Trending Games | Moonrise | Cabal 2 | Crowfall | Blade & Soul

  Network:  RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,982,615 Users Online:0
Games:827  Posts:6,431,063
Funcom | Official Site
MMORPG | Setting:Real Life | Status:Final  (rel 07/03/12)  | Pub:Funcom
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download,Retail | Retail Price:$30.00 | Pay Type:Hybrid | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

The Secret World Forum » Beta Reviews & Impressions [ARCHIVED] » TSW Review from a BETA Tester [short]

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 » Search
75 posts found
  Mage_Francis

Novice Member

Joined: 2/03/12
Posts: 53

6/25/12 2:33:13 AM#21
Originally posted by Fadedbomb 

~~~[Skill System]~~~ (MMO-Score: 6SinglePlayer Score: 7)

TSW's take on "classes" is to use an Open-Purchasable skill wheel that allows you to unlock EVERYTHING but only mix & match certain skills. The problem here is that, when you begin, it seems awesome & completely original. However, a month or two in you realize that the developers have already pre-thought out all of the possibly good combinations & only made X number of actual combinations worth doing. This leads you to a sort of "psuedo sick" feeling when you realize its not as open as they claim it is. If you don't believe me you'll understand if you purchase retail & play for about a month or two. Don't say I didn't warn you :).

 

 

This couldn't be more vague or misleading.  A good portion of the wheel was closed for most of the cloased beta and the decks don't evenn have the best combo's of skills available.  Hell most of the skills weren't even balanced or working properly because the game was in beta.  

 

Why would someone even put together a review on a unfinished product?  

  wasim470

Novice Member

Joined: 5/31/10
Posts: 246

6/25/12 2:35:34 AM#22
Originally posted by Fadedbomb

So essentially I promised a long & drawn out review of TSW a couple months back after the NDA dropped (which it has), however after reading around the forum since then I've concluded that people have pretty much already made up their minds by now (as with SWTOR, and TERA). So I won't bother with a long-winded approach.

 

Therefore, a short summary:

~~~[Gameplay]~~~ (MMO-Score: 5, SinglePlayer Score: 9)

When TSW is played as a "Single Player game with Online/Coop elements" it really shines, but as an "MMO" it falls flat. I've been in the beta for the past 3 months and I've seen rises & falls up until last week. All I can say here is that, again, the single-player storyline is AMAZING, but when you start trying to team up for everything you see glaring potholes all throughout the journey that simply doesn't work well as an MMO, or quite simply falls on its face. I won't even delve the combat animations, sounds, and effects all of which are sub-par for such a highly funded project.

 

~~~[Skill System]~~~ (MMO-Score: 6SinglePlayer Score: 7)

TSW's take on "classes" is to use an Open-Purchasable skill wheel that allows you to unlock EVERYTHING but only mix & match certain skills. The problem here is that, when you begin, it seems awesome & completely original. However, a month or two in you realize that the developers have already pre-thought out all of the possibly good combinations & only made X number of actual combinations worth doing. This leads you to a sort of "psuedo sick" feeling when you realize its not as open as they claim it is. If you don't believe me you'll understand if you purchase retail & play for about a month or two. Don't say I didn't warn you :).

 

~~~[Leveling]~~~ (MMO-Score: 5SinglePlayer Score: 6)

What can I say here? Very linear by design, and once you leave the first area of Egypt you might start asking yourself "What am I actually doing this for?". I found that I was going back through from BlueMountains all the way to Transylvania rushing missions as fast as possible to get X number of AP an hour on about month 3 as I had already experienced ALL the content from Egypt to Kingsmouth, but at the time Transylvania hadn't been completed (the zones past the first village area). Some more content may have been added but the linear system is still there. Sorry if you disagree, but it's pretty much a more open-ended SWTOR in terms of leveling where you can go back to repeat quests after X amount of time, but that's about as far as it goes. 

Grinding missions, instances, and certain named mobs gets VERY boring after awhile, and I doubt their version of "Massive Battlegrounds" will keep you interested for very long without more linear content to drive you.

 

ps: Linear being Solomon's Isle (3 zones) -> Egypt (2 zones) -> Transylvania''s 3 zones all from easiest to hardest in terms of difficulty & progression. This is how its designed, and demanding others play differently because you refuse to admit to yourself that its almost, if not completely, as linear as SWTOR is a little "off key".

 

~~~[PvP]~~~ (MMO-Score: 4)

I have nothing other than to say more of the same Battlegrounds nonsense. Coming from a UO, DAOC, Shadowbane, EQ-Zek, SWG background I wasn't impressed whatsoever. Flavour of the Month builds are rampant & you see all of the top killers in each area have the same build, more than most. 

 

 

Overall:

MMO: 5

SinglePlayer Game: 7.3 (PVP omitted for obvious reasons)

 

 

I enjoyed the storyline & the quests more than I have in any online game in the past, however if you're going to do such a fantastic job on the Story aspect of an MMO make sure its done in a way that doesn't make you feel like you're playing a SinglePlayer RPG like Mass Effect. 

 

As an MMO, I believe Funcom dropped the ball...again. I'm just not sure why they're in the MMO market when they're clearly more suited towards SinglePlayer RPGs. 

 

 

I brought up similar issues with SWTOR a month or so before its release, and although I gave it a MUCH lower average score than TSW I was told I didn't know what I was talking about or I was just "another hater". Please understand that I give every product I test a fair chance, but in the end I feel I always represent the product for what it IS and what it is NOT. 

 

Thank you for reading :)!

Thank you for the review, I seem to agree with you on 90% of the points set, sadly tho.

the other 10% is the PVP which i didn't bother to try, i just gave up.

 

 

  NorseGod

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/28/12
Posts: 826

6/25/12 2:44:42 AM#23

/tldr

Roll fists/chaos build to win the game.

Paying for a provided service does not bother me. Gaming is not a human right.

  Randallt3mp

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/04/08
Posts: 174

6/25/12 2:45:45 AM#24
Originally posted by thePREdiger

I was happy to see a MMO having a 3-side RvR modell. DAoC had it and it was awesome (imo best pvp experience ever).

TSW looked pomising and the factions inviting but my expectations were utterly destroyed with 15 mins in the game (beta weekend).

the gameplay felt as something is missing and the char animations werent really great. UI is looking like someone put

some icons together and was happy with the 1st version.

 

After my experiences with AoC and FUNCOM I can gladly skip this one. Sadly there is no MMO coming soon that sparks

interest. GW2 is just another AION without wings (same as TERA) - unless you like korean style.

 

I'm sorry but when I saw that last sentence at the bottom I litterally did a double take.  GW2 and AION the same? Really?
Either 1.  You are very misinformed  2.  You hate the fantasy setting   3. You don't play MMOs or  4.  You arent really a gamer.

You seriously sound like my friend friend who barely plays any video games at all who confused Zelda with Fable.....

 

Anyway on-topic I agree with most people's and mostly the op's sentiments.  The game just doesnt feel like an MMO.  But the questing and story is well done and more interesting than many other games.  Although I think comparing it to the pile that is SWTOR is a little harsh.  If the game was B2P I would have preordered already, but I can't justify paying a sub for a game that will probably last only 2 months or so of extended playtime.  I will probably wait till a couple of weeks after launch and see how it goes in terms of bugs, content, and to see if all of these so called fixes are actually there when it releases.

 

MMOs Played: FFXI,Age of Conan, Aion, Rift, SWTOR, TERA, TSW, GW2

Playing:None

Waiting For: Wildstar, The Repopulation, Archeage, TESO, Warhammer 40K:EC, EQN

  aesperus

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/04/05
Posts: 5238

6/25/12 2:49:59 AM#25
Originally posted by Mage_Francis
Originally posted by Fadedbomb 

~~~[Skill System]~~~ (MMO-Score: 6SinglePlayer Score: 7)

TSW's take on "classes" is to use an Open-Purchasable skill wheel that allows you to unlock EVERYTHING but only mix & match certain skills. The problem here is that, when you begin, it seems awesome & completely original. However, a month or two in you realize that the developers have already pre-thought out all of the possibly good combinations & only made X number of actual combinations worth doing. This leads you to a sort of "psuedo sick" feeling when you realize its not as open as they claim it is. If you don't believe me you'll understand if you purchase retail & play for about a month or two. Don't say I didn't warn you :).

This couldn't be more vague or misleading.  A good portion of the wheel was closed for most of the cloased beta and the decks don't evenn have the best combo's of skills available.  Hell most of the skills weren't even balanced or working properly because the game was in beta.  

 

Why would someone even put together a review on a unfinished product?  

2 things:

1) We have full access to the skill wheel. Myself and some of my buds managed to even unlock a few of the 50 AP elites on it. What he says about the PvP system is most definitely true from what I saw. Even just over the weekend.

2) The game is going live next friday. I'm really sick of people using the excuse 'it's beta!' or 'it's not finished yet!' on a game that doesn't have time to make any significant changes at this point. We've seen the game. We've played it. Most of the issues people have with it are not going to change for launch. This includes the skill wheel.

This isn't to say that skills need to be rebalanced quite a bit in certain areas, but Funcom hasn't said anything of a major revamp of skills for release. We're going to see the same cookie-cutter roles as we've been seeing already, for sure.

  kasta

Novice Member

Joined: 5/30/03
Posts: 518

Never try to teach a pig to sing,it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

6/25/12 2:50:47 AM#26
Originally posted by Mage_Francis
Originally posted by Fadedbomb 

~~~[Skill System]~~~ (MMO-Score: 6SinglePlayer Score: 7)

TSW's take on "classes" is to use an Open-Purchasable skill wheel that allows you to unlock EVERYTHING but only mix & match certain skills. The problem here is that, when you begin, it seems awesome & completely original. However, a month or two in you realize that the developers have already pre-thought out all of the possibly good combinations & only made X number of actual combinations worth doing. This leads you to a sort of "psuedo sick" feeling when you realize its not as open as they claim it is. If you don't believe me you'll understand if you purchase retail & play for about a month or two. Don't say I didn't warn you :).

 

 

This couldn't be more vague or misleading.  A good portion of the wheel was closed for most of the cloased beta and the decks don't evenn have the best combo's of skills available.  Hell most of the skills weren't even balanced or working properly because the game was in beta.  

 

Why would someone even put together a review on a unfinished product?  

Because the game releases in 8 days and is for all intents and purposes finished.  I can understand  every point he made but I still enjoyed the game and have purchased it.  I figure it will be good for a month or two.  Kinda like Conan. :)

 

  palulalula

Novice Member

Joined: 9/07/11
Posts: 685

6/25/12 2:56:12 AM#27

Maybe you are right in some points but compared to games in last few years it is for me best one. I cant even see one game this year which is more worth to play. I have awesome exprience from last beta weekend

  User Deleted
6/25/12 4:15:33 AM#28

This is an excellent review that matches my own closed beta experience.

And yes, the comparison with SW:TOR is 100% valid - and I predict exactly the same will happen to this game once the players will have played through the linear content once. Take SW:TOR's "world design", replace Spaceships with Agartha, planets with separated small spots on earth, and you have TSW.

  fiontar

Novice Member

Joined: 4/07/04
Posts: 3726

6/25/12 4:51:28 AM#29

I completely agree with the OP and others, based on about 26 hours of play testing this weekend and feedback from people who had more time with the game.

The game is just completely lacking as an MMORPG. That they are planning to charge a subscription fee is really a shame, because they already have a cash shop slated for launch and it's only real chance of producing more than a couple months of respectable revenue would be for the game to adopt the Buy to Play Cash Shop model. It still would come up completely short as an MMO, but it might be worth the box price with out the sub fee.

I enjoyed it as a solo/cooperative Lovecraftian Urban Fantasy Action RPG and I can see myself getting maybe 80 hours of play from it, but that would be about it. The MMO elements are just non-existent as is any sense of replayability. The content is pretty linear, there is almost no redundancy to provide any sort of variety for leveling an alt and only the most die hard completionists will want to grind out a 100% unlocked character. For most people, once the PvE content is done, it will be time to make sure the subscription has been properly canceled before deleting the game from one's HD.

Could the game ever have been a full MMORPG? Maybe, but it's clearly a couple years from that point. I actually see huge parallels between the state of TSW as a subscription based MMORPG at launch and the failed state of FFXIV when it launched about two years ago. However, I doubt that Funcom will follow Square Enix's example of a full Mea Culpa, long term suspension of subscription fees and a deep commitment to completely rebuilding the game into what might be a worthy MMORPG title in a couple years.

After the FFXIV fiasco, I thought there was no way we would ever see another developer manage to duplicate that level of failure in meeting the minimum expectations for a AAA MMORPG at release. Well, Funcom has proven me wrong on that one. I think this is even more disappointing because after AoC fell flat due to being launched way too early, I definitely hoped Funcom would have learned from their mistake. Guess not.

Maybe, all told, AoC's flash in the pan launch, subscription revenue that dropped off quickly, followed by an eventual transition to a F2P cash shop model actually produced some profit for Funcom? If so, maybe they've just accepted that their business model is to produce sub-standard MMOs that have just enough going for them to still turn a profit? Or, maybe they once again just ran out of money and are doing the best they can to keep the company alive?

Another MMO with squandered potential. Definitely not news in the MMORPG genre, but that doesn't make it any less disappointing.

I am wrestling with whether or not to purchase the game as a solo RPG. I do think I could enjoy an 80 hour play through and I'd be satisfied with the value for the dollar. However, I also hate the idea of rewarding Funcom for an effort that falls so completely short when judging the game as an MMO. If I can find something else to fill my play time needs for the month of July, I might put off a TSW purchase until the retailers start to chop prices to move the unsold inventory.

Note: There is some extention of play time based on the initial learning curve. Getting my first character through the first zone took a lot longer than the second. A little bit of this was due to knowing how to complete the missions the second time through, but a lot of the time compression is just due to understanding how to play the game and build a character. 8 hours to complete 1/8th of all the PvE world content in the game is not a good sign and the lack of replayability kills any value for alts. Some people may find an acceptable end game raid grind, (I have no idea what the game offers there), or may find PvP extends their play time, but since the game offers much more as a solo/co-op action-RPG than it offers as an MMORPG, I think it's fair to point out how limited the content and world size are for an "MMO".

Some people will Pay to Play this game and will have fun doing so, others will buy it for a one off and not feel cheated. I'm not saying that some people won't find what they are looking for, but it's very limited MMO appeal is very likely to leave the game a niche title in the market.

Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated

  Boldyn

Apprentice Member

Joined: 12/29/04
Posts: 283

6/25/12 5:01:26 AM#30
Originally posted by The_Korrigan

This is an excellent review that matches my own closed beta experience.

And yes, the comparison with SW:TOR is 100% valid - and I predict exactly the same will happen to this game once the players will have played through the linear content once. Take SW:TOR's "world design", replace Spaceships with Agartha, planets with separated small spots on earth, and you have TSW.

Really? That's all you need to replace to have the exact same game? You mean this., to 100%, that they are EXACLTY the same if you change those things?

 

Stop making moronic comparisons

  User Deleted
6/25/12 5:09:29 AM#31
Originally posted by Boldyn
Originally posted by The_Korrigan

This is an excellent review that matches my own closed beta experience.

And yes, the comparison with SW:TOR is 100% valid - and I predict exactly the same will happen to this game once the players will have played through the linear content once. Take SW:TOR's "world design", replace Spaceships with Agartha, planets with separated small spots on earth, and you have TSW.

Really? That's all you need to replace to have the exact same game? You mean this., to 100%, that they are EXACLTY the same if you change those things?

I was talking about world design and progression, and yes, the comparison is valid on those two points. And that's what matters the most, that's the core content of the game, what will keep players busy.

Of course, character development and combat are different - the skill based character development makes TSW slightly more interesting than SW:TOR on that point, but combat is in my opinion better in SW:TOR.

PS: I've played SW:TOR for 5 months and I liked it. I'm not "bashing" TSW by comparing it to SW:TOR, I just predict it will have similar problems after a couple of months.

  fiontar

Novice Member

Joined: 4/07/04
Posts: 3726

6/25/12 5:21:30 AM#32
Originally posted by The_Korrigan
Originally posted by Boldyn
Originally posted by The_Korrigan

This is an excellent review that matches my own closed beta experience.

And yes, the comparison with SW:TOR is 100% valid - and I predict exactly the same will happen to this game once the players will have played through the linear content once. Take SW:TOR's "world design", replace Spaceships with Agartha, planets with separated small spots on earth, and you have TSW.

Really? That's all you need to replace to have the exact same game? You mean this., to 100%, that they are EXACLTY the same if you change those things?

I was talking about world design and progression, and yes, the comparison is valid on those two points. And that's what matters the most, that's the core content of the game, what will keep players busy.

Of course, character development and combat are different - the skill based character development makes TSW slightly more interesting than SW:TOR on that point, but combat is in my opinion better in SW:TOR.

I see the comparison as well. The bitter taste of a game designed to maximize travel related time sinks and utilize long cut-scenes as some what enjoyable filler left me with flashbacks of TOR. However, I actually think there is a better comparison to be made with FFXIV when it first released. FFXIV was very clearly released about two years too early and I get a similar impression from TSW.

TSW has more to offer as a solo/co-op RPG than FFXIV did, so it may have some value there, but it's lacking as an MMORPG in many of the same ways that FFXIV came up short.

For TSW, the deck/skill system is interesting. The game world is engrossing and I love the theme. I may still buy it to play through the PvE content and story once, but I think that people looking for a full AAA MMORPG should know that it's very lacking as an MMORPG and not a game many are likely want to maintain a subscription to beyond the free month.

TSW would have been much better suited to a Buy to Play, subscription free, cash shop supported model. They apparently already have a ful cash shop ready for launch, so I don't see the subscription fee as anything other than a cash grab before the game transitions to a F2P cash shop model in the not too distant future.

 

Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated

  chaod1984

Novice Member

Joined: 2/05/08
Posts: 278

6/25/12 5:41:00 AM#33
Originally posted by fiontar
Originally posted by The_Korrigan
Originally posted by Boldyn
Originally posted by The_Korrigan

This is an excellent review that matches my own closed beta experience.

And yes, the comparison with SW:TOR is 100% valid - and I predict exactly the same will happen to this game once the players will have played through the linear content once. Take SW:TOR's "world design", replace Spaceships with Agartha, planets with separated small spots on earth, and you have TSW.

Really? That's all you need to replace to have the exact same game? You mean this., to 100%, that they are EXACLTY the same if you change those things?

I was talking about world design and progression, and yes, the comparison is valid on those two points. And that's what matters the most, that's the core content of the game, what will keep players busy.

Of course, character development and combat are different - the skill based character development makes TSW slightly more interesting than SW:TOR on that point, but combat is in my opinion better in SW:TOR.

I see the comparison as well. The bitter taste of a game designed to maximize travel related time sinks and utilize long cut-scenes as some what enjoyable filler left me with flashbacks of TOR. However, I actually think there is a better comparison to be made with FFXIV when it first released. FFXIV was very clearly released about two years too early and I get a similar impression from TSW.

TSW has more to offer as a solo/co-op RPG than FFXIV did, so it may have some value there, but it's lacking as an MMORPG in many of the same ways that FFXIV came up short.

For TSW, the deck/skill system is interesting. The game world is engrossing and I love the theme. I may still buy it to play through the PvE content and story once, but I think that people looking for a full AAA MMORPG should know that it's very lacking as an MMORPG and not a game many are likely want to maintain a subscription to beyond the free month.

TSW would have been much better suited to a Buy to Play, subscription free, cash shop supported model. They apparently already have a ful cash shop ready for launch, so I don't see the subscription fee as anything other than a cash grab before the game transitions to a F2P cash shop model in the not too distant future.

 

Lol...first of all, nice signature...I already see your bias shining through.

Secondly, NO game can be compared to the release of FFXIV.  I played the Beta and that game was downright lacking in EVERY area.  There was NOTHING fun about that game.  Please continue to go back to GW2 forums and leave us alone.

The game is alot better than SWTOR...yes, the zoning progression is similar, but it's also similar to Rift as well...so what's your point?  The only reason anyone brings up SWTOR is because there is cut-scenes....guess what?  There was cut-scenes in AoC too....

I truly believe what killed SWTOR had to do alot more with limitations due to Lore, terrible mob AI and lack of things to do at endgame...don't think story had much to do with it at all.

  arieste

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/11/04
Posts: 3331

6/25/12 5:44:25 AM#34

It's far from the perfect MMO, but really I just compare it to the other available options - it's not nearly as boring and bland as TOR and while it does feel a lot like a single-player game, at least it not as bad as the "everyone is on their own and every fight is a zerg" that is GW2 gameplay - at least TSW has a good story and properly designed multiplayer PvE content.  The skill system may not be as open as people expect, but it's a hell of a lot more open and interactive than any of its major competitor game.  

 

Animations and character creator do suck quite bad, but after playing the really really really great looking TERA and GW2, i'd still much rather play TSW.  Looks matter, but pretty running animations don't make for intersting content.  

"I’d rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."

- Raph Koster

Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2
Currently Playing: EQ2, Firefall

  Nudles

Apprentice Member

Joined: 4/27/10
Posts: 52

6/25/12 5:58:06 AM#35
Originally posted by Fadedbomb

So essentially I promised a long & drawn out review of TSW a couple months back after the NDA dropped (which it has), however after reading around the forum since then I've concluded that people have pretty much already made up their minds by now (as with SWTOR, and TERA). So I won't bother with a long-winded approach.

 

Therefore, a short summary:

~~~[Gameplay]~~~ (MMO-Score: 5, SinglePlayer Score: 9)

When TSW is played as a "Single Player game with Online/Coop elements" it really shines, but as an "MMO" it falls flat. I've been in the beta for the past 3 months and I've seen rises & falls up until last week. All I can say here is that, again, the single-player storyline is AMAZING, but when you start trying to team up for everything you see glaring potholes all throughout the journey that simply doesn't work well as an MMO, or quite simply falls on its face. I won't even delve the combat animations, sounds, and effects all of which are sub-par for such a highly funded project.

 

~~~[Skill System]~~~ (MMO-Score: 6SinglePlayer Score: 7)

TSW's take on "classes" is to use an Open-Purchasable skill wheel that allows you to unlock EVERYTHING but only mix & match certain skills. The problem here is that, when you begin, it seems awesome & completely original. However, a month or two in you realize that the developers have already pre-thought out all of the possibly good combinations & only made X number of actual combinations worth doing. This leads you to a sort of "psuedo sick" feeling when you realize its not as open as they claim it is. If you don't believe me you'll understand if you purchase retail & play for about a month or two. Don't say I didn't warn you :).

 

~~~[Leveling]~~~ (MMO-Score: 5SinglePlayer Score: 6)

What can I say here? Very linear by design, and once you leave the first area of Egypt you might start asking yourself "What am I actually doing this for?". I found that I was going back through from BlueMountains all the way to Transylvania rushing missions as fast as possible to get X number of AP an hour on about month 3 as I had already experienced ALL the content from Egypt to Kingsmouth, but at the time Transylvania hadn't been completed (the zones past the first village area). Some more content may have been added but the linear system is still there. Sorry if you disagree, but it's pretty much a more open-ended SWTOR in terms of leveling where you can go back to repeat quests after X amount of time, but that's about as far as it goes. 

Grinding missions, instances, and certain named mobs gets VERY boring after awhile, and I doubt their version of "Massive Battlegrounds" will keep you interested for very long without more linear content to drive you.

 

ps: Linear being Solomon's Isle (3 zones) -> Egypt (2 zones) -> Transylvania''s 3 zones all from easiest to hardest in terms of difficulty & progression. This is how its designed, and demanding others play differently because you refuse to admit to yourself that its almost, if not completely, as linear as SWTOR is a little "off key".

 

~~~[PvP]~~~ (MMO-Score: 4)

I have nothing other than to say more of the same Battlegrounds nonsense. Coming from a UO, DAOC, Shadowbane, EQ-Zek, SWG background I wasn't impressed whatsoever. Flavour of the Month builds are rampant & you see all of the top killers in each area have the same build, more than most. 

 

 

Overall:

MMO: 5

SinglePlayer Game: 7.3 (PVP omitted for obvious reasons)

 

 

I enjoyed the storyline & the quests more than I have in any online game in the past, however if you're going to do such a fantastic job on the Story aspect of an MMO make sure its done in a way that doesn't make you feel like you're playing a SinglePlayer RPG like Mass Effect. 

 

As an MMO, I believe Funcom dropped the ball...again. I'm just not sure why they're in the MMO market when they're clearly more suited towards SinglePlayer RPGs. 

 

 

I brought up similar issues with SWTOR a month or so before its release, and although I gave it a MUCH lower average score than TSW I was told I didn't know what I was talking about or I was just "another hater". Please understand that I give every product I test a fair chance, but in the end I feel I always represent the product for what it IS and what it is NOT. 

 

Thank you for reading :)!

 

My personal experience with the game echoes most of your review so far. For me, the game still needs more time in development  to improve some gameplay elements which i find lacking to justify a sub.

 

Originally posted by fiontar

...

TSW would have been much better suited to a Buy to Play, subscription free, cash shop supported model. They apparently already have a ful cash shop ready for launch, so I don't see the subscription fee as anything other than a cash grab before the game transitions to a F2P cash shop model in the not too distant future.

 

Agreed.

I wouldn't be surprised to see TSW following the same AoC route although more prematurely. Let's just hope they present a better F2P model than AoC.

  User Deleted
6/25/12 5:58:56 AM#36
Originally posted by chaod1984 

The game is alot better than SWTOR...yes, the zoning progression is similar, but it's also similar to Rift as well...so what's your point?  The only reason anyone brings up SWTOR is because there is cut-scenes....guess what?  There was cut-scenes in AoC too....

I truly believe what killed SWTOR had to do alot more with limitations due to Lore, terrible mob AI and lack of things to do at endgame...don't think story had much to do with it at all.

Which game is better between SW:TOR and TSW is a matter of opinion of course.

But on mob AI, I didn't see anything impressive in TSW either, and about things to do at end game... well, that's something we will see in a couple of months after release.

The zoning progression is similar to SW:TOR and to Rift, indeed, because all three games are very linear in design. Want to know my point? Both Rift and SW:TOR had to do massive server merges to compensate for the players who left because they lost interest in the game since they didn't feel playing through exactly the same content again. Rift was the worse because you didn't even have a specific story for different classes and/or races, on that part, SW:TOR and TSW are slightly better.

If you design a MMORPG like a linear single player game with some MMO features, people will play it like that. And how do people play those single player games? Play through the story a couple of times, and ditch the game. And on that part, TSW is not different from its predecessors.

  User Deleted
6/25/12 6:04:49 AM#37

The OP's main complaint is that the same is too single player-ish. Fair enoug, but, can i know 1 themepark mmorpg nowadays that isn't? Almost every single of them is either full solo or co-op at best.

I myself am getting sick and tired of this happening, but TSW isn't even worse than all others.

  cinos

Novice Member

Joined: 8/22/05
Posts: 975

6/25/12 6:19:21 AM#38
Originally posted by FredomSekerZ

The OP's main complaint is that the same is too single player-ish. Fair enoug, but, can i know 1 themepark mmorpg nowadays that isn't? Almost every single of them is either full solo or co-op at best.

I myself am getting sick and tired of this happening, but TSW isn't even worse than all others.

The problem being that they are charging a sub for a (based on the review) predominantly better single player experience.

You defending that point by basically saying "well every themepark mmo is like that" doesn't change the fact that maybe these games should be sold like every other single player/coop game and simply follow the standard B2P model.

  User Deleted
6/25/12 6:36:19 AM#39
Originally posted by cinos
Originally posted by FredomSekerZ

The OP's main complaint is that the same is too single player-ish. Fair enoug, but, can i know 1 themepark mmorpg nowadays that isn't? Almost every single of them is either full solo or co-op at best.

I myself am getting sick and tired of this happening, but TSW isn't even worse than all others.

The problem being that they are charging a sub for a (based on the review) predominantly better single player experience.

You defending that point by basically saying "well every themepark mmo is like that" doesn't change the fact that maybe these games should be sold like every other single player/coop game and simply follow the standard B2P model.

What does this have to do with the paymen model? I myself think that B2P fits these themeparks, because they're just "play for 3 months, finish content, get bored and move on", but i don't mind paying a sub either.

Anyway, this is actually kind of funny. There was a thread in general talking about how people played mmos solo because they just want to be surrounded by others, but don't want to interact or be force to group. So, like all other games, TSW allows you to play just like that, but now it's too much of an SP? *facepalm*

In case people didn't know, you can group up with others which, since they're PQ's, they auto update if you're on the same tier, and give rewards to all. Everyone keeps saying that being social in mmos isn't about forced grouping or depending on others, and you have that. I wonder what would happen if an mmos actually as forced grouping.

Oh, and i still can't think of any themeparks from nowadays that's any different. If the OP means a more sandboxy approach to mmos, i agree, but everyone as always known this isn't one.

  Fadedbomb

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 5/19/06
Posts: 2149

 
OP  6/25/12 7:55:11 AM#40
Originally posted by FredomSekerZ

The OP's main complaint is that the same is too single player-ish. Fair enoug, but, can i know 1 themepark mmorpg nowadays that isn't? Almost every single of them is either full solo or co-op at best.

I myself am getting sick and tired of this happening, but TSW isn't even worse than all others.

Which is why TSW has gotten the highest MMORPG review score that I've ever given to a "Themepark" style game.

 

Personally, I'm waiting until it goes "Free To Play" so I can redo the storyline post-launch. It was actually really fun, and even though I already know how it plays out I'd like to see where they go with it further down the line.

 

Lastly, this is Funcom's best MMO they've ever made, but I don't think that says much tbh. The writers for TSW are the only saving grace it has unfortunately.

The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 » Search