eartharioch Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 (edited) Stop thinking WoW or other "old school" MMOs where they drop a huge expac on yeah and then maybe a little something mid way through the dev cycle. Think instead of an that one drop the entire life of 3.X. We got how many more FPs and OPs already... there will be more this month with 3.2. They are clearly adopting a philosophy of faster dev cycles with the content handed out in smaller batches. Think the difference between the person that east 3 big meals a day and the person who eats in the work out" recommended 4- 5 smaller meals a day. This is a new trend in MMOs but it is something a lot of MMOs are doing now. Instead of a HUGE Expac then wait 12-18 months for the next one essentially spread the release of that expac out over the course of an entire development year....Hell most of 3.2 had to be in the can already...no way they are generating an entire world (even if it is only the size of yavin 4) with more FPS and likely at least one OP in just a couple months. At launch they had ONE OP, thats it 1... Here we got as many hardmode FPs as launch (at least) 2 OPs and there are going to more with 3.2...there almost has to be because they are going to up gear. You may not do FPs and Ops... you may have wanted this to be a BW: Tor game on-line (maybe not but that is the feeling I get)... and I get that but it was the lack of that endgame content that the "I quite" surveys after launch that informed this decision. So they are going for that crowd. How many 'pologies can a 'pologist 'pol? The problem with SoR isn't the size (although it is much smaller than RotHC was at release), it's that the content was lackluster (Rishi, Yavin, no new SM flashpoints, two tacticals, and four crapticals -- HM upgrades of tacticals) and buggy (operations). It feels like a skeleton of what could have been -- just like everything post Oricon has. GSF, GSH, Manaan. If it makes the game better, that's fine, but you should wait until the game actually gets better instead of preaching/speculating about the future and acting like you know more about BW's thoughts and plans than they have shared with [the rest of] us. Edited April 4, 2015 by eartharioch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghisallo Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 (edited) How many 'pologies can a 'pologist 'pol? The problem with SoR isn't the size (although it is much smaller than RotHC was at release), it's that the content was lackluster (Rishi, Yavin, no new SM flashpoints, two tacticals, and four crapticals -- HM upgrades of tacticals) and buggy (operations). It feels like a skeleton of what could have been -- just like everything post Oricon has. GSF, GSH, Manaan. If it makes the game better, that's fine, but you should wait until the game actually gets better instead of preaching/speculating about the future and acting like you know more about BW's thoughts and plans than they have shared with [the rest of] us. First your comments have LITTLE to do with the guy I was responding to. I was responding to a guy that basically ignored that this game had NO end game at launch, by Bioware's own admission actually. My point is to say as compared to the end game Skeleton it was for the first year it is an improvement. Maybe you don't get it or maybe I am just weird that when I look at the video games I play I look at them as the business they are. At launch they flubbed up BIG TIME with having littlke to no end game content... they said it themselves... their failure got their budget CRUSHED. When that happens you don't throw money at it and say "fix it and they will come" you say "here's your vastly reduced budget, amke more money and we will give you more next year" In other words..."PROVE to us bean counters you are worth the cash." I would bet I know A LOT more about Bioware's plans than you do. How? because I don't get infor just from this web site or fan sites... I do things like get transcripts of the presentations these cats do at the GDC every year... I see what they said about how they failed and what they need to do to correct it to other game designers. Hell in the past I actually cultivated devs as friends to get the real info. So when I say "they failed because of lack of end game" I don't say that because I think that... I say that because BIOWARE SAID it at GDC. I also understand how these companies operate. Some companies use LONG 12-18 month dev cycles and drop the stuff almost all at once, others try for 3-4 smaller updates a year. I then look and see what a company is doing and from experience say "okay they are pursing this model." (PS they also said they were pursuing that model) I pay a sub... imo that is an investment. So I treat it as an investment. I don't just read the marketing spin on the official forums and twitter or the rantings of fansites. My money is more valuable than that. The ifno for everything I said is out there for anyone to get. all you need to do is bother to look for it. BTW I am not even saying if any of this is good or bad... I am on two minds with the issue. I have played other games that basically have a "brain dead easy version" of a dungeon for when you are leveling and then a "hard mode" or expert version of the same dungeon. Are the Ops buggy? At launch yeah but if we are honest new raids are always buggy because only a limited number of players on any PTS are actually capable of testing them and now they are pretty much at the 'average" for bugginess in the industry. In essence since MMOing starting in 1999 I see NOTHING different here than I have seen in every MMO I have played at this point (content/stability/quality wise) for he most part. So I can either say "damn you bioware you should do better than everyone else!!!!" or say "well in terms of the industry they are not doing bad at all." I can honestly say not sure which way I am going to go this time around. Edited April 4, 2015 by Ghisallo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaesha Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 One thing is for sure, a new Star Wars MMO is being produced and not necessarily by Bioware. Just because a game is an Open world "Sandbox" doesn't make it an MMO. Skyrim and DAI are Open world but neither would be called an MMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghisallo Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 (edited) Just because a game is an Open world "Sandbox" doesn't make it an MMO. Skyrim and DAI are Open world but neither would be called an MMO. Yeah... people erroneously think that being able to play with a bunch of people on line makes it an MMO. For all w know the game that is currently being worked on won't even have anoption like GTA Online. I remember when gamers used to actually know about the games and not just what buttons to push. Old am I, I suppose. The fact EA has said "we are working on an open world game" means it is NOT and MMORPG...if it was an MMORPG they would have called it that and it would be STUPID for them to do that any way... They specifically stated like a month ago they are double downing on SWTOR AND even if they weren't you do NOT make competition for one of your own games that is making over 100 million dollars a year for ya. Logic seems to be in short supply around here, as opposed to schadenfreude and/or wishful thinking. Edited April 4, 2015 by Ghisallo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaesha Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Yeah... people erroneously think that being able to play with a bunch of people on line makes it an MMO. For all w know the game that is currently being worked on won't even have anoption like GTA Online. I remember when gamers used to actually know about the games and not just what buttons to push. Old am I, I suppose. The fact EA has said "we are working on an open world game" means it is NOTR and MMORPG...if it was an MMORPG they would have called it that and it would be STUPID for them to do that any way... They specifically stated like a month ago they are double downing on SWTOR AND even if they weren't you do NOT make competition for one of your own games that is making over 100 million dollars a year for ya. Logic seems to be in short supply around here, as opposed to schadenfreude and/or wishful thinking. I turn 33 this month and I know what you're talking about so if You're and old man what does that make me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghisallo Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 (edited) I turn 33 this month and I know what you're talking about so if You're and old man what does that make me? at least 10 years younger than me... but wise beyond your years? lol Edited April 4, 2015 by Ghisallo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaesha Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 10 years younger than me... but wise beyond your years? lol GOOD answer!! as My brother who is the same age as you would say "43 isn't old unless you feel old" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts