Krafus Posted June 16, 2009 Author Share Posted June 16, 2009 I am cautiously intrigued but it does disappoint me that #1 they rushed the Sith Lords giving us a watered-down candyass short version of the game and #2 scraped the idea for three and then didn't scrap it and took it in an entirely new direction.As Derfel says, it wasn't BioWare who made KotOR 2, but Obsidian. Aside from having greater influence than Obsidian, the guys at BioWare have two other advantages: 1) there isn't a new movie coming out next year, so Luca$Art$ has no reason to rush out the game in time for next Christmas, and 2) even if Lucas's greedy minions want to do that, BioWare can retort by asking "If we rush it out, you could have another Star Wars Galaxies on your hands. Do you really want that?" Unless Lucas's lackeys are too dumb to care about their new franchise MMORPG's long-term viability (and profitability), 2) should be enough to dissuade them if it gets that far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnt hound Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 So, has anybody heard any rumors when this is released? It's been very quiet for a while now, I expected some more trailers at least... Has the beta begun yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 So, has anybody heard any rumors when this is released? It's been very quiet for a while now, I expected some more trailers at least... Has the beta begun yet?The beta has started, which has led some to assume the launch date will be spring or summer 2010. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 The beta has started, which has led some to assume the launch date will be spring or summer 2010.It's not a complete beta they are only testing certain things out at this point.And the guy in the Trailer in the OP in not Malak besides being dead this happen 300 years after KOTOR. But I'll tell you one thing it had better show us what the hell happened to Revan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VarysTheSpider Posted October 11, 2009 Share Posted October 11, 2009 I'll play the free trial when it comes out. I liked the original KotOR, and I want to see what the settings (especially Coruscant) look like. However, MMORPGs are such a grinding time sink I can't see myself actually buying it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnt hound Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 http://www.gametrailers.com/news/swtor-targeting-spring-2011/1739The release date they are shooting for is spring 2011, so no star wars in 2010 for me. Hm, too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 http://www.gametrailers.com/news/swtor-targeting-spring-2011/1739The release date they are shooting for is spring 2011, so no star wars in 2010 for me. Hm, too bad.Somewhat disappointing, but not surprising in the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 The Old Republic is now the most expensive single game title ever developed in the entire history of Electronic Arts to date.Which, skimming my eyes over the EA games on my shelf, is an impressive claim. Looks like they're rolling out the biggest guns possible to go after WoW's crown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slurktan Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 The Old Republic is now the most expensive single game title ever developed in the entire history of Electronic Arts to date.Which, skimming my eyes over the EA games on my shelf, is an impressive claim. Looks like they're rolling out the biggest guns possible to go after WoW's crown.Thats a weirdly written "article". Why are they comparing to WoW since it wasn't an EA product and why don't they have a number or scale to compare it to the number from WoW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Looks like they're rolling out the biggest guns possible to go after WoW's crown.Impossible IMO.The landscape is totally different today than when WoW launched in 2004. Gamers compare everything to WoW. They expect a launch that is as clean and smooth as Warcraft after 5 years. Players will get the game and rush to endgame (as they do with every new WoW expansion) and then will be dismayed that they are the only max level characters and there is nothing to do. People forget that when WoW launched, there was Molten Core as a raid and that was about it. When T2 gear was first released, it didn't have the awesome unique skins... it was a dull retread of generic lower level armor.It happened with Warhammer, Conan, and every other "WoW killer" released in the last 3 years. A huge initial rush, followed by a drop off of high level players because there weren't enough people to play with.That said, this game certainly has a lot of promise. I'll definitely check it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuellar Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 It's hard to beat the top dog in video games. They've had 5 years of developing content, to which star wars just can't release with teh same content.The biggest thing this has going for it vs WoW, is that the rest of the contenders were Fantasy games, this is Sci-Fi. It doesn't have to "play" the same, and it will appeal to people who are sick of a decade (after EQ and WoW) of elves with swords, and want to shoot someone in the face with a blaster. There were also some design decisions which WoW made that Old Republic HAS to capitalize on, namely player housing. People (especially women), go nuts over that shit, and if they manage to put that in, they'll have something to convince people to at least check it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 I think that the thing that they've got going for it most of all is the lore aspect. If they can actually focus and provide a compelling storyline that has illusion of choice while allowing interaction with other players in a meaningful way, that's something WoW has not really gone after or provided. It's a fairly big niche that clearly has some interest (as the Kotor and dragon age/mass effect games show). And it doesn't bite into the WoW crown. If the compelling reason to play isn't to grind, but to follow the story - that could be a huge deal. But I have my doubts. That's a hard thing to get right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Mostly it's a hard thing to get right in an MMO.Not even touching the issues with the multiplayer part (they seem to have ideas about solving that), in the end you will run out of story.The defining design paradigm of an MMO is that players go through content WAY faster then it is possible to create content. So you need repeatable content, which let's face it, does not lend itself to "story-centric" gameplay.The truth is they gonna need to provide something to keep the max level players coming back. And it's gonna need to compare to WoW as it is right now. (or, really, as it will be in Cataclysm).Screw "WoW Killers", Wow itself is a Genre Killer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuellar Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 True Kal. I think most MMORPGs fail to beat WoW because they try to make a BETTER WoW. WoW is about getting constant "level ups" (gear, levels, skills, etc), and isn't really about the setting or story. LOTRO was a decent change, but they didn't take it nearly as far enough. The only problem star wars will run into is that it is VERY hard to have a "story" line that lasts 20 hours a week for a year (roughly the time till new content is released). That is why most video games last 50-100 hours, and most MMORPGs deteriorate into a grind. The game has to have something that "repeats" to allow 20 iterations of 100 hours... otherwise you wrap up the 100 hours and quit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 The only problem star wars will run into is that it is VERY hard to have a "story" line that lasts 20 hours a week for a year (roughly the time till new content is released). That is why most video games last 50-100 hours, and most MMORPGs deteriorate into a grind. The game has to have something that "repeats" to allow 20 iterations of 100 hours... otherwise you wrap up the 100 hours and quit.Very, very few video games last 50-100 hours, certainly not 'most'. Even today, most big RPGs are far shorter than that (exceptions like Bethesda's games aside), with even BioWare's recent RPGs clocking in at half the length of their old-school big RPGs. Finding a FPS today that lasts longer than about 6-7 hours is getting increasingly difficult. Yeah, there's multiplayer, but that isn't story-focused (co-op aside, obviously). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 I'm not sure they have to have something to bring the max level players back - at least not in the 'raiding' sense. Think about how many people play or replay Dragon Age or Mass Effect or Kotor. If you want people to stay subscribed, you just need to give them enough stuff to do. But it doesn't need to be the end-game content specifically. If the 'repetition' aspect of the game isn't play a lot at the end, but it's play the same stuff over and over - that might work. It also means zones aren't deadlands. I'm not saying they won't have the endgame mean something. But it doesn't need to be the biggest thing. And it certainly doesn't have to be a really grindy thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 I'm not sure they have to have something to bring the max level players back - at least not in the 'raiding' sense. Think about how many people play or replay Dragon Age or Mass Effect or Kotor. If you want people to stay subscribed, you just need to give them enough stuff to do. But it doesn't need to be the end-game content specifically. If the 'repetition' aspect of the game isn't play a lot at the end, but it's play the same stuff over and over - that might work. It also means zones aren't deadlands. I'm not saying they won't have the endgame mean something. But it doesn't need to be the biggest thing. And it certainly doesn't have to be a really grindy thing.People don't pay to play Dragon Age/etc over and over again though.You need SOMETHING for people to do. Some way to continue playing in a meaningful way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 People don't pay to play Dragon Age/etc over and over again though.You need SOMETHING for people to do. Some way to continue playing in a meaningful way.Agreed.But doesn't TOR already have this possibility? The storylines would appear to be different depending on what side you adopt, what NPCs you team up with (I still don't know how the hell that is going to work, but hey, it's BioWare) and so on, with both a core 'main' storyline and branching side-missions that change depending on class, alignment, which characters are involved and so on, plus you can do all of this co-op with other players (I believe).On that basis, I can see the game having significant replay value, changing radically based on class or which side you adopt. Beyond that depends on how fast BioWare can add new content into the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Agreed.But doesn't TOR already have this possibility? The storylines would appear to be different depending on what side you adopt, what NPCs you team up with (I still don't know how the hell that is going to work, but hey, it's BioWare) and so on, with both a core 'main' storyline and branching side-missions that change depending on class, alignment, which characters are involved and so on, plus you can do all of this co-op with other players (I believe).On that basis, I can see the game having significant replay value, changing radically based on class or which side you adopt. Beyond that depends on how fast BioWare can add new content into the game.Eh, I don't think constant rerolling is gonna be as popular as you think.One of the biggest draws for MMOs, the thing that keeps people addicted and coming back, is the chance to constantly improve yourself. (or, technically, one or more of your avatars).If TOR is just "Your done, reroll", I don't think it'll fly. You need something for people to do with the character they leveled and love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted March 16, 2010 Share Posted March 16, 2010 Maybe. Again, that's what MMOs have done successfully before. If they just keep that model or they focus on making that their model, it's just WoW in star wars. Which admittedly will attract people.But think about this: 30% of all WoW players never go past level 10. The most compelling thing about AoC was the lvl 1-20 storyline; this is what was exclaimed by many, and the biggest problem was that it ended. If you instead focus on the story - will it make a more compelling experience in general for those people? Do most people really want to grind and play with their uber character? What if grinds at the end were essentially really long questlines that required some grinding, but they ended up with a storyline choice? What if they required teaming up to do but still emphasized the story? And even so - what if the endgame is really just the epilogue of the character, and not the thing that made people want to play more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.