SWTOR

[DLRiley]

I hope BioWare realizes there making Guild Wars with a starwar IP. If they don't....I sense a great failure in the force.

[Lantyssa]

I would be quite happy if they did that.

[Cyrrex]

Same.  Despite what often gets thrown around here, Bioware has a pretty good track record.  While I won't believe all claims, they know their storytelling, too.

[Venkman]

So if SWTOR comes to me and says I'm basically getting an offline or LAN game with a graphical chatroom patched onto it, and then they say they want to charge me monthly because I'm getting so many sweet, sweet hours, I'll say fuck off, they're charging way over market rate for that software.

I am very curious where people are getting the idea that SWTOR is going to be a bunch of people playing single player games with a chatroom/auction house. Because I haven't seen anything yet that implies anything different from AoC. And AoC didn't fail because it had a single-player front end wtih eventual dropping into a semi-MMO ("semi" because you could level up well in night missions alone) and then a full-on MMO.

I also don't get the rage about MMO monthly fees. Nobody cares about the accumulated financial investment they made into an MMO until they're about ready to quit and are trying to emotionally divorce themselves from their character and friends. It's not really because they "wasted" $150. Conversely, nobody cares about the potential $150 they may invest in an MMO over 10 months, unless they're so strapped for money they shouldn't be buying games in the first place.

[Merusk]

Welcome to my friend, the recession.  Perhaps you've heard of it?  I'm seeing people drop from WoW because of it, the question is how many overall. 

I certainly would't pay for WoW if it didn't have the large-group endgame, but that's my own bias.  I don't need to pay per month to wave my e-peen and/ or have people around me for he illusion of a world interaction. (Which I still don't understand from the crowd here, who turns off all channels and doesn't group.)  If it's a single player game, with only single player or 2-3 person missions, why the fuck would I pay for it at all?  Because it's 'the model' and 'just how things are done these days?'

Screw that. I'll go full console first.   While SP games may be designed with only 12-24 hours of gameplay, I can also find them for less than $50 if I wait a short while.  I'm willing to, and do that already.   The games I pay full-price for are ones I know I'll get more than 12-24 hours of. Things like Civs, Mount and Blade or other sim-likes and soem FPS.  You know, things where the game differs each time you play it.  I'm sure as hell not paying $50 for Final Fantasy ## since it's a once-then-done experience.

[schild]

Bioware has a pretty good track record.

EDMONTON.

[rk47]

the hype is just isn't there, I foresee many many many many jedis in there on day one hunting down sand people for moisture vaporator parts to hand in at Tatooine right after they finish the tutorial in Dantooine cause it's the 'fastest way to exp'

[Lantyssa]

$15 is still a good deal if you are enjoying the game.  You won't get multiple games to give you the same number of hours played for $15, even if you buy them from the bargin bin.

As long as I get my money's worth for the month, I can afford to stop and start a single MMO, including during the lean periods.

[Cyrrex]

Bioware has a pretty good track record.

EDMONTON.

Quit throwing things in my face that I forgot.

Still, I'm not convinced that the corporate culture of Bioware won't have it's influence.  It should.

[sidereal]

Bioware has a pretty good track record.

EDMONTON.

You are clearly not aware that once you put the Bioware logo above your front door, thick drops of sweet genius drip onto the heads of your employees.

[schild]

Bioware has a pretty good track record.

EDMONTON.

You are clearly not aware that once you put the Bioware logo above your front door, thick drops of sweet genius drip onto the heads of your employees.

I'm far too aware of this, hence my reminding of that one little fact - constantly.

[HaemishM]

Isn't the Bioware office in charge of this also being run by Kelly Flock? If so, you people are really getting your hopes too far up.

[HaemishM]

schild has informed me it is not, in fact, Kelly Flock, but a bunch of ex-SWG, ex-Shadowbane devs. Ummm, yeah, fail.

[Venkman]

If it's a single player game, with only single player or 2-3 person missions, why the fuck would I pay for it at all?  Because it's 'the model' and 'just how things are done these days?'

You're raging against the second paragraph in my post but about stuff I asked about in the first paragraph? I'm all for generic rage, but wtf do we really know about SWTOR to get all sandy about it this early?

[SnakeCharmer]

schild has informed me it is not, in fact, Kelly Flock, but a bunch of ex-SWG, ex-Shadowbane devs. Ummm, yeah, fail.

Gordon Walton - Studio head (SWG, The Sims Online, UO)
Rich Vogel - Vice President (SWG, UO, M59)
Damion Schubert - Lead Combat Designer (M95, Shadowbane, The Sims Online)
Dallas Dickinson - Lead Content Designer (SWG, EQ)

If it's a single player game, with only single player or 2-3 person missions, why the fuck would I pay for it at all?  Because it's 'the model' and 'just how things are done these days?'

You're raging against the second paragraph in my post but about stuff I asked about in the first paragraph? I'm all for generic rage, but wtf do we really know about SWTOR to get all sandy about it this early?

Dude.  MMO discussion.  F13.  Sand comes with the territory.

[Ratman_tf]

Gordon Walton - Studio head (SWG, The Sims Online, UO)
Rich Vogel - Vice President (SWG, UO, M59)
Damion Schubert - Lead Combat Designer (M95, Shadowbane, The Sims Online)
Dallas Dickinson - Lead Content Designer (SWG, EQ)

[NinjaSteve]

Bioware has a pretty good track record.

EDMONTON.

I'd never have thought to see my hometown in such big bright words!

[eldaec]

Bioware has a pretty good track record.

EDMONTON.

You are clearly not aware that once you put the Bioware logo above your front door, thick drops of sweet genius drip onto the heads of your employees.

I'm far too aware of this, hence my reminding of that one little fact - constantly.

I swear half of f13 is doing this on purpose now.

[Zzulo]

new vid

mostly interviews, with some sporadic ingame footage

http://www.swtor.com/media

[eldaec]

I'm lazy. I demand to be told if the video contains any information.

[Hawkbit]

I wouldn't call it information.  It's almost as if Mark Jacobs was at the helm of that video. 

That said, if they pull off what they're saying, I might quite like it. 

Different story quests based on what class you are (Sith, Jedi and BH mentioned). 
Lots of popular environs. 
Set 200 years after KOTOR, yet thousands before ANH. 

It does have a bit of a clone wars/cartoony look to it.  If anything, it reminded me a little of WoW's art direction because they're likely doing it to keep poly counts down but textures rich. 

Dunno, I liked what I saw overall.  Diablo with a coat of SW paint sounds awesome to me.  I like the story-based part of the game, but if they're focusing on that, they better put a ton of story in and keep updates flowing. 

[rk47]

Summary
This takes place 100 years after KOTOR 2.
Apparently the forces of destruction are winning over order...and you get to choose sides. Each character class has their own starter quests that spans their own racial pairing (in this case,class). I'm guessing there'd be RVR in there.

Personally this sounds all too familiar but knowing Bioware (edmonton or not), they should retain their 'movie production' into the story presentation which we often see in their games (Mass Effect, etc). What's the ETA on this thing anyway?

[Aez]

What's the ETA on this thing anyway?

Before it's finished.

[rk47]

What's the ETA on this thing anyway?

Before it's finished.

no mmorpgs arrives finished i guess. 

[WindupAtheist]

That said, if they pull off what they're saying, I might quite like it.

Come on man, what even prompts you to say such a thing? It's a bunch of EQ/UO/SWG developers shitting out something that we can guarantee EA is going to shove out the door half-finished. You know it, I know it, we all fucking know it.

[Stormwaltz]

Bioware has a pretty good track record.

EDMONTON.

As I've said before, a big swack of Edmonton moved down to Austin to work on SWTOR. But you knew that when you posted this. ;) Hell, the lead writer of ME1/2 is moving down there in a few weeks.

Anyway. I talked to one of the writers in the Edmonton office who's telecommuting to work on SWTOR. Single-player? No. Diablo/Guild Wars? No. Friendly towards single players and small groups? Yes, very. Less oriented towards those who like their fun to rely on the contributions of 40-60 strangers? Yes.

I walked away with a positive impression. It sounds like they're making a game that suits the way I and my friends tend to play rather than the way catasses and raider guilds tend to play. Only my impression, not official, contents may have settled during shipping, disclaim, disclaim.

[Zane0]

Reducing group sizes also tends to quicken the rate of content consumption.. unless there's a whole Diablo thing going on, which apparently isn't the case? Not to mention the unusual pains being taken to craft a careful single player narrative that many MMO players are predisposed to skipping through.

This sort of stuff is cynically received because it all sounds far too good to be true. No dev studio has ever produced static content at a rate deemed satisfactory by their playerbase; there needs to be some sort of emergent social gameplay to fall back on. Instead, the Bioware PR campaign seems entranced thus far with this idea of providing parallel, rich, impactful, singleplayer storylines -- but this will all be exhausted in a matter of months. Then what? Guild Wars PvP would be a good cop-out; the alternative would be.. nothing? What?

[Stormwaltz]

No dev studio has ever produced static content at a rate deemed satisfactory by their playerbase

I disagree. But of course I'm biased.

I can't say much more than I have. It sounds like they're taking the route LotRO has following the last year or so. Epic story quests + 3-12 man raids + single-player instances. That's a combination that works very well for me and the people I tend to game with. Obviously it can't work for every style of player. With apologies to Sun Tzu, he who tries to appeal to every audience will appeal to no audience.

[Hawkbit]

Speaking of AC, I was reminded of AC2 during this move by all the story talk.  I remember from AC2 they had monthly updates and (from my spotty memory) you could look at the quests that were offered on a monthly basis in the UI, like it sorted it by month.  I'd really like to see that enter back into a MMO.  It keeps players logging in every month to both pay and have something new to do.  On paper, WoW is one of the best games I've ever played... but lack of consistent new content for all player types means I play for 2 months, then I'm out till the next xpac. 

I hope that a focus on solo/small group content will open up staff that would have done raid material to do content.  I hope. 

[Zane0]

I understand of course the limitations of your position in this capacity, but I do appreciate your thoughts.

If SWTOR is ultimately taking cues from LOTRO -- fine, this is sensible in a few ways. If we compare Turbine's own DDO to LOTRO and conclude that 10-man raids are an ideal compromise between emergent social activity and static content consumption, the line that begins to justify a subscription fee, then I would agree; and it would be sensible for Bioware to adopt this model.

What I still take exception to, however, is the angle the good doctors appear to be taking -- this idea of a vast single player narrative. Yeah, maybe that'll be the 'hook' for the first few months of release and that of any subsequent expansion pack; but the vast majority of time afterwards, presuming a LOTRO model, will be spent in mini-raids with more than a few of your friends (or idiotic strangers), and I very much doubt that we'll be seeing individual agency, or player choice, or a sweeping storyline, or saving the world by your lonesome in these situations.

[palmer_eldritch]

LoTRo online did a great job of giving you quests which "changed the world" in the sense that they changed the world as seen by that particular character, but you still knew that lower level characters were seeing things as they had been for you a week earlier.

I'm not knocking LoTRO because the quests and storyline were fun. It does sound as if SWTOR will do something similar, except perhaps giving the payer more choices to make. What they seem to be suggesting, however, is that players' actions will actually, really change the world, which is something I'll believe when I see it.

As long as it has exciting combat, shiny graphics and some of the classic Star Wars music to bring back the memories, I'll probably spend my money on it. Too much hype makes me cynical.

[Stormwaltz]

If SWTOR is ultimately taking cues from LOTRO

Just to be clear, I was drawing a parallel based on my own experiences playing LotRO (which are extensive, since it strongly appeals to my play style). I couldn't tell you what the SWTOR team is drawing their inspirations from. The guys I talk to on the design team seem to chew through MMGs very quickly. They were "done" with LotRO before I even started playing, and in the last year they got through to the endgames of AoC and WAR (and maybe some others we haven't talked about).

What I still take exception to, however, is the angle the good doctors appear to be taking -- this idea of a vast single player narrative.

I'm of two minds about it myself. The conventional wisdom is that you can't make any one player the focus/hero of an an MMG, since all quests are shared and repeatable. But I can see ways to have single player/small group focus in epic/class quests without losing the community spirit of an MMORPG in the workday public quests and dungeons, in crafting and loot-selling, and in moving through the world between quest areas and dungeons.

Like everyone else who's worked on (or played) an MMG, I have a "dream design" on my hard drive at home. One of the concepts I want to explore is use of instances to allow players to change the world -- as they see it on their own client in most cases, and as everyone sees it in the case of Sagas (my name for uber-Epic, world-story advancing quests).

Shit, I'm off-topic now. Anyway. All I wanted to say in the first place is that "SWTOR is a single-player game" is an exaggeration. Back to work now.

[Malakili]

 What they seem to be suggesting, however, is that players' actions will actuallu, really change the world, which is something I'll believe when I see it.

Sure it will change the world, just only for the player that does it.  If you want a game where players change the world, it can't be done through quests, because that means once the quest has been completed, the world has been changed, and that is that.   EVE is a pretty good example, so is UO, SWG, etc..  Players have a huge impact on the game world.  The problem is, how do you make a game with the depth of a game like EVE, that is actually playable by a million people?  The answer is: I don't know, but SWTOR isn't going to be the ones who do it, and they aren't even going to try.  They are simply going to give us a lot of KOTOR content with a chat box,  call it an MMO, release content patches every so often, and charge 15 bucks a month.

[eldaec]

Basically the Hellgate:London strategy.

Which is another game everyone was all OMGWTFBBQ about and didn't mind paying a subscription for until the quality of execution turned out to be about the level of Horizons.

[ashrik]

I just don't really see the appeal in adding a new pillar of gaming to a place that was structurally sound without it and, according to most who lived there, looked better when they could pretend their own structure was in its place. When most products of this nature are being hyped to me, they claim to provide more and more interesting systems of things that I'd like to see. This is going in the entirely opposite direction of having a superior version of something that I've never cared about to begin with.

Even if we are you believe the statement claiming to have more content that 4 to 6 other RPGs (I can't help but assume this is purely a mathematical assessment), it just seems like a whole lot of what I don't want. While I'm sure ease-of-use and soloability certainly contributed to WoW's success, I'm not quite ready to believe the straw-man line that following it to its logical conclusion (the massively multiplayer singleplayer RPG) could be a greater, or even equal, draw.

In conclusion: HARRUMPH