Bespin. Well, specifically, a city like Bespin since lore says Bespin didn't exist.

Edit: Disregard. I just saw a post that answered my question.

I agree with you that TOR has some innovative features, and - in this very thread - I was using companions as an example of one of those features. I'm on your side in regards to innovation in this game, but if someone points out something that unquestionably disproves what I said, I'll concede. That's exactly what Twyggaerynn did (in regards to companions). What Twyggaerynn described was exactly everything that I thought was innovative about companions in TOR. That's why I conceded that point. I mean, Twyggaerynn said companions in that other game leveled with you, had affection that you had to maintain and could increase by giving gifts, could be equipped with gear, harvested for you, and then crafted for you. If all of that already existed in another MMO before TOR, what are you suggesting TOR did to it that was innovative? Being fair here, I think (assuming Twyggaerynn's post is correct, and I have no reason not to) I think we'll have to let go of the "companions are innovative" argument on this one.

I admit I don't browse all the different forum categories, but in my limited experience here, I've never seen a thread complaining that this game is too hard.

Ha. I understand that. And based on your post, I completely retract my claim that TOR's companions are truly innovative. TOR brought it to the mainstream, I suppose, but apparently didn't reinvent the companion paradigm as much as I thought.

Yeah, I'm not arguing that some servers are more crowded than others. That's kind of outside the scope of what I was saying. Obviously (I think) there are massive population differences on servers. The entire second week of Launch, Bioware was recommending people roll on light servers (I was one of the people that did this). They did it to handle the huge amount of players coming in and filling servers. I think this was a mistake. When they kept adding servers, I thought then that they should have started connecting them to full servers. For example, if they'd have just created a server called Darth Bandon 2, it would have made it clear that their eventual intent would be to merge those servers when they stabilized the server loads. Now, they're stuck in a bit of a mess because of the PR backlash a server merge could cause. Just imagine the "it's dying" people if they merged servers, even if they actually didn't have a sub drop. But I agree with you, servers vary wildly on population.

If what you're describing it true, then I'll totally concede that companion implementation in this game isn't very innovative. It sounds like the exact same thing. I personally have never even heard of Grand Fantasia, much less played it, so I certainly can't contradict what you're saying.

The 30 people on fleet don't indicate anything other than players aren't on fleet. You're making an assumption based on information that could have several reasons. One likely scenario is that less people are in the fleet because they've found regular players to play with and don't need to go to the fleet to find groups anymore. Even if TOR has seen a "drastic decline" like you're saying, a /who check in fleet wouldn't give you any indication one way or the other. I mean, if they had 50,000 people on your server and the population dropped in half, that would still leave 25,000 people on your server. The numbers are just too big for anecdotal evidence to suggest anything about sub decline. I mean, about how many people are you suggesting your server has now? Just a rough estimate...

If every one that loved the game and everyone that hated the game had your attitude, I think this would be the best forum in the history of the universe. Edit to keep this on topic: Most people react that way because we all like to think our opinions are justified. We take various approaches to do that. Some people post peripherally related fact to support it. Other people attack those that disagree. What most people don't get, though, is that the coolest thing about opinions is mine can directly contradict yours and we both get to be right. No justification needed. The truth is, no player has enough information to know whether subs are increasing or dropping. We can create as many graphs and charts as we want... and we can call our idle speculation "educated guesses" if we want... but the one thing we know is that there are currently too many people playing for us to make any greater assumptions based on our own anecdotal evidence.

All fair points. We're just predicting here. I happen to think that leading up to TOR's launch and the subs it had at launch will set a new standard for AAA MMOs. I think it will happen. I think many of the people that came to MMOs because of TOR will see anything that has you reading quest text as a massive step back. I also think the process will streamline significantly, and what we see TOR doing today probably won't be exactly how it's implemented, but I think they have set a standard that many MMOs players (going forward) will see as a requirement, for better or worse.

I don't think it has to be a success at all, as long as enough people experience those specific features to start expecting them in future MMOs, which has probably (in my opinion) already happened.

Maybe I did a poor job of explaining myself. I think these features are great - as they are. I love them. But I also think that if you follow the natural progression of MMOs, these features will almost certainly be improved upon with future games. But the features this game has now put down are the minimum standard for many people's views on future MMOs. I'm not saying their failure means that future efforts to prevent their failure should be credited to them (which is your examples). I'm saying they've succeeded, but it's not perfect. It could definitely be improved upon and most certainly will be improved upon.

Fair points. But in the interest of this OP (how this game is pushing the genre forward), we probably should recognize that TOR's current implementation probably isn't how it'll be implemented in future games. Companions, full VOs, story, and choices won't likely be what they are now. TOR's implementation is essentially a prototype that will almost certainly be improved upon and experimented with in many various ways. The important part is that BW has created (IMO) a new minimum standard with these features. In the same way some people are saying BW took a step backwards by not including "basic features" like LFD and cross-realm PVP, I think many future MMO players will claim games that don't include full VOs, etc, (or improve upon them) are equally taking a step backwards. What many people on this thread seem to overlook is that BW can be a let down in some areas, yet still move the genre forward in others.

To be fair to BW, taking an old concept and presenting it a truly new way does qualify as innovative. Methodology can be innovative. BW using VOs isn't innovative. BW making VOs and story a fundamental part of their MMO experience is innovative. For many other MMOs, the story is secondary. In TOR it's the selling point. That's an innovative approach to MMOs. Whether it's a good or significant approach is up for debate.

Thing is, in other MMOs, most people I play with just skip ALL quest text, even if it's the first time they talk to the NPC. In DDO, that was a massive complaint from the players because you actually needed to read the texts for some of the quests. In TOR, I've never met anyone that skips the dialogue the first time (for the class quests). I'm sure they're out there, but I've never met them. This is a step forward. Even you inferred (unless I misunderstood you) that you do watch the class quest cutscenes. That alone is more than I've ever seen in any other MMO before. Whether or not you skip it the second or third time isn't really applicable because that's true in every other MMO in existence. And SWTOR - just like the others - lets you skip it. The difference is, in TOR, people actually know the story of their main quests. I've never witnessed that to such a degree in any other MMO.

I disagree. For me (and my wife) EQ 2 is hands down the most beautiful and robust MMO on the market. We're actually glad that many people disagree, though, because it makes EQ2 feel like our little secret oasis MMO. Nothing wrong with you not liking it, so please don't think I'm saying you're wrong. Just offering a different perspective. For 7 years, we've been actively trying to find a replacement for EQ2, but have yet to find a game that has so many incredibly diverse features. I personally think TOR could learn a lot from EQ2, especially in regards to its broker system (which is, IMO, perfect).

With (at least) hundreds of thousands of players spread across over a 100 servers, there's simply no way that we can base any conclusions about the state of the game on our own in-game experiences. Whether this game has taken a 10% drop, a 20% drop, or a 50% drop, the anecdotal evidence is going to be the same. There will be people talking about how incredibly full the fleet is and people talking about how incredibly empty the fleet is. There will be people with extremely full guilds and people with extremely empty guilds. I'm not saying subs are steady, dropping, or growing. I'm saying, this early in, the numbers are simply too massive for a /who count in the fleet to be any indication either way. If people aren't in the fleets, it's a stronger indication of this game's pug popularity than an indication of the game's subs.

How is that different from every other mmo in existence. Every boss in every instance is - story wise - just killed by you. But he's actually killed by thousands. Every quest is a quest only accomplished by you, but it's actually accomplished by thousands. Every named mob is killed - over and over - by thousands. Really, what you're complaining about is a complaint toward all MMOs, not SWTOR.

I think this is a very good post and pretty much nails exactly what TORs place is in regards to moving the genre forward.

Wow. I played DDO for years and was completely unaware of that. I feel goofy.

The thing is, most sound business people don't want to be the first to do something. It's too risky. They want to be second. They want to take a model that has been proven to be successful, then tweak it just enough to call it their own. This isn't "dirty business." It's just how business typically works. Let the other guy take the real risks. MMO developers (including Blizzard) follow this principle. Genuine innovation isn't something that can be assigned to a committee and then worked into a business plan. Significant innovation is inspired. I might be missing some others, but I can think of three primary games that were genuinely inspired. They had varying degrees of success. EQ (while technically not the first MMO) was inspired. EQ was born from people wanting to truly represent a table top RPG in a 3D world setting. EQ wasn't born from them looking at another game and thinking, "We should tap into that market." It was born from them genuinely wanting people to experience the awe that RPGers get around a D and D table. SWG was inspired. For better or worse, it was Ralph Koster's inspiration. He wanted to create a true sandbox. He wanted to design a universe where players could be the "everyman" of Star Wars. He believed if he created a genuine universe, he could hand that to the players and just say, "Here." For various reasons (some his fault, some not his fault), that dream didn't work out so well. I personally think AoC was inspired. The devs genuinely wanted to take MMOs and make them for grown-ups. They wanted a visceral, brutal game that truly captured the harsh reality created by Robert E. Howard. As with SWG, it didn't work out so well (for various reasons). There are some others, I'm sure, but I don't have experience in playing them (for example, I hear Eve would fit, but I never played it). Most other MMOs (IMO) were business decisions. They really just said, "What if we made an MMO based on X. I bet that would sell!" I think SWTOR is a mix of both. I think TOR - first and foremost - had the business approach. It was, "If we just make a good, simple grass-roots MMO with the Star Wars name, it will sell." But I personally think that Bioware brought some genuine inspiration. Bioware brought the idea that an MMO should incorporate what they believed were the best elements from their single player RPGs. They made the core of their MMO about the story. I think the story implementation (while not perfect) was an inspired move and a logical step forward, and I think it marks the beginning of story being a fundamental element of MMOs, instead of being a side feature. Just my long winded opinion.

He said significantly improved PVP. Can't use companions in WZs.

While I agree with you, to be fair, DDO and DCUO also removed auto attack.

A fair point. I get caught up in the "actual definition of innovation" arguments too much, but really, they never claimed they were reinventing the wheel with this game. Matter of fact, every promise they made before launch met my expectations. To be fair, though, the OP just asked if they've done anything to push the genre forward. He didn't mention anything about promises.

Yeah, my only point was to the person that said it wasn't innovation. I was just saying it is - by definition - innovation. They might not be big innovations, and they might not even been good innovation. That's a matter of opinion. But to say they aren't innovations at all is just untrue. That was my only point (which I think you agree with anyway, judging from your last line). I just think if we're going to criticize the game, it should be fair criticisms and not denials of actual facts. Fact is, SWTOR did have some innovations. It's fine to say they're crappy innovations (even though I disagree). But don't deny that they're innovations. That's just untrue.