Well... that's it. Bioware wanted this news to get out before the free month expired. And many people will resubscribe based on this information. SWTOR will be around for a long time with a healthy population.

The idea of "battlegrounds" or "warzones" is boring, period.

Using that same logic, Bioware could ban people who go into high level zones with low level characters to loot chests intended for high level characters...

It does make things worse though, instead of one dumb name there are two.

Thanks. I'll look into it. I actually never played UO (unfortunately, because it looked awesome).

I had credibility? Like I wrote before, accessibility is a PR term used by many game developers to sugar coat changes to game play mechanics that serve to make games less challenging. Not necessarily. I wouldn't call that inaccessible because the task is easy; and if it's easy, then that means pretty much anyone could do it. But if having to do it 7,000 times translates to an amount of time that most wouldn't enjoy spending, then that would mean it's not very accessible. However, if you compared killing a mob only 1 time before receiving an item to having to kill a mob 100 times before receiving an item, which would you say is more difficult? Surely, you wouldn't say they're equal in difficulty? I would say the latter is more difficult only because it takes more time. Finally, an item that took 100 kills to receive would be worth more than the same item dropping only after 1 kill. For one, that would mean the former item is less common. And two, an item that takes 100 kills to receive would hold more sentimental value. Actually, because the task is difficult, then that might make it less accessible, especially less accessible to children. In any case, I'd take interesting and difficult tasks over repetitive and simple tasks any day. Do you know of any such tasks in WoW or SWTOR?

As far as innovation goes, I think the only thing that WoW brought to the table that EQ didn't was smooth controls, a nice UI, and unique looking and working skills with little overlap. These were very important additions to the MMORPG genre.

Uh-huh. I'm going to hang around since I did invest some money into the game already. I don't think it's a bad game, by the way.

You can call me captain instead. Yup. Yup. No, I'm saying the MMORPG genre used to be about fictional-based virtual worlds. For instance, the AI in EQ, a game released in the 1990s, is more realistic than the AI used in WoW and SWTOR. In EQ, there wasn't some magical distance that you could run before mobs would magically forget that you existed, followed by them glitching out and being teleported back to their spawn points. If you pulled too many mobs in EQ, then you'd either feign death, run, teleport, or die. Further, mobs would remember the people that they ran past, so after you got away or died, they'd run after those people. Again, much more realistic. But with realism comes responsibility, challenge, and even frustration. Things that Blizzard didn't like, so they dumbed down the AI when they made WoW; and the MMORPGs created afterward followed their lead. But when you "limit the impact of failure" there comes a point when failing doesn't mean anything; and if failing doesn't mean anything, then your accomplishments become less significant. Some players like to purposely fail in these newer MMORPGs so they can get a free teleport.

I didn't say fetching water makes you appreciate tap more, although I'm sure that it would. But having to fetch your own water would make you appreciate water itself more. You'd also probably use less of it. Or to use another analogy, if you had to hunt your own food, then you would appreciate your food more too. It might even make it taste better (in your mind). Having to work for things make the rewards all the sweeter. This isn't a difficult concept to grasp...

What games don't exist anymore? EQ? EQ is still going. If they're not challenging, then what do you call being able to die and then respawn on top of where you died? Brain dead? Most video games are, especially MMORPGs. Sure there is. But accessible is a PR term used in the MMORPG industry to describe making a game easier. Like when you make death penalties almost nonexistent. Is that making the game easier or making it more assessable? Technically, it's both. You're making the game easier which in turn makes it more assessable. Well, again, vanilla WoW was dumbed down, which made it more "user friendly." Giving every character god-mode would also make the game more "user friendly." That's typically how all MMORPGs work, even the newer ones. The players who invest the most time typically have the most money, items, etc. Well I've played EQ recently and still have more fun playing it than any of the newer MMORPGs.

Uh, no. Leveling, unlocking skills, etc., is a big part of MMORPGs.

To use your own analogy, going out to fetch your own water would surely make you appreciate it more.

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that it's "nostaliga talking" when people say they want a more realistic open-ended and challenging game?

First, let's not get into the "who values their time more" discussion, since we both play MMORPGs. And, technically, we'd both be investing the same amount of time, it's just that players would progress slower in a more challenging game. Which is a good thing in my opinion since it makes accomplishments more meaningful and it doesn't take, you know, 2 days to hit level cap. Because once you hit level cap, what else is there to do? All of the skills and talents are already unlocked, so you're left with just grinding dungeons over and over again. And I don't know of any MMORPG where you lose a few days of progress from dying once (maybe eve online?), nor am I advocating such a penalty. But dying and then being able to respawn right on top of where you died is pretty weak, don't you think? When you get to that point, you might as well just get rid of the death penalty altogether. Maybe that will be the next step for MMORPGs? That means you're new. You didn't play EQ back when it was known as Evercrack. You've probably never even played EQ once (or ultima online), so all your opinions about it are based on hearsay.

It was only a matter of time before a player who is new to the MMORPG genre would come in and make the claim that wanting a challenging open-ended world means you're a masochist.

First of all. Every single MMORPG is a grind (at least according to you). To you, progression = grind. Questing = grind. Running the same dungeons over and over = grind. Killing mobs = grind. Regardless, I don't think anyone here said they wanted a grind... In fact, I never mentioned anything about leveling in my original post. Did you even read it? The reason why I'm complaining is to let Bioware know that there are still players like me that don't like theme park MMORPGs.

I thought that might be part of the reason too, until I resubscribed to EQ and played on one of their new servers: Fippy Darkpaw. I actually had more fun playing EQ than I did playing WoW for all those years, or SWTOR. My dream is for there to be a new EQ-type game with the polish of WoW. EQ wasn't perfect though. For instance, the downtime was ridiculous. That was by far the biggest problem I had with EQ.

Let me start off by saying that I do like SWTOR (at least more than any of the other new MMORPGs out there); and I plan on playing it for awhile. I'd give the game a 8.7 out of 10. So what do I mean by a theme park? I mean game developers, like Bioware and Blizzard, are less interested in crafting virtual worlds and more interested in creating an experience where players can log on, press a button that automatically groups them up with strangers that they'll probably never talk to again, which then teleports them to some destination (a dungeon, battleground, etc.). Granted, the dungeon finder system hasn't found its way to SWTOR yet, but I'm betting it will eventually (and at least part of the community is asking for it). Further, questing in these theme parks constitutes mindlessly following quest indicators followed by reward collection, followed by using quick travel. Rinse and repeat until you're level capped. To make matters worse, when you die in these theme parks, practically nothing happens. In SWTOR, you lose a bit of durability and are given the option to respawn right where you died! Before I move on, I'll just list some of the ways that the MMORPG genre has improved in an effort to appear less negative: better graphics, better sound, better UIs, smoother controls, less downtime, and less skill/group role overlap between classes. And in the case of SWTOR, voiced dialogue and conversation options. That being said, I can't believe how far the MMORPG genre has fallen since Everquest (EQ). --- The thing that bothers me the most about the newer MMORPGs like SWTOR is the abuse of quick travel, quest indicators, instancing, and matchmaking (dungeon fingers, battlegrounds, etc.), as well as the lenient penalties for dying. Instancing: Back during the golden age of MMORPGs, there was no such thing as "running dungeons," at least not in the way that MMORPG players do now. Running a dungeon in, Everquest for instance, meant running to a dungeon that was actually part of the static world (noninstanced), and then traversing the dungeon--exploring the dungeon--with a group. And while this went on, you'd more than likely run into other adventurers, who may or may not interact with your group in a negative or positive way. I think this is way more interesting than your group being cut off from the rest of the server population and in-game world by being teleported inside an instance of a dungeon. It's almost as though you and your group had fallen asleep and the dungeon is just a dream. Instancing is especially a problem in SWTOR because of the way the world was constructed. It almost feels like you're on a train or rollercoaster. There are too many invisible barriers and areas that exist to prevent players from leaving a linear predetermined path. The instancing just adds to the claustrophobic and dead (you don't run across enough players) feeling. Death penalty: Maybe my view on this subject is skewed from playing too much Diablo II Hardcore and Everquest, but I've always liked a good meaty death penalty. Otherwise, what's the point? Playing a MMORPG with a lenient death penalty is like playing a NES game with Game Genie. Some people may like that (I know my brother enjoyed cheating in NES games), but I don't. Good death penalties make rewards and progression all the sweeter. I'm not saying newer MMORPGs like SWTOR should adopt a permanent death system or anything that crazy, but I do think the penalty for dying should sting a little more than mere durability loss. SWTOR is out already, so I don't expect Bioware to change the penalty for dying. But they could create servers with alternate rule sets. Just a thought. Quick travel: There's nothing wrong with quick travel per se. But there needs to be some restraint. Too much quick travel makes the world feel small and meaningless. Meaningless in that it is treated as merely an obstacle to your next quest rather than a journey. Personally, I'd like to go back to how EQ did things: having to run or ride to your destination! But I'm probably in the minority in this respect--so I'll just say I don't think players should have the option of teleporting to any discovered hub on their local map every 30 minutes. An easy fix for this would be to just increase the cool down for quick travel (the fleet pass is fine). Quest indicators: Like the quick travel system, I think this is being abused. It's to the point where 90% of the time you don't even have to read (or listen to) quest text. All you need to do is bring up your map and follow the giant pulsating dots and circles (KILL 5 MONKEYS). I think this sort of thing contributes to the mindlessness of current MMORPGs. Match making: By match making I mean any button that you can press that will automatically group you up with other players, and then teleport you to some destination. I see this as contra to some of the things that MMORPGs are supposed to be about; namely, community and adventuring. Fortunately, Bioware has decided to leave dungeon finder out of the game, for now. Unfortunately, I think it will inevitably make its way into the game in the future. --- I anticipate a tsunami of WoW fanboys and MMORPGs noobs that will try to set me straight by propagating the lie that WoW is popular because it has a lenient death penalty, dungeon finder, instanced dungeons, and quest indicators. That's wrong. WoW didn't have any of the above when it was first released save for a lenient death penalty and instanced dungeons. The rest came later. The reason why WoW is popular is because: 1. It was developed by a popular company. 2. WoW is based on a popular universe. 3. WoW was released during a time when EQ was in its decline, when people were fed up with SOE's antics. 4. Good controls and UI. WoW is really just a dumbed down version of EQ with better graphics, UI, and controls.

Big butts and breasts? At one time, my Jedi warrior had a robe that added like 5 inches to his butt. And I've noticed that some of the chest pieces will give male characters breasts. Did Bioware get lazy and just make one kind of armor for both males and females? So the armor looks fine on female characters, but when given to a male character, all of a sudden, you get a giant butt and breasts? Seriously? Will this ever be fixed?

Yeah it is. You just never play sports.

Actually, you're the one burdening the GMs with inane petitions. Grow up, kid. Grow a thicker skin, kid.

Yeah, let's make World PVP and Warzones even more boring by removing cross-faction communication. Shut up please.

A very good point.

People who leave prematurely should get a debuff where they can't join another Warzone for at least 5-10 minutes. What's the problem? If you had to leave for RL reasons, then you'll be able to queue up as soon as possible when you come back. If players aren't being replaced instantaneously, then it's not fast enough. A team with fluctuating members isn't going to do so hot up against a team of people who stayed and completed the match. Every moment counts and every moment where a team is behind a member or two is detrimental.