and they share many of the same features. it comes down to personal taste. 

i am over the dark ages. (as i am over small cars... ). i am going to swtor. (and i bought a truck.. just using that as a personal choice analogy)

This is basically what I was trying to convey in my response earlier in this thread.. TYPICAL MMO and TYPICAL MMO's have alot of the same features, just as other games in other genres share a lot of the same features... Typical isn't always a BAD thing, it basically lets you know that the mechanics will be familiar should this not be your first dance..

I still don't understand why that is such a crime to some of the playerbase...

Originally posted by Drachasor

Originally posted by Vyeth

Originally posted by Drachasor

Originally posted by Vyeth

Originally posted by Drachasor

Originally posted by Vyeth

The bottom line is that SWTOR is:

1. An MMORPG..

2. It has skills that can be clicked or one could spaz out on the number keys..

3. It has an "MP" mechanic, renamed for each class..

4. It has collection quests, it has activate object quests, it has waypoint quests...

5. It has an xp and level system..

6. It has skill trees..

7. It has LOS but also an auto target system..

8. It has instances..

9. It has raids..

And back to number 1, its an MMORPG..

If you prefer action games, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer first person shooters, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a sandbox, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a space flight simulator, you should look elsewhere..

If you dislike any of the features listed above to the point you'd frequent a forum to tell us so, then you should probably look elsewhere..

MMORPG can have action mechanics, first person mechanics, sandbox mechanics, or any or all of those other things.  Nor does an MMORPG imply that it must use Holy Trinity mechanics.

Yeah but to EXPECT every MMORPG to be a blend of those other genres is not really fair.. And its the sole reason why this genre is losing its identity.. because everyone wants it blended.. And now we have MMO Golf..

When Marvel vs Capcom 3 came out, you didnt hear people screaming how much they wanted to be able to click skills on a hotbar.. nor in a Call of Duty forum have I ever heard someone cry about not being able to throw down their guns and execute combos and get ring outs..

There are certain mechanics that make a genre, a genre.. Fighting games will always be fighting games and shooters will be shooters.. CAN they blend? Sure they could, but should their fans expect them to ALWAYS blend? I wouldn't think so..

When Nintendo came out with the "NEW" super Mario bro's on handheld, they could have made it a shooter, or even a role playing game.. but then it wouldn't have truly been a platformer..

I mean it's fine to want something different, but some of us enjoy what we have in our genre, thats why I play them.. Either wait for something that is more your cup of tea, or simple play something thats worth while to you..

And you can overspecify what is necessary to be a game of a particular genre.  You could require a platformer must have jumping on people's heads as an attack, or an FPS must have regenerating health, or an MMORPG must be a themepark/use HT mechanics/can't have action elements/etc.

You have overspecified what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG.  I merely pointed that out.  I was pointing out there are a large number of paths one can take in making an MMORPG.  There's no reason for one to resemble another all that much...certainly no more than say Dragon Age: Origins resembles Skyrim or a Final Fantasy title.

Btw, if people want to play a golf MMO, then there's no reason they shouldn't play it.  It might sound odd to you or me, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.  It certainly doesn't hurt people who like other kinds MMOs.

Now Bob, I never said no one should enjoy a golf MMO, i was just stating that it is outside of the genre's norm and if WE (the traditionals) don't want to play it we shouldn't have to either..

I am not taking away your entitlement to do whatever you want guy, I am just saying that you guys attempt to make every game seem so "bad" because it wants to be traditional.. Some people like traditional. We heard all the same complaints during Rift launch, how it was the "same ol' same ol".. It's okay, we get your point, but you guys make it a point to say the same thing every single time a new game is launched.. I should have ignored the comment but I simply must understand what drives you guys on your political campaign against the fact that some of us find this and other games like it to be highly enjoyable?

But do not get me wrong, any developer can make whatever they want to make and slap any genre label on it.. But they and people like yourself should not get so angry when folks prefer it the traditional way..

Who the heck is saying you have to play any game?  That's a total non-sequitor and has nothing to do with what we're talking about.  Are people coming to your door and demanding you play MMOs that you don't want to?  No?  Then why even bring this up?

What's this thread about?  What TOR is like.  Does it make sense to discuss how it is like games like WoW then?  Does it make sense to talk about how it isn't innovative in its combat mechanics?  Yes and yes.  This isn't a "campaign" against anything except misconceptions.  I also pointed out that your list of what makes an MMORPG is simply poorly conceived...at best it is a list of what YOU like to see in an MMORPG, which is totally different and generally not helpful to people reading this thread to get an idea of what TOR is like.

So just don't act like "Doing it the WoW way" is the only way to do things and the only right way to be an MMORPG.

Edit:  And if you are going to call someone a name, you might as well use the name they post with, not a generic one.  There's no need to sound dismissive, Vyeth.

Well if there is one thing you should have taken from my list is that it does little if anything different at all.. If you hate it for those reasons, then you should not play it. That was my statement. Did I expect to get into a forum rumble over it? Not really, but then again who would disagree with me on the fact that there are some things which haven't changed in the industry for years? That must make it 'traditional'. And while "WoW" may be your only reference to what an MMO is, it is not for me. Sure, they al have some things in common, but to me that is what makes it a traditional MMORPG and that is why I like it.

And from what I read over these forums over and over again is how it is "just like WoW".. Why is that such a problem?

Edit: And you really didn't even have to respond to the name 'Bob'.. I don't know you and as far as I am concerned your 'forum' name is just as generic as the rest of us. So no need to take it personal, even if you felt attacked by the name, I simply just applied an anonymous name to an anonymous figure. If you'd prefer I'd just call you John as in John Doe. And I am quite sure you understand the usage of that right?

Originally posted by PukeBucket

Originally posted by Vyeth

Originally posted by Drachasor

Originally posted by Vyeth

The bottom line is that SWTOR is:

1. An MMORPG..

2. It has skills that can be clicked or one could spaz out on the number keys..

3. It has an "MP" mechanic, renamed for each class..

4. It has collection quests, it has activate object quests, it has waypoint quests...

5. It has an xp and level system..

6. It has skill trees..

7. It has LOS but also an auto target system..

8. It has instances..

9. It has raids..

And back to number 1, its an MMORPG..

If you prefer action games, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer first person shooters, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a sandbox, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a space flight simulator, you should look elsewhere..

If you dislike any of the features listed above to the point you'd frequent a forum to tell us so, then you should probably look elsewhere..

MMORPG can have action mechanics, first person mechanics, sandbox mechanics, or any or all of those other things.  Nor does an MMORPG imply that it must use Holy Trinity mechanics.

Yeah but to EXPECT every MMORPG to be a blend of those other genres is not really fair.. And its the sole reason why this genre is losing its identity.. because everyone wants it blended.. And now we have MMO Golf..

When Marvel vs Capcom 3 came out, you didnt hear people screaming how much they wanted to be able to click skills on a hotbar.. nor in a Call of Duty forum have I ever heard someone cry about not being able to throw down their guns and execute combos and get ring outs..

There are certain mechanics that make a genre, a genre.. Fighting games will always be fighting games and shooters will be shooters.. CAN they blend? Sure they could, but should their fans expect them to ALWAYS blend? I wouldn't think so..

When Nintendo came out with the "NEW" super Mario bro's on handheld, they could have made it a shooter, or even a role playing game.. but then it wouldn't have truly been a platformer..

I mean it's fine to want something different, but some of us enjoy what we have in our genre, thats why I play them.. Either wait for something that is more your cup of tea, or simple play something thats worth while to you..

Expecting MMORPG to = hotbar is short sighted.

There's too much variety in the "RPG" genre to have such a limited scope.

Because everything I have said thus far means that MMORPG - hotbar. Not quite my friend, not quite.. But it IS a traditional feature of the MMORPG, going back to its earlier graphical days and the HUD mechanics.. It's a feature that does not bother me so much that a developer would use such mechanics in their own product.. I don't expect all new MMORPG releases to require combo button sequences and active rolling and flipping. If they do, that's fine I will not rage at whoever enjoys such endeavors.. But I like and rather prefer the "old style" of graphical MMORPG's with clicks and "dice rolls"..

Originally posted by Drachasor

Originally posted by Vyeth

Originally posted by Drachasor

Originally posted by Vyeth

The bottom line is that SWTOR is:

1. An MMORPG..

2. It has skills that can be clicked or one could spaz out on the number keys..

3. It has an "MP" mechanic, renamed for each class..

4. It has collection quests, it has activate object quests, it has waypoint quests...

5. It has an xp and level system..

6. It has skill trees..

7. It has LOS but also an auto target system..

8. It has instances..

9. It has raids..

And back to number 1, its an MMORPG..

If you prefer action games, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer first person shooters, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a sandbox, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a space flight simulator, you should look elsewhere..

If you dislike any of the features listed above to the point you'd frequent a forum to tell us so, then you should probably look elsewhere..

MMORPG can have action mechanics, first person mechanics, sandbox mechanics, or any or all of those other things.  Nor does an MMORPG imply that it must use Holy Trinity mechanics.

Yeah but to EXPECT every MMORPG to be a blend of those other genres is not really fair.. And its the sole reason why this genre is losing its identity.. because everyone wants it blended.. And now we have MMO Golf..

When Marvel vs Capcom 3 came out, you didnt hear people screaming how much they wanted to be able to click skills on a hotbar.. nor in a Call of Duty forum have I ever heard someone cry about not being able to throw down their guns and execute combos and get ring outs..

There are certain mechanics that make a genre, a genre.. Fighting games will always be fighting games and shooters will be shooters.. CAN they blend? Sure they could, but should their fans expect them to ALWAYS blend? I wouldn't think so..

When Nintendo came out with the "NEW" super Mario bro's on handheld, they could have made it a shooter, or even a role playing game.. but then it wouldn't have truly been a platformer..

I mean it's fine to want something different, but some of us enjoy what we have in our genre, thats why I play them.. Either wait for something that is more your cup of tea, or simple play something thats worth while to you..

And you can overspecify what is necessary to be a game of a particular genre.  You could require a platformer must have jumping on people's heads as an attack, or an FPS must have regenerating health, or an MMORPG must be a themepark/use HT mechanics/can't have action elements/etc.

You have overspecified what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG.  I merely pointed that out.  I was pointing out there are a large number of paths one can take in making an MMORPG.  There's no reason for one to resemble another all that much...certainly no more than say Dragon Age: Origins resembles Skyrim or a Final Fantasy title.

Btw, if people want to play a golf MMO, then there's no reason they shouldn't play it.  It might sound odd to you or me, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.  It certainly doesn't hurt people who like other kinds MMOs.

Now Bob, I never said no one should enjoy a golf MMO, i was just stating that it is outside of the genre's norm and if WE (the traditionals) don't want to play it we shouldn't have to either..

I am not taking away your entitlement to do whatever you want guy, I am just saying that you guys attempt to make every game seem so "bad" because it wants to be traditional.. Some people like traditional. We heard all the same complaints during Rift launch, how it was the "same ol' same ol".. It's okay, we get your point, but you guys make it a point to say the same thing every single time a new game is launched.. I should have ignored the comment but I simply must understand what drives you guys on your political campaign against the fact that some of us find this and other games like it to be highly enjoyable?

But do not get me wrong, any developer can make whatever they want to make and slap any genre label on it.. But they and people like yourself should not get so angry when folks prefer it the traditional way..

Originally posted by Drachasor

Originally posted by Vyeth

The bottom line is that SWTOR is:

1. An MMORPG..

2. It has skills that can be clicked or one could spaz out on the number keys..

3. It has an "MP" mechanic, renamed for each class..

4. It has collection quests, it has activate object quests, it has waypoint quests...

5. It has an xp and level system..

6. It has skill trees..

7. It has LOS but also an auto target system..

8. It has instances..

9. It has raids..

And back to number 1, its an MMORPG..

If you prefer action games, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer first person shooters, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a sandbox, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a space flight simulator, you should look elsewhere..

If you dislike any of the features listed above to the point you'd frequent a forum to tell us so, then you should probably look elsewhere..

MMORPG can have action mechanics, first person mechanics, sandbox mechanics, or any or all of those other things.  Nor does an MMORPG imply that it must use Holy Trinity mechanics.

Yeah but to EXPECT every MMORPG to be a blend of those other genres is not really fair.. And its the sole reason why this genre is losing its identity.. because everyone wants it blended.. And now we have MMO Golf..

When Marvel vs Capcom 3 came out, you didnt hear people screaming how much they wanted to be able to click skills on a hotbar.. nor in a Call of Duty forum have I ever heard someone cry about not being able to throw down their guns and execute combos and get ring outs..

There are certain mechanics that make a genre, a genre.. Fighting games will always be fighting games and shooters will be shooters.. CAN they blend? Sure they could, but should their fans expect them to ALWAYS blend? I wouldn't think so..

When Nintendo came out with the "NEW" super Mario bro's on handheld, they could have made it a shooter, or even a role playing game.. but then it wouldn't have truly been a platformer..

I mean it's fine to want something different, but some of us enjoy what we have in our genre, thats why I play them.. Either wait for something that is more your cup of tea, or simple play something thats worth while to you..

The bottom line is that SWTOR is:

1. An MMORPG..

2. It has skills that can be clicked or one could spaz out on the number keys..

3. It has an "MP" mechanic, renamed for each class..

4. It has collection quests, it has activate object quests, it has waypoint quests...

5. It has an xp and level system..

6. It has skill trees..

7. It has LOS but also an auto target system..

8. It has instances..

9. It has raids..

And back to number 1, its an MMORPG..

If you prefer action games, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer first person shooters, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a sandbox, you should look elsewhere..

If you prefer a space flight simulator, you should look elsewhere..

If you dislike any of the features listed above to the point you'd frequent a forum to tell us so, then you should probably look elsewhere..

Ive done some pretty deep reserach into this.. And what it boils down to is what type of engineer are you reffering to?

Engineering has some pretty different areas relating to combat.. Some prefer to see no combat at all (which is why some MMO's like WoW have it as just a craft profession, like tinkering) , but if you were looking at games like global agenda and the battlefield series, those represent somewhere that is a mix of combat engineering and tinkering.. The TF2 engineer is a tinkerer, and although he is able to use a shotgun it is not his primary mode of defense or even offense, its his turrets..

Some games don't represent the turret, but it COULD be considered a summon, but engineers do not use magic so being a summoner just wouldn't be the same.. Another branch of engineering or combat engineering would be sabatoge or sapping..

And this was something that was done and has to be done very stealthy and usually ahead of the main infantry or front line soldiers. This is where trap removal/setup was important, and this is where the "rogue" usually comes in..

People don't realize it, but in TF2 there are 3 actual engineers.. The Engineer is the tinkerer (build stuff).. The Demoman is the Saboteur(blow stuff up).. And the Spy is the Sapper(disables utilities by "sapping" them with charges)..

So in essence if you wanted a complete idea of where they would lie in an MMO, I would say that te TInkerer Engy would be a Ranger (Non-magical with a pet familiar), Demoman would be a Rift Saboteur (couldn't find many examples of a rogue with bombs, but they do have them quite often), and the Sapper would be best described by the Burglar from LoTRO (he was a disabler more than a dps and he had to be stealthy and up close to do his job)

None of those are magic based, as even in the old world, technology was science applied.. Applied to the usage of bows and traps, a crude homemade thrown bomb, and even some kind of creating and using a new poison to line a dagger or arrow to subdue an individual..

In Ebberon of D&D online, they have the artificer using a crossbow (which was pretty advanced in any stage of that era) as his weapon but still allow him to contruct various mechanical things.

Originally posted by Zefire

Thats were all the money goes.Bombarding with advertisment for average products.

 

That's the ol' MMORPG way.. Bring the hate wherever it's needed.. That'll show em!

I mean, what was the point of the blatant call for war? Anyway..

Looking at the tree's, I'd say this would fall (just like the rest of the matchups) to which advance class was chosen.. If it was a sniper vs. a sage, then I would think it would probably be an even fight.. If it was a shadow vs. an operative it would again be an even fight.. A sniper vs. a shadow would probably be in the shadows favor (with the ability to close in on and surprise the sniper) and an operative would probably get the jump on a sage..

But of course in a team situation (which it will almost always be) it will take more then simple matchups to win..

All in all, while I like the matchup, the staff debate was pretty boring unlike the ones we've seen in the past..