Jump to content

MAXIMUM PC Rates SWTOR 7 out of 10

Rheemus

By Rheemus
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 189
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Twaggy

Twaggy

Posted
Posted
It works like this:

 

Joe Gaming Company makes a dog. Joe Gaming Company gets a 65.

 

BioWare makes a dog. BioWare gets an 80 because in 1998 they made Badur's Gate which was, don't you know, one of the greatest CRPGs of all time... Therefore NOTHING they do can bad. Ever. No matter if some people notice that all their games are rail-crpgs with few, if any, real game-effective options and are padded with excess running around in large areas to pad play time to the point that if you put a clock on your game, pointless running approaches 50% in these games. This list includes, but is not limited to:

 

NWN,

NWN:SoU,

Jade Empire (which was short (18 hours) and padded),

KOTOR,

 

(I wise up and)

 

Mass Effect 1, (bought in bargin bin)

Mass Effect 2 (but not nearly as bad as 1), and (bought in bargin bin)

Dragon Age:Origins (bought when price dropped, but before bargin bin).

 

I don't include the obvious rip-off, cash-in that was DAII and got a 94 from PC Gamer because I wouldn't even buy it in the bargin bin. I will point out that, despite the 94 from PC Gamer, DAII sold (in its first six months), less than 400.000 copies and most of them were from pre-order by fools who actually trust BioWare to deliver when, since Baldur's Gate, they've been more 'average' than good...

 

So I've found, for various reasons, that the ratings for BioWare, from any gaming magazine, are generally worthless. Conflict of interest and rose colored glasses tends to give them a leg-up on average-to-mediocre products.

 

Having said all that and played other, non-BioWare, initial release MMOs, this one is one of the shoddier ones. Too many bugs and lacks MMO features. It is, like the recently released "Lord of the Rings -- War in the North" game (not to be confused with LOTRO), a co-operative, multi-player CRPG.

 

And when I'm done with the stories, I'm done with the game. This is the first MMO I've ever played where it's all solo on the intial release. That there is nothing worth having that you get by raiding, grouping, etc.

 

And that is sad. But, I have this, I'm getting about 3 CRPGs worth of play out of the game and it'll work out to about $30 a game for three grinding, running-man CRPGs that I expect from BioWare. Though when I run the four Sith stories, I'll run just four Sith, not like I've done with the Republic and run all eight...

 

Im sorry but did you just say the BAFTA award winning KOTOR game was crap? KOTOR? which to this date is still played by hundreds of thousands of people who like to mod it and add new content and items? :D:D:D Don't believe me? http://knightsoftheoldrepublic.filefront.com/ may all the KOTOR fans who have not tried this have fun ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Baaddare

Baaddare

Posted
Posted (edited)
Lacking MMO elements like:

 

UI Moddability

 

Guild Banks

 

Bank Stacking

 

Actually working Open PvP incentives

 

Combat parser

 

Addons

 

LFG Tool

 

Well optimized game engine

 

 

I'm not gonna mention the countless frustrating bugs this game has or the dozens of game design mistakes.

 

Once people hit 50 and see how broken and lacking the endgame is they'll stop playing.

 

 

They are adding a customizable UI

they are adding more guild functions

I do world pvp all day so not sure what the issue is here

not sure what bank stacking means as i can stack items as high as i want in my bank. (well i have gotten up to 78 of one item in a stack so far)

 

The rest are elements that one game brought to the table and are not actual standard MMO. i wil not address their pros or cons here and that discussion is already a dead horse.

 

not sure on the engine as the game runs fine for me. However, i do understand the issue a small minority ( to me 5% or 75k out of 1.5 million is a small minority)of players are having and hope they can fix the game for them sooner rather than latter. As I understand it is hard to optimize a pc game for all the possible variations out there right out of the box.

Edited by Baaddare
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daisai

Daisai

Posted
Posted

Pretty much have to agree with that review.

 

Only a bit strange that after so much negative comments about the game he still gives it a 7/10.

 

But one thing i dont agree with , he complaints about large worlds and that travel takes to long.

Then mmo's is just not for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kabloosh

Kabloosh

Posted
Posted
The problem is it is all a matter of taste. Outside of DAO II all of the games you mentioned were huge success. Myself i loved playing all of them.

 

Mass Effect should be made into a movie its got such an amazing story and an fascinating universe to explore. Definitely one of my favorite sci-fi universes out there... but of course that list is large in the first place cause I LOVE sci-fi stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DarthPeterNorth

DarthPeterNorth

Posted
Posted

SWTOR has smaller areas than most of MMORPGs i've played. The exaust area cries for amateur development.

 

Small Worlds, extremely instanced.... after a while, when you remember that you will see tons of loading screens during a session play (switching from PVE to PVP) you just lose the motivation to keep playing when the game keeps making you wait to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DarkCarnage

DarkCarnage

Posted
Posted
They are adding a customizable UI

they are adding more guild functions

I do world pvp all day so not sure what the issue is here

not sure what bank stacking means as i can stack items as high as i want in my bank. (well i have gotten up to 78 of one item in a stack so far)

 

The rest are elements that one game brought to the table and are not actual standard MMO. i wil not address their pros or cons here and that discussion is already a dead horse.

 

not sure on the engine as the game runs fine for me. However, i do understand the issue a small minority ( to me 5% or 75k out of 1.5 million is a small minority)of players are having and hope they can fix the game for them sooner rather than latter. As I understand it is hard to optimize a pc game for all the possible variations out there right out of the box.

 

i think bank stacking is, when you add something to your bank it auto stacks, vs you ahving to manual stack everything. basic an auto sort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muligan

Muligan

Posted
Posted

Some of the replies are laughable. I especially like the sig of one of the posters that reads "Cancelled 1/4/2012" ... This game has been out what...a month? There's no surprises in the release of this game. What is left out was not promised... Target of Target, LFD, Guild Banks, etc. have all been on the list for some time...

 

Many of you obviously have no idea how MMO's work. You should have played EQI, it took forever to get a lot of the bugs hammered out. Given it was probably the first large scale, commercial MMO, not much has changed. Fast forward to WoW, if you look at their release, we would still be waiting on queues and playing a tenth of what you are now.

 

I understand a lot of points that are being made, and i'm frustrated with several of them. However, I have found the people that really drive and develop MMO's do not have a lot of say when and how they are released. If EA says a certain day, it comes out. These guys are doing pretty good so far. They have responded to a lot of concerns and they have queues down to a playable amount.

 

If you don't like the game, move on and leave it alone. We don't care if and when you cancelled because at that point you are no longer a part of the community. Go play WoW, Rift, or something else. The real judgement will come about 3 months from now.

 

TOR is a great game. Probably a 8 or 8.5 out of a 10. I knock it a couple of points only because MMO's are not in their infancy any more. Some things should have been learned and implemented early on. However, these guys had to really integrate a ton of VO and environment. They prioritized the more Bioware'esque portions of their game and they are adding the typical MMO concepts secondarily. That's fine. It looks to me, 6 months from now, if they make the right decisions, we'll have one heck of a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BobTheTeepo

BobTheTeepo

Posted
Posted (edited)
If it were a race horse, it'd be plowing fields.. It's not an MMO. It's a co-op CRPG pretending to be an MMO.

 

It lacks the basic features needed to foster a community and long-term particaption found in an MMO. So stop pretending it's more than it is...

 

Other things:

 

It's not 2004 in the early post-pioneering days of MMOs. This game was released 7 years later. It is an established, competitive market with rational, mature consumers who have viable choices and a resonable beleif that their MMO expectations will be met.

 

This game fails, and fails hard, to meet those rational expectations. And no matter how much you, or anyone else, cries "Please Leave BRITTANY ALONE" you're not going to do more than put lipstick on this pig. MAYBE in a year it'll be worthwhile. But I, like a huge swath of people who expect a good game, will be gone. And for reference:

 

  • Age of Conan lost 7 out of every 8 initial subscribers in three months.
  • Warhammer Online lost 7 out of 8 intital subscribers in six months.

 

But even I have doubts this game will recover. Neither game has ever recovered from that launch failure because the market doesn't forgive in this industry. History tells us that you have one shot to get it right in this market and BioWare failed.

 

So, go ahead, like the rest of the fanbois and defend this game. Time will prove the critics right, not you.

 

 

One other thing. People like you tent to dismiss the forum hater-fanboy post balance. I've been through a lot of BioWare games. Even the mediocre ones have been far, far better received. There have always been 'this game sucks' threads. But they might make three out of twenty...

 

Here the 'this game sucks' threads would overwhelm the board but for the constant closure by the moderators. And I mean constant closure three out of the six threads I posted in yesterday were closed as I was posting. I have not seen this bile and venom, and corporate spin-control, on any CRPG since Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor.

 

First off, it is by the very definition, an MMO, you're arguing semantics.

 

Secondly, MMOs do not work like YOU want them to, however rational your expectations may or may not be. How many games have you seen that launched with enough content to compete with WoW in it's current shape? Wow has had many years to develop its winning formula, Bioware JUST entered the MMO scene, anyone who has a rational and logical mind can see that it will not be able to directly compete on launch.

 

I issue you a challenge: Name one MMO that launched with enough endgame, with the lack of bugs, with the inclusion of enough minor features, to directly compete with WoW. Name ONE.

 

I know you're biased and you don't expect anyone to call you out on anything, but if a thread devolves (as this one has) and loses it's constructive qualities, then it has NO place on the forums so it's obvious that they get closed (go read the forum guidelines). Additionally, they already have threads up where you can complain about every little issue you want to, they don't want their forums to become cluttered with all the useless threads that keep popping up. I really hate to burst your bubble, but you've provided ALMOST nothing constructive. All you do is spew venom at others who disagree with you, and you fail to even attempt to understand what the other side has to offer.

 

In the end, you're just another person who needs to learn the difference between objective and subjective. This game has faults, but as someone who has witnessed quite a few MMO launches, I can safely say that this MMO is off to a better start than most. You'd be hard pressed to find a game where people didn't whine and complain at the start "OH THIS GAME IS GONNA DIEZZZZZZ, I R TEH QUITTING BUT I WANNA POSTZ TO SPRED MY HATE FOR DIS GAEM". Want me to start listing MMOs I've seen launch, and list what they launched like, just so you can get a taste? I'm capable and absolutely willing.

Edited by BobTheTeepo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sparklehorse

Sparklehorse

Posted
Posted
First off, it is by the very definition, an MMO, you're arguing semantics.

 

Secondly, MMOs do not work like YOU want them to, however rational your expectations may or may not be. How many games have you seen that launched with enough content to compete with WoW in it's current shape? Wow has had many years to develop its winning formula, Bioware JUST entered the MMO scene, anyone who has a rational and logical mind can see that it will not be able to directly compete on launch.

 

I issue you a challenge: Name one MMO that launched with enough endgame, with the lack of bugs, with the inclusion of enough minor features, to directly compete with WoW. Name ONE.

 

I know you're biased and you don't expect anyone to call you out on anything, but if a thread devolves (as this one has) and loses it's constructive qualities, then it has NO place on the forums so it's obvious that they get closed (go read the forum guidelines). Additionally, they already have threads up where you can complain about every little issue you want to, they don't want their forums to become cluttered with all the useless threads that keep popping up. I really hate to burst your bubble, but you've provided ALMOST nothing constructive. All you do is spew venom at others who disagree with you, and you fail to even attempt to understand what the other side has to offer.

 

In the end, you're just another person who needs to learn the difference between objective and subjective. This game has faults, but as someone who has witnessed quite a few MMO launches, I can safely say that this MMO is off to a better start than most. You'd be hard pressed to find a game where people didn't whine and complain at the start "OH THIS GAME IS GONNA DIEZZZZZZ, I R TEH QUITTING BUT I WANNA POSTZ TO SPRED MY HATE FOR DIS GAEM". Want me to start listing MMOs I've seen launch, and list what they launched like, just so you can get a taste? I'm capable and absolutely willing.

 

I think I might be falling in love with you....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LaurV

LaurV

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

Not sure why you posted these ... did you look at the user score?

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic/user-reviews

 

6.1 ... now that's a problem ... when your players give your game a 6.1 ... is not good.

Edited by LaurV
Link to comment
Share on other sites
freakuancy

freakuancy

Posted
Posted (edited)
Not sure why you posted these ... did you look at the user score?

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic/user-reviews

 

Just a quick explanation;

 

Metacritic is the most widely used tool by industry analysts to judge the critical success of a game. I'm not making that up, it's just the pure and simple truth. Gamers look at Game Informer scores (or whatever their favorite mag is), industry pro's look at metacritic.

 

They do not care about the user score because its famously skewed towards the negative. In the end, total sales and subs are far more telling in terms of consumer favor.

 

Edit: This is by no means diminishing peoples honest concerns with the game, I've just seen a lot of people wonder about the metacritic links that pop up in these threads from time to time and thought I'd offer a hand.

Edited by freakuancy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BobTheTeepo

BobTheTeepo

Posted
Posted (edited)
Not sure why you posted these ... did you look at the user score?

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic/user-reviews

 

6.1 ... now that's a problem ... when your players give your game a 6.1 ... is not good.

 

It's well known that -- on the user scores -- a lot of trolls give things a 1 or a 0. Just because you don't like the game, that does not mean it's objectively bad. Every time a game gets a 0 (unless there's nothing in the game at all) it's a bogus review. Every time it gets a 1 it's pretty much the same. Go in and actually read the negative reviews, most of them are 0-2 and basically all the person says is "I dun likez it".

 

You're much better off going to the Metascore, where people do this on a professional level. Even if you don't agree with their overall assessment, they at least list the upsides and the downsides. You'll quickly notice that all of the 31 reviews are above 8 from the professional critics.

 

Even though my professional doctor could very well have ulterior motives (and it is not unheard of) diagnosing me, I still trust him to do it more than some random person of the street. Not to mention, if I think his diagnosis could be incorrect, I can always get a second opinion. If every doctor of repute I run into says that I'm sick but I'll live, and 1/2 of every person on the street I run into says I'm sick and going to die, I think I'll go with my doctor.

 

Edit: Ya, the userscore is clearly fair and balanced: http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3

Edited by BobTheTeepo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starglide

Starglide

Posted
Posted

I have been flipping out on developers on these forums and I can say that review is rediculous.

 

If the dude is complaining about low levels being in Warzones with level 50s, he clearly does not understand managing faction balancing until its fixed. And complaining he has to run in an MMO and that it is big? Really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...