SWTOR

[lamaros]

They haven't gone into detail.  I'd be surprised if they let a Jedi go fully over to the Darkside, but there's no reason why Smugglers, Bounty Hunters, or Troopers at least wouldn't have options to be good or evil, regardless of which faction each class is aligned with.  I imagine a "good" Sith wouldn't be petting puppies so much as showing mercy rather than killing people mid-conversation for no reason.

Actually, yes there is. It's, as Marg said, due to the fact that they're already clearly delineated the two sides before you even make a character. At best it will come down to one side being Boring Good/Well Meaning Nutcase and the other being Psychpath and Criminal Mastermind. If they wanted there to be any crossover they'd have just not made it a two uber-faction game to begin with.

I can see that some of you buy this as being meaningful in some way, but it's pretty much a gloss to me. As is the whole story thing.

People replay different classes in WoW because the character mechanics are different and the races are different. They replay on the other faction because the whole game is from a different perspective. If SWTOR is going for the later element with their story focus then you can understand why, but I cannot see them having a chance in hell of making every class feel like a faction, and if they don't then the mechanics sure better be fun, otherwise what's the point?

And if all I want to do is see what Thrall might have said to me if I said "fuck you, I want more money for killing Ony" instead of being a nice loyal subject then I'm just looking it up on the internet, I'm not playing the fucking game through again.

[Sheepherder]

The divide is Empire/Rebel + Dark/Light, right?  The answer is pretty simple as to how they handle it:

Empire / Light = Lawful Good
Empire / Dark = Lawful Evil
Rebel / Light = Chaos Good
Rebel / Dark = Chaos Evil

[Lantyssa]

Um, they've said from the begining that Sith could choose to fully embrace the darkside or might seek to mitigate things from the inside.  Likewise Alliance could be the typical goody-two-shoes or can be selfish money-hungry jerks.

The last video kind of strongly hints that you can do most missions with buddies from different classes.  Yes, you can experience their stories, but you can also do another play through and make different choices.  How much effect those choices make we don't know, but I'd guess it's at least on the order of what we've seen with KotOR and Mass Effect, if not moreso.

And at the very least, if you're worried about repeating content, Sith aren't going to see any of the Alliance content and vice versa.  If you duo or solo though, you'll have a lot of options.

[lamaros]

How much effect those choices make we don't know, but I'd guess it's at least on the order of what we've seen with KotOR and Mass Effect, if not moreso.

Highly highly highly unlikely. It'll all me cosmetic or it'll be patched to be so. Imagine the balance issues.

[Lantyssa]

Balance issues for what?  Rewards we don't even know about yet?  Loot could be anything from parts you used to craft custom gear, to completely random Diablo-style drops.

[Koyasha]

The divide is Empire/Rebel + Dark/Light, right?  The answer is pretty simple as to how they handle it:

Empire / Light = Lawful Good
Empire / Dark = Lawful Evil
Rebel / Light = Chaos Good
Rebel / Dark = Chaos Evil

Republic and Sith Empire, not rebels - it's set ~4000 years before the Battle of Yavin if I remember correctly.

And I actually see the divide being somewhat different.  On the republic side it'll probably be pretty similar to the Mass Effect concept of being ruthlessly good or being good and having magic plot fairies making all your decisions actually work out good instead of letting the massive stupidity give serious consequences (care to guess what alignment I usually play?), while the Sith will probably be kind of the opposite, being either efficient evil or batshit insane destructive evil.

[Bzalthek]

As of right now, there's quite a lot we don't know.  I'm pretty cynical about these things myself and I'll believe what they're saying when I see it.  However, everyone saying "can't," "wont," "only" etc are making vastly larger assumptions about these unknowns than those who are saying "it could," "it's possible," "maybe."

We're not saying ti will happen, but that doesn't mean it can't happen.

[lamaros]

Balance issues for what?  Rewards we don't even know about yet?  Loot could be anything from parts you used to craft custom gear, to completely random Diablo-style drops.

Player power.

Random != "on the order of what we've seen with KotOR and Mass Effect, if not moreso", BTW.

If you have choices that have a meaningful impact on the game, and by that I mean they change something people care about in a way that cannot be changed back, then you have balance issues. If you don't.. then you don't have meaningful choices and they story is just so much text and voice acting that doesn't really change the game experience unless you're roleplaying.

[Bzalthek]

Ah, I see.  Your definition of meaningful choice seems rather narrow.  You want to be the main character of the game (or at least a big one.)  But so does everyone else.  You get to be the hero of your own story which will unfold depending on your choices.  How interesting that will be is still up in the air, but with an estimated 40 novels worth of dialogue being recorded for 8 non-linear story arcs it's possible that your choices will lead to drastically different personal outcomes.  But in the end the figurative death star will still blow up.  Maybe you weren't Luke, but maybe you were a key figure in getting Luke to that moment.  Whatever.  The problem with your idea of meaningful choices is that some douchebag is going to come along and permanently fuck things up.  I can see a guy out there with his digital shovel digging trenches so you can read "Fuck You" from space.

[Falwell]

I'd like to start seeing details of why this is an MMO and not a single player game with inflated fees to cover the audience.

[DLRiley]

Cause its the next generation I tell ya 

[tmp]

If you have choices that have a meaningful impact on the game, and by that I mean they change something people care about in a way that cannot be changed back, then you have balance issues.

Unless they are aiming the game at their single player RPG audience, which finds it pretty normal to simply replay the game and take different choice(s) if they want to see what it's like to have different set of powers.

[AutomaticZen]

I'd like to start seeing details of why this is an MMO and not a single player game with inflated fees to cover the audience.

It's KOTOR 3 with online coop, probably some mass PVP stages and ongoing DLC.

I oddly find I'm not having a problem with this.

[5150]

Isn't part of the problem with this discussion that Bioware are using Sith and Republic as 'factions' but people are treating them as strict alignments.

From what I saw of KOTOR most of the 'Sith' were just Stormstooper-esque grunts (so actually no change from the more recent backstory really)

[Margalis]

Ah, I see.  Your definition of meaningful choice seems rather narrow.  You want to be the main character of the game (or at least a big one.)  But so does everyone else. 

Lamaros said nothing of the sort. All he said is that for a choice to be meaningful the result has to be meaningful. That could mean a world-changing event or it could mean +2 to Strength.

[Bzalthek]

Ah, I see.  Your definition of meaningful choice seems rather narrow.  You want to be the main character of the game (or at least a big one.)  But so does everyone else.

Lamaros said nothing of the sort. All he said is that for a choice to be meaningful the result has to be meaningful. That could mean a world-changing event or it could mean +2 to Strength.

I can see that.  It didn't appear in the context from which he was speaking that +2 to strength would be considered meaningful.  By "meaningful impact on the game" I assumed that by game he meant the game everyone else was playing (as in it had repercussions others had to deal with, good and bad.)  I apologize if I made an unwarranted assumption.

However, I don't see why the result has to be a tangible reward in order to be meaningful.  If the developers are choosing to focus on storytelling, then wouldn't the story be the reward?  Your choices allow you to choose how you see and interact with the story as it unfolds.  If you have a quest that allows you to choose to go to world A or world B, then choosing world A means you won't see or be able to play through the events on world B.  That's a result which "cannot be changed back," and whether or not people care about it is really a subjective matter.  Being able to say "My Jedi was at the battle of Rigel IV" is just as rewarding to some people as achievement titles or non-combat pets are in other games. 

[Ashamanchill]

Ah, I see.  Your definition of meaningful choice seems rather narrow.  You want to be the main character of the game (or at least a big one.)  But so does everyone else.

Lamaros said nothing of the sort. All he said is that for a choice to be meaningful the result has to be meaningful. That could mean a world-changing event or it could mean +2 to Strength.

+2 to Strength is worldchanging.

[Senses]

Soooo, does anyone know yet what you do when your story line is over?  Is there any end game or just time to try the next story line?

[Hindenburg]

Standard pvp and group-related activities, I'm sure.

[lamaros]

However, I don't see why the result has to be a tangible reward in order to be meaningful.  If the developers are choosing to focus on storytelling, then wouldn't the story be the reward?  Your choices allow you to choose how you see and interact with the story as it unfolds.  If you have a quest that allows you to choose to go to world A or world B, then choosing world A means you won't see or be able to play through the events on world B.  That's a result which "cannot be changed back," and whether or not people care about it is really a subjective matter.  Being able to say "My Jedi was at the battle of Rigel IV" is just as rewarding to some people as achievement titles or non-combat pets are in other games.

So you're suggesting they lock people out of content and force them to replay the game again to see it?

As I said before: Reasonable when it comes down to two factions. Unreasonable when it comes down to every single choice that every single character makes, multiplied by the number of character classes.

And if it's not that, then it's not what you're suggesting and is simply the same end result described in a different way. Which, again, isn't going to get me replaying the game.

[Koyasha]

It' my guess that each class will have a handful of major choices, along the order of 2-5, and these choices will lock the character out of the other path for their class.  All other decisions will be minor, giving little more than a light/dark shift or whatever.

If it was like that with every single choice, "unreasonable" wouldn't be the word I'd use.  I think the term would be more along the lines of "incredibly awesome."

[Bzalthek]

However, I don't see why the result has to be a tangible reward in order to be meaningful.  If the developers are choosing to focus on storytelling, then wouldn't the story be the reward?  Your choices allow you to choose how you see and interact with the story as it unfolds.  If you have a quest that allows you to choose to go to world A or world B, then choosing world A means you won't see or be able to play through the events on world B.  That's a result which "cannot be changed back," and whether or not people care about it is really a subjective matter.  Being able to say "My Jedi was at the battle of Rigel IV" is just as rewarding to some people as achievement titles or non-combat pets are in other games.

So you're suggesting they lock people out of content and force them to replay the game again to see it?

As I said before: Reasonable when it comes down to two factions. Unreasonable when it comes down to every single choice that every single character makes, multiplied by the number of character classes.

And if it's not that, then it's not what you're suggesting and is simply the same end result described in a different way. Which, again, isn't going to get me replaying the game.

What's wrong with that?  It's nothing more than what you would find if class quests were extended and more elaborate in other games.  I doubt there will be many of these choices as they increase development cost tremendously.  If you aren't interested in seeing those stories, such is life.  Your typical MMOer probably isn't.  But there is a large fanbase for their single player RPG games and being able to bring that experience into a world where they can share it with others simultaneously is pretty damn cool (in theory.)  I'm not even anything remotely like a Star Wars fan, but if they manage to pull it off I will most certainly pick this game up. 

I'm still doubtful that any company can pull off what they promise in this day and age of suck, but I can still hope for the best.

[lamaros]

It's a MMOG, not a single player game. Locking people out of content or forcing character choices is just going to lead to tears. No one wants to invest 100's of hours in a character and then find out they made the wrong choice because option 1 gave better loot and they chose option 2, or to realise that there's no way they can experience the missions of option 2 without replaying 90% of the same content just to get back to that variable and choose the other direction.

(Again here, RE WoW, people do not replay for minor content, they replay for major content differences - the other faction - or other class mechanics. Things that have some significant and fundamental change in the what the game involves. If SWTOR - and we're speculating heavily now, but lets just go with your examples - makes people choose between content or character development in their choices then they're locking them out from what they don't choose, without letting them get back at it without repeating the same thing over again.)

Single player RPGs allow you to save and load, and put you against the PC. MMOs have a whole lot of other things going on that make many good RPG elements problematic.

[Velorath]

It's a MMOG, not a single player game. Locking people out of content or forcing character choices is just going to lead to tears. No one wants to invest 100's of hours in a character and then find out they made the wrong choice because option 1 gave better loot and they chose option 2, or to realise that there's no way they can experience the missions of option 2 without replaying 90% of the same content just to get back to that variable and choose the other direction.

People keep saying stuff like this, but unless it's some epic fucking loot, nobody is really going to give a shit.  If a decision I make results in some +2 str gloves when I'd rather have some +2 dex boots, it doesn't matter in the long run since it probably won't be too long before I outlevel the loot anyway (if this game follows MMO standards I assume the best endgame loot will come from raids, so quest choices shouldn't matter there). 

As for not being able to experience the missions of option 2, so what?  How much quest content does the average player miss out on when leveling a character?  If you don't give a shit about seeing all the variations of the story, then it won't matter in the same way it doesn't matter if you don't complete every single quest in WoW.  If it does bother you, then I guess Bioware will have succeeded in getting you to care about the story in an MMO.

[lamaros]

It's a MMOG, not a single player game. Locking people out of content or forcing character choices is just going to lead to tears. No one wants to invest 100's of hours in a character and then find out they made the wrong choice because option 1 gave better loot and they chose option 2, or to realise that there's no way they can experience the missions of option 2 without replaying 90% of the same content just to get back to that variable and choose the other direction.

People keep saying stuff like this, but unless it's some epic fucking loot, nobody is really going to give a shit.  If a decision I make results in some +2 str gloves when I'd rather have some +2 dex boots, it doesn't matter in the long run since it probably won't be too long before I outlevel the loot anyway (if this game follows MMO standards I assume the best endgame loot will come from raids, so quest choices shouldn't matter there).

And again, we come back to what 'meaningful' means. If the other options have no meaning for you then why have them at all? Why not just tell the players they get to choose, and then give them all the same result regardless of what choice they make? Far less work for the team.

But not really something to hang your PR hat on...

Anyway thread and me are going circles at this point so I'm out until we hear some new info about the game.

[WindupAtheist]

I don't really get what the problem is, beyond the usual schizophrenic MMO gamer "If I have to choose between two paths I WON'T GET TO SEE THE OTHER ONE WTFFFFFFF FUCK CHOICES! Hey why are all these games just graphical ProgressQuest?" routine.

[Bzalthek]

You keep harping about loot.  It's been said: some people find the story to be its own reward.  You apparently don't consider that meaningful.  Many people do.  Will it be enough?  Who knows.  All I do know is regardless of what actually happens, MMOers will cry about it.  If the end result is always tears, they can do what they want as far as I'm concerned.

[Margalis]

Is SWTOR an MMO because it has MMO gameplay or it has an MMO revenue model?

It's been said: some people find the story to be its own reward. 

Fine point except that in all these moral choice games story is never the reward. IMO all these games suffer because they present a choice that often conflicts between the one you want to choose for the sake of story and the one you want to choose for the sake of earning good-guy points so you can shoot lightning out your ass.

In a single player game I'm willing to make the choices I want and if it means I don't earn the max number of good-guy points I really don't care. In an MMO I'm not sure I could say the same. People who choose to gimp their chars in MMOs generally have a tough time. What's going to happen when you've played the game down the middle and all the raids call for either max-evil DPS Sith or max-good healer Jedi?

[Velorath]

And again, we come back to what 'meaningful' means. If the other options have no meaning for you then why have them at all?

Because it's fun.  You remember, the reason most of us play games in the first place.  Aside for a few particular choices in Mass Effect, it didn't really matter if you went through the game as a nice guy or an asshole, but it was fun to say "ok, this time I'm going to go through with my character acting like the biggest douchebag possible".  Sometimes you feel like playing the good guy.  Sometimes you play the good guy, but some NPC pisses you off to the point where you just have to kill the guy if the game gives you the chance.

[Velorath]

What's going to happen when you've played the game down the middle and all the raids call for either max-evil DPS Sith or max-good healer Jedi?

Have they said anything yet that would give you the indication that lightside or darkside points would have an effect on player power?

[Bzalthek]

Is SWTOR an MMO because it has MMO gameplay or it has an MMO revenue model?

It's been said: some people find the story to be its own reward. 

Fine point except that in all these moral choice games story is never the reward. IMO all these games suffer because they present a choice that often conflicts between the one you want to choose for the sake of story and the one you want to choose for the sake of earning good-guy points so you can shoot lightning out your ass.

In a single player game I'm willing to make the choices I want and if it means I don't earn the max number of good-guy points I really don't care. In an MMO I'm not sure I could say the same. People who choose to gimp their chars in MMOs generally have a tough time. What's going to happen when you've played the game down the middle and all the raids call for either max-evil DPS Sith or max-good healer Jedi?

Then the developers have failed to do their job.  Again, though, you are making the assumption that because there is a choice one must be good and one must be bad.  You are, in my opinion, focusing too much on the end point and assigning value to it.  I prefer to assign the value on the journey.  MMOs suffer too much from the min/maxers.  If a game wants to tell a story, then the best bet would be to remove things that can be min/maxed from those choices.  That doesn't automatically make those choices meaningless except to people who don't care about the story and only care about the rewards.  Oh well.

[Margalis]

If a game wants to tell a story, then the best bet would be to remove things that can be min/maxed from those choices

I completely agree but the chance of that happening is close to zero.

[Rendakor]

Is SWTOR an MMO because it has MMO gameplay or it has an MMO revenue model?

It's been said: some people find the story to be its own reward. 

Fine point except that in all these moral choice games story is never the reward. IMO all these games suffer because they present a choice that often conflicts between the one you want to choose for the sake of story and the one you want to choose for the sake of earning good-guy points so you can shoot lightning out your ass.

In a single player game I'm willing to make the choices I want and if it means I don't earn the max number of good-guy points I really don't care. In an MMO I'm not sure I could say the same. People who choose to gimp their chars in MMOs generally have a tough time. What's going to happen when you've played the game down the middle and all the raids call for either max-evil DPS Sith or max-good healer Jedi?

It is trivially easy to imagine a solution: puppy-killing or orphan-rescuing dailies. Wanted to be a nice guy on that one quest? Well grind puppies for a week and you're evil enough to raid again.

Just because a choice is meaningful doesn't mean it is irreversible.

[Fordel]

Does SWTOR have a MMO revenue model?



I didn't think they released any of that info yet.

[WindupAtheist]

We had this exact same conversation in that KOTOR BIIF thread Margalis made last year. The bottom line is that he hates story choices even in a single-player game because he's there to powergame everything to the greatest extent possible, and doesn't want anything in any game that isn't clearly labeled by how optimal it is for combat.

The appropriate solution is to let him read spoiler sites and torture himself playing the game wrong so he can be 5% more powerful at level 37, while everyone else just picks whatever sounds cool because they know leveling doesn't mean shit and the endgame will be equalized by raid/faction/pvp gear anyway. Questions like "What if raids are segregated by karma meter?" are just a silly case of looking to invent an excuse for why having a karma meter is bad.