Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 06:16:18 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Star Wars: The Old Republic  |  Topic: SWTOR 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 402 Go Down Print
Author Topic: SWTOR  (Read 2072178 times)
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11839


Reply #280 on: December 19, 2008, 02:02:05 PM

There is no earthly reason that mmog style d20 variant combat can't be translated to a ranged weapon setting.

There is also no reason that positioning and movement can't be made more important. And absolutely no reason it has to encourage you-swing-I-swing slugfests.


As others have said. EVE.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
TripleDES
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1086


WWW
Reply #281 on: December 19, 2008, 03:35:45 PM

Exception to the rule. And it did take the game quite a while to get somewhere.

Also, in EVE you shoot spaceships with shields and ablative armor. The laser-vs-human-no-instant-death argument from Sunbury goes kind of moot in this case. Assuming you equal spaceships with humans... Since there are no human PCs... yet... What the fuck did I want to say?
« Last Edit: December 19, 2008, 03:37:28 PM by TripleDES »

EVE (inactive): Deakin Frost -- APB (fukken dead): Kayleigh (on Patriot).
Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8306


Reply #282 on: December 20, 2008, 12:49:19 AM

Just make the actual visual combat blocks and parries and dodges, your health goes down when your 'hit', but visually you still parry/dodge or whatever until the killing blow.


The Health Bar represents your 'focus' or 'endurance' or whatever, and when its out, the fatal attack slips in and your suddenly in two pieces or have a blaster hole in your chest.

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
Sophismata
Terracotta Army
Posts: 543


Reply #283 on: December 20, 2008, 04:47:56 AM

...which is really what hitpoints are supposed to represent, anyway.

"You finally did it, you magnificent bastards. You went so nerd that even I don't know WTF you're talking about anymore. I salute you." - WindupAtheist
Aez
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1369


Reply #284 on: December 20, 2008, 06:30:39 AM

... except the hitpoint bar should not be replenished with healing abilities if it was really what it represented.
Threash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9165


Reply #285 on: December 20, 2008, 10:24:24 AM

... except the hitpoint bar should not be replenished with healing abilities if it was really what it represented.

Then you stop calling it healing and call it "restore strenght" or whatever, really its not hard.

I am the .00000001428%
sidereal
Contributor
Posts: 1712


Reply #286 on: December 20, 2008, 10:28:26 AM

You mean like calling it 'Morale' and having it be restored by music and reduced by taunting and insults, and the result of losing it be 'retreating' instead of dying?

If only some game could do something like that. . .

THIS IS THE MOST I HAVE EVERY WANTED TO GET IN TO A BETA
ashrik
Terracotta Army
Posts: 631


Reply #287 on: December 20, 2008, 10:34:47 AM

The semantics! They do nothing!

People have enjoyed, are enjoying, and will always enjoy star wars games in which a blaster shot or lightsaber swipe doesn't instantly kill them. Changing it visually to a series of dodges/parries while your fatigue builds or stamina drops doesn't seem to add any value to the product. I don't expect that stuff to be fatal to my character in a Star Wars game because it just makes sense any more than I expect headshots to be instant kills in Fallout 3 because it just makes sense. Just seem to be nitpicking at little peripheral systems that matter very little, in comparison to the whole, because we don't have much info yet.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #288 on: December 20, 2008, 11:15:40 AM

You mean like calling it 'Morale' and having it be restored by music and reduced by taunting and insults, and the result of losing it be 'retreating' instead of dying?

If only some game could do something like that. . .

Yes, we get it.  LOTRO justifies its system that way.  It does not however, have animations for parry dodging, etc.  You actually get whacked, which reduces your morale.    *shrugs*
Morat20
Terracotta Army
Posts: 18529


Reply #289 on: December 20, 2008, 11:24:47 AM

...which is really what hitpoints are supposed to represent, anyway.
I always started out pen and paper games that have new players with the "Hit points aren't your ability to take a hit. They're your ability to take a hit, your ability to dodge, your luck, your karma, your fate, your ability to roll with blows --- everything that comes together in keeping you alive in a fight." talk.

I then go on to explain that it's not that a level 20 character can take a ballista bolt and still live -- they can't. Their high HP pools merely represent that they're experienced enough to get the hell out of the way, whereas said level 5 guy wouldn't be fast enough.

Doesn't really matter in MMORPGs, I think, but for P&P games it adds some realism for players.
Ratman_tf
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3818


Reply #290 on: December 20, 2008, 12:35:23 PM

...which is really what hitpoints are supposed to represent, anyway.
I always started out pen and paper games that have new players with the "Hit points aren't your ability to take a hit. They're your ability to take a hit, your ability to dodge, your luck, your karma, your fate, your ability to roll with blows --- everything that comes together in keeping you alive in a fight." talk.

I then go on to explain that it's not that a level 20 character can take a ballista bolt and still live -- they can't. Their high HP pools merely represent that they're experienced enough to get the hell out of the way, whereas said level 5 guy wouldn't be fast enough.

Doesn't really matter in MMORPGs, I think, but for P&P games it adds some realism for players.

Yeah. I never really liked that explanation though. Because your AC was your chance to deflect and/or avoid damage. Saying that somebody with more HP could take glancing blows better just kinda ignored the fact that my fighter had a ton of hit points and could take the best hit from a broadsword (critical, max damage) and survive.
Or that it wasn't such a concern for big monsters like giants and dragons.

It just isnt' a consistent rationale.



 "What I'm saying is you should make friends with a few catasses, they smell funny but they're very helpful."
-Calantus makes the best of a smelly situation.
ajax34i
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2527


Reply #291 on: December 20, 2008, 04:08:39 PM

People have enjoyed, are enjoying, and will always enjoy star wars games in which a blaster shot or lightsaber swipe doesn't instantly kill them. Changing it visually to a series of dodges/parries while your fatigue builds or stamina drops doesn't seem to add any value to the product.

Visual dodges and parries add quite a bit of value to a game, for me.  The parrying and lightsaber-shoving that the NPC's in the KOTOR games did looked way better than the 'swing at empty air' moves of other games.  Of course, as far as realism goes, you can't really parry with a sword without ruining it very fast, so meh.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #292 on: January 27, 2009, 08:43:14 AM

Supposed "inside source" gives some information on SWTOR.  awesome, for real

I don't know how legit it is (probably not much), but if it is, then its pretty much death to the game as far as I can tell.

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/221089/Here-it-is-an-inside-look-at-TOR-in-its-current-state.html
SnakeCharmer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3807


Reply #293 on: January 27, 2009, 08:46:39 AM

You bumped this thread for that?
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #294 on: January 27, 2009, 08:49:23 AM

You bumped this thread for that?

Someone might care *shrugs* it was only on the second page.
Rasix
Moderator
Posts: 15024

I am the harbinger of your doom!


Reply #295 on: January 27, 2009, 08:50:56 AM

Sounds great.  Would love to see a game that doesn't make me go grab 4 other people to complete a quest line that I solo'd to that point.

Not that I believe that information is real.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 08:52:28 AM by Rasix »

-Rasix
Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27449

Badge Whore


Reply #296 on: January 27, 2009, 09:03:22 AM

Yeah, I fail to see the problem, other than tacking on a sub fee for a single player game. The game is supposed to be KOTOR: Online, and that's what it sounds like.   The folks bitching about "Whah, fuck hybrid classes" and "wtf you can solo the whole game?" make me giggle in sadistic glee.  Its like people WANT to sit around unable to do anything for hours like the old EQ days.  No thanks!  Raid content/ small group content is nice, but even I have a problem with it being the only avenue of gearing up toons and It'll be nice to see a game going a different direction.

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
SnakeCharmer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3807


Reply #297 on: January 27, 2009, 09:14:21 AM

The TOR forums are awful.  Just awful.  Painful to read.  I try not to read them until Friday nights when the weekly updates are posted.  Otherwise it's the same drivel posted again and again.  Suppose in that manner it's no different than any other MMO pre-launch forums.
Montague
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1297


Reply #298 on: January 27, 2009, 09:15:06 AM

Yeah, I fail to see the problem, other than tacking on a sub fee for a single player game. The game is supposed to be KOTOR: Online, and that's what it sounds like.   The folks bitching about "Whah, fuck hybrid classes" and "wtf you can solo the whole game?" make me giggle in sadistic glee.  Its like people WANT to sit around unable to do anything for hours like the old EQ days.  No thanks!  Raid content/ small group content is nice, but even I have a problem with it being the only avenue of gearing up toons and It'll be nice to see a game going a different direction.

Sounds great to me. I would definitely pay $15 a month for a KOTOR with massive content that me and a couple of friends could play together. A KOTOR where I have to group with 24 other people with names like "xxxDARTHBOBOxxx" to do stuff, no thanks.

When Fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross - Sinclair Lewis.

I can tell more than 1 fucktard at a time to stfu, have no fears. - WayAbvPar

We all have the God-given right to go to hell our own way.  Don't fuck with God's plan. - MahrinSkel
SnakeCharmer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3807


Reply #299 on: January 27, 2009, 09:23:12 AM

Oh yeah, I'd love a constantly updated single player type game with some co-op stuff.  MMOs are generally a blast until you start having to converse with the general population.  Then it comes crashing to a halt.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #300 on: January 27, 2009, 09:48:57 AM

Oh yeah, I'd love a constantly updated single player type game with some co-op stuff.  MMOs are generally a blast until you start having to converse with the general population.  Then it comes crashing to a halt.

I guess my problem then is why call it an MMO?  This might as well be Neverwinter Nights with frequent content updates.
Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8306


Reply #301 on: January 27, 2009, 09:49:53 AM

MMO = Monthly payments.

 awesome, for real

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #302 on: January 27, 2009, 10:22:44 AM



I'm not paying a sub fee for a single-player game, and companies can go right on eating shit until they learn that.

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
Yegolev
Moderator
Posts: 24440

2/10 WOULD NOT INGEST


WWW
Reply #303 on: January 27, 2009, 11:21:26 AM

I'll pay a sub for a single-player game with a huge world and constant updates that also had co-op... but I guess the co-op means it's not single-player.  I want to game with my friends, not random shitcocks, which isn't a problem until I have to find four shitcocks to fill out a group when I really just want to play with my wife and/or another friend.  LotRO comes pretty close but it has more than one place where you need a full group to progress the story, and that is what has kept my wife and I from finishing even Book 1.  I keep telling her that it's not a big deal, we can just jump into a group and knock it out (Epic 1.11) but it is, in fact, a big deal.

Why am I homeless?  Why do all you motherfuckers need homes is the real question.
They called it The Prayer, its answer was law
Mommy come back 'cause the water's all gone
SnakeCharmer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3807


Reply #304 on: January 27, 2009, 11:29:13 AM

Oh yeah, I'd love a constantly updated single player type game with some co-op stuff.  MMOs are generally a blast until you start having to converse with the general population.  Then it comes crashing to a halt.

I guess my problem then is why call it an MMO?  This might as well be Neverwinter Nights with frequent content updates.

Add in a stout co-op/matchmaking component.  Would that really be a bad thing?

I'd rather just be able to play solo or with the companions or a couple friends.  I'm not in a large guild - hell, it's not even a guild, just a close circle of friends spread out over the country that like the same games.  Every 'real' guild I've ever been apart of is nothing more than a bunch of players playing solo playing together: each person was off doing their own thing, and people would help each other when need be.  Otherwise, guild chat or vent was just a bunch people talking.  I've never been apart of a raiding guild in any game, and likely never will.
Mrbloodworth
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15148


Reply #305 on: January 27, 2009, 12:11:38 PM

It does not however, have animations for parry dodging, etc.

Uh, yes it does. My hunter dodges fucking arrows with matrix like grace.

Today's How-To: Scrambling a Thread to the Point of Incoherence in Only One Post with MrBloodworth . - schild
www.mrbloodworthproductions.com  www.amuletsbymerlin.com
WindupAtheist
Army of One
Posts: 7028

Badicalthon


Reply #306 on: January 27, 2009, 12:16:15 PM

Blizzard didn't charge for Diablo 2 and that whole thing turned out kinda successful. It's not just the Blizzard magic either, since I haven't heard about Guild Wars driving ArenaNet out of business yet. This is just a moneygrab by a bunch of EA fucks who think you'll pay $15 a month for anything with multiplayer and levels. You want to sell me additional content? It's called an expansion pack. But hey, why crank out a traditional expansion in six months and charge forty bucks for it, when you can produce content at the same rate and make ninety bucks in sub fees in the same period of time? Shit I'll bet you can collect sub fees AND sell expansion packs, as long as you keep buying the notion that it's an MMO!

Money. Grab.

Whatever. It's going to blunder around in development generating little-to-no buzz, EA is going to shove it out the door early and unfinished because they just can't fucking help themselves, and it's going to sell mediocre and then shuffle off into obscurity.

"You're just a dick who quotes himself in his sig."  --  Schild
"Yeah, it's pretty awesome."  --  Me
Yegolev
Moderator
Posts: 24440

2/10 WOULD NOT INGEST


WWW
Reply #307 on: January 27, 2009, 12:41:53 PM

While I generally agree with WUA's assessment of KotORO/EA, I submit that I would have paid a monthly fee for Diablo II if it meant Blizz would have put more effort into preventing battle.net from being as shitty as it was.

Why am I homeless?  Why do all you motherfuckers need homes is the real question.
They called it The Prayer, its answer was law
Mommy come back 'cause the water's all gone
Sheepherder
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5192


Reply #308 on: January 27, 2009, 12:46:09 PM

Of course, as far as realism goes, you can't really parry with a sword without ruining it very fast, so meh.

Yeah, responding to an old post, sue me.  But you don't parry with the edge of the blade, you parry with the flat and allow the striking blade to slide along the length, either directing it outwards to throw the guy off guard or inwards, turning your blade slightly and catching it with your cross-guard.  At which point it is possible to use the greater contact area between the blades and your more centered balance to twist the blade out of the other guy's hand.

Anyways, I tried going to that link.  The only possible conclusion: fuck mmorpg.com.

I submit that I would have paid a monthly fee for Diablo II if it meant Blizz would have put more effort into preventing battle.net from being as shitty as it was.

Like by ethnically cleansing half the population that played it?
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 32117

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


Reply #309 on: January 27, 2009, 12:48:35 PM

I'll pay a sub for a single-player game with a huge world and constant updates that also had co-op... but I guess the co-op means it's not single-player.  I want to game with my friends, not random shitcocks, which isn't a problem until I have to find four shitcocks to fill out a group when I really just want to play with my wife and/or another friend.  LotRO comes pretty close but it has more than one place where you need a full group to progress the story, and that is what has kept my wife and I from finishing even Book 1.  I keep telling her that it's not a big deal, we can just jump into a group and knock it out (Epic 1.11) but it is, in fact, a big deal.
You want any chance of ever competing with WoW, pay heed to this dude.

Or go ahead and try to make the same game BUT BETTAR. The reason I play EQ2 is basically, everything else is the same and I have high level characters there. But even that game gets me down when I'm in a great quest line and cockblocked by some epic dungeon crap. Because you shouldn't be able to get to the fun stuff without putting up with mmogtards. Oh, and you picked the wrong class, you suck, we don't want you, blah blah fucking why are these game forms still dominant? Because for some reason, the masochistic geek assholes like grunk are driving the market, and companies think that by having some tepid solo component, they've covered all the bases.

My old idea is to have multiple instances of a dungeon: public, group, and solo. Public is like old-school EQ dungeons, open for the poaching, have fun kids.  Group scales to your group. Solo scales to your character, maybe even some class-specific options. Anyone in any form of the dungeon can turn on the dungeon chat channel, for LFG or just socialization. But then you'd get the grunks bitching that people like me could hang out and casually solo something and not /earn/ my gear for bragging rights or whatthefuckever. Meanwhile, these are the same assholes who will be first to tell you that if you don't force grouping, nobody will ever group. So it's good game design to force people to play the way they don't want to?

MMO != mandatory grouping. Please fucking stop. It will lead to better grouping (srsly, UO).
SnakeCharmer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3807


Reply #310 on: January 27, 2009, 12:55:36 PM

Exactly, Sky.

Which is why, in my own humble opinion, if any MMO developer could implement Valve's AI Director into raid encounters in MMOs it would be moneyhats.
trias_e
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1296


Reply #311 on: January 27, 2009, 02:37:39 PM

Quote

Or go ahead and try to make the same game BUT BETTAR. The reason I play EQ2 is basically, everything else is the same and I have high level characters there. But even that game gets me down when I'm in a great quest line and cockblocked by some epic dungeon crap. Because you shouldn't be able to get to the fun stuff without putting up with mmogtards. Oh, and you picked the wrong class, you suck, we don't want you, blah blah fucking why are these game forms still dominant? Because for some reason, the masochistic geek assholes like grunk are driving the market, and companies think that by having some tepid solo component, they've covered all the bases.

My old idea is to have multiple instances of a dungeon: public, group, and solo. Public is like old-school EQ dungeons, open for the poaching, have fun kids.  Group scales to your group. Solo scales to your character, maybe even some class-specific options. Anyone in any form of the dungeon can turn on the dungeon chat channel, for LFG or just socialization. But then you'd get the grunks bitching that people like me could hang out and casually solo something and not /earn/ my gear for bragging rights or whatthefuckever. Meanwhile, these are the same assholes who will be first to tell you that if you don't force grouping, nobody will ever group. So it's good game design to force people to play the way they don't want to?

I think the big problem with the WoW and post-WoW MMORPGs is their incongruous nature.  You'll be going along, playing your bland but mildly entertaining never-ending single-player RPG (that's all these games are without the MMOGtard element), and then they fuck with the skinner box and tell you to do go be social for seemingly no reason whatsoever.  Current MMORPGs start off with solitary activity, and then randomly expect you to change after letting you settle into this mode of play.  This is why public questing in WAR was such a great idea (with horrible execution of course).  We'll be seeing more reiterations of that in the future I'd expect.

But I don't think mainly catering to solo players is a necessity in every MMORPG.  Personally, I actually find that this hurts retention for me.  I find these games last about 24 to 48 hours without any sort of social necessitation.  CoH, AoC, and LoTRO all certainly fit this bill for me.  They aren't terrible for the genre...I don't see why the fuck I'd play any of these games for longer than a month if I just played them as a singleplayer game.  And since 90% of the early content is solo, that's really the only option you have.  Then when they eventually thrust grouping on to you, it's unnatural and no one wants to do it.  Which to me is simply ludicrious and utter fail in a MMORPG.

So SWTOR.  Link is gone, but if it's a single-player game with a monthly payment, that, of course, is fucking insane. Why not just make a single-player RPG that's actually good?  Instead of a what's likely to be a mediocre single-player RPG with time sinks and bullshit that I have to pay a monthly for?

Oh yeah, skinner boxes and money hats. 
Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280

Auto Assault Affectionado


Reply #312 on: January 27, 2009, 02:42:58 PM

While I generally agree with WUA's assessment of KotORO/EA, I submit that I would have paid a monthly fee for Diablo II if it meant Blizz would have put more effort into preventing battle.net from being as shitty as it was.

Shit, I would have paid a monthly fee just so my characters didn't get deleted from inactivity. If GW had a monthly fee... I'd probably pay it. I wouldn't expect either to be in the 'full MMO' price range, but if ArenaNet slapped a $5/month fee on GW, I would pay it.

The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT.
Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8306


Reply #313 on: January 27, 2009, 03:00:43 PM

I wouldn't, and our magical duo would be broken up.  ACK!

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #314 on: January 27, 2009, 05:10:03 PM

I guess my idea of a MASSIVELY multiplayer game implies some sort of massively multiplayer aspect.  I actually don't have a huge problem with the idea of paying a monthly fee and getting a co-op game with frequent content updates.  In fact it doesn't sound like a terrible idea.  What I have a problem is when they say "We are making a Star Wars MMO" and give me a star wars co-op game.'

Perhaps its merely marketing.  People are probably willing to pay monthly if you use the term "MMO" and might be resistant to the idea of that concept seeping into other genres. 
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 402 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Star Wars: The Old Republic  |  Topic: SWTOR  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC