Confused by the controversy over game difficulty

[sentientomega]

Well all I can say is this in closing as the debate is largely pointless at this point is that I would wager that come the publication of the 4.0.2 patch notes we will see either a new thread and/or a change in the debate on this one. I am not privy to the patch notes obviously... Yeah. If you want to know what I am talking about PM me, I do not want to stir the hornet's nest publically.

 

That said I do agree with a few things you said.

 

First I do think that removing gear was part of the problem. Before you got the gear for the companions as you progressed so it was not "too easy" from the jump. While they geared up quite fast and once geared they were dang good, they were not dang good out of the gate. This I think is part of the problem. It makes sense that EVENTUALLY my companion kicks butt, that they progress like I do.

 

Second I do think the idea of universal companions is part of the problem, though perhaps not exactly the way you see it. You could make things harder by bringing the dps companion if you were dps, or the tank companion if you were running a healer. I also think this hurt immersion. Why do you need a "Doc" if everyone can heal (as an example). I think the boat on that world has sailed tbh. They may make some "a little more tanky" or "Healy" but they will still be able to do everything to a certain degree. So if none sees the idea of universal companions as "insurmountable" it would only be because they want their face to be , literally, identical to one they do not like in every single role.

 

Except that the whole point of being able to use any companion to fill any role was so that you didn't have to use a companion you didn't particularly like because they performed at a role better than everyone else, or, that role exclusively (ala Quinn).

 

Put simply, I should be able to use exactly whichever companion I have, in any role, and if they're all the same influence rank, there should be ZERO difference in performance, either as tank, dps, or healer; and I thought that's what universal companion capabilities were supposed to ensure, was I wrong in thinking that I should be able to use companions I liked, and not gimp myself in the process?

[LordArtemis]

And what part of your experience is that?

 

Just to give an example I am currently typing this while kira eats the boss on Taris.

 

I didn't even have to initiate that combat, it just happened at the end of the conversation.

 

And, he's dead.

 

You seem rather concerned with my opinions, and rather fixated on the idea that companions have to be overpowered in every single situation, despite the massive amount of evidence to the contrary.

 

So I guess I would ask....why is this? You are aware changes are likely coming, right?

 

It almost seems as if it is very important to you that I believe you......

Edited November 15, 2015 by LordArtemis

[LordArtemis]

Except that the whole point of being able to use any companion to fill any role was so that you didn't have to use a companion you didn't particularly like because they performed at a role better than everyone else, or, that role exclusively (ala Quinn).

 

Put simply, I should be able to use exactly whichever companion I have, in any role, and if they're all the same influence rank, there should be ZERO difference in performance, either as tank, dps, or healer; and I thought that's what universal companion capabilities were supposed to ensure, was I wrong in thinking that I should be able to use companions I liked, and not gimp myself in the process?

 

One could argue, and I am just speculating here, that in order to make them generic and effective in every situation so you could openly choose any one of them you wish they had to be overpowered in most situations.

 

It could be said that would be the only way they would perform properly in all roles.

 

I contend this is likely not possible if you wish to provide a challenge to those players that desire it. All too often the companions would overperform when they should not be able to.

 

So I believe that it is possible that true generic companions may not be possible with the way the game is designed.

[Ghisallo]

Except that the whole point of being able to use any companion to fill any role was so that you didn't have to use a companion you didn't particularly like because they performed at a role better than everyone else, or, that role exclusively (ala Quinn).

 

Put simply, I should be able to use exactly whichever companion I have, in any role, and if they're all the same influence rank, there should be ZERO difference in performance, either as tank, dps, or healer; and I thought that's what universal companion capabilities were supposed to ensure, was I wrong in thinking that I should be able to use companions I liked, and not gimp myself in the process?

 

No you are right. That was their reason. First a personal note II thought that messed with the whole story and immersion. I recruited Doc on my JK, Elara on my Commando, because they needed a "medic". Whether I " liked" their personality was unimportant. I was fighting the Empire and needed someone to keep my crew and I healthy. If this expac was about story... Well Universal Companions seemed to go against that.

 

The problem with the idea from a technical aspect is this. Under the current system the only way to actually adjust difficulty is to drop gear or your companion. In either case you do not play the game as intended. Having the companions with variable strengths, and weaknesses, provide some flexibility. Want a challenge as a dpser? Bring a dps companion... You are then forced to kill the enemy before they kill you. Are you a healer? Bring a tank companion. Now you have to heal and dps, but in a manner that does not result in energy issues. If you don't manage your energy properly your tank dies then you die, if you dont dps then the mob dies next year after the tank killed it. If you want ez mode you bring Treek and dps.

 

Also Artemis hits on the other issue. If they can tank AND dps AND heal equally well it is an issue. The fact they need to have heal output to keep up a player if the player is face tanking means that as a tank you do not have to heal them as a player then add the dps... It's not like they have a "role" button...they are all 3 all the time. This I believe is the source of the issue.

Edited November 15, 2015 by Ghisallo

[maidelken]

You seem rather concerned with my opinions, and rather fixated on the idea that companions have to be overpowered in every single situation, despite the massive amount of evidence to the contrary.

 

So I guess I would ask....why is this? You are aware changes are likely coming, right?

 

It almost seems as if it is very important to you that I believe you......

 

 

Haha. It's you in the other thread as well!!

 

I very rarely look at the name on the post, when I double click to zoom in on the iPhone it just shows the text, not the bits around it.

 

I don't care if you believe me or not, all I have been asking for is answers to simple questions I out to you. Answers that you just seem to evade and talk around rather than answering. Have you considered a career in politics?

[sentientomega]

No you are right. That was their reason. First a personal note II thought that messed with the whole story and immersion. I recruited Doc on my JK, Elara on my Commando, because they needed a "medic". Whether I " liked" their personality was unimportant. I was fighting the Empire and needed someone to keep my crew and I healthy. If this expac was about story... Well Universal Companions seemed to go against that.

 

The problem with the idea from a technical aspect is this. Under the current system the only way to actually adjust difficulty is to drop gear or your companion. In either case you do not play the game as intended. Having the companions with variable strengths, and weaknesses, provide some flexibility. Want a challenge as a dpser? Bring a dps companion... You are then forced to kill the enemy before they kill you. Are you a healer? Bring a tank companion. Now you have to heal and dps, but in a manner that does not result in energy issues. If you don't manage your energy properly your tank dies then you die, if you dont dps then the mob dies next year after the tank killed it. If you want ez mode you bring Treek and dps.

 

True, but then some story REQUIRES that you bring a specific companion, so if you were a tank or healer STUCK with a tank companion who's REQUIRED, you're utterly screwed.

 

How about bringing the same companion to the fight, but CHANGE their role, hmmm? We can do that, theoretically, but we should not be punished for doing so.

 

There is a third option, see those green checkboxes in non-default companion abilities? Uncheck some of them, especially the channelled heal, and see how it goes. By the by, they are intended, since BW:A put them in in the first place, for, I can't imagine, any other reason.

[LordArtemis]

Also Artemis hits on the other issue. If they can tank AND dps AND heal equally well it is an issue. The fact they need to have heal output to keep up a player if the player is face tanking means that as a tank you do not have to heal them as a player then add the dps... It's not like they have a "role" button...they are all 3 all the time. This I believe is the source of the issue.

 

And I think the original design of the companions may have come to bear here. Some companions heal better than others, have more health in certain roles, or more DPS. Some companions concentrate on self healing, while others seem to focus on healing you, yet others blast away at the target even in heal mode.

 

So even if they WANTED to make them generic that may not have been possible unless they completely redesigned the companion abilities, which it appears they did not do, at least from cursory evidence.

 

One way to solve design problems like this? Make them very powerful healers across the board. That means in most situations they would be competent, but unfortunately that ALSO means that almost ALL encounters of a difficult nature would be changed in some way, some very dramatically.

 

I don't think they intended to create a situation where your companion would be a god, and in certain situations I believe that is exactly what happened.

[LordArtemis]

Haha. It's you in the other thread as well!!

 

I very rarely look at the name on the post, when I double click to zoom in on the iPhone it just shows the text, not the bits around it.

 

I don't care if you believe me or not, all I have been asking for is answers to simple questions I out to you. Answers that you just seem to evade and talk around rather than answering. Have you considered a career in politics?

 

No, but this is starting to feel like a career.

 

You call evade, I call it not taking your obvious bait....you have a post history you know. I am not foolish. Your not asking simple questions. You are making claims and asking questions so you can likely attempt to discredit them.

 

Notice I am conversing with others? Their post history on this matter is VERY different from yours.

 

If you wish to actually have a conversation, and not engage in forum PVP, change your posting style and THEN perhaps we will talk.

 

Until then I continue to find your claims suspect and ignore your baiting. I would expect that will not change any time soon. If you truly do not care, then you will likely not have an issue with this point of view.

 

And there it is.

[maidelken]

No, but this is starting to feel like a career.

 

You call evade, I call it not taking your obvious bait....you have a post history you know. I am not foolish. Your not asking simple questions. You are making claims and asking questions so you can likely attempt to discredit them.

 

Notice I am conversing with others? Their post history on this matter is VERY different from yours.

 

If you wish to actually have a conversation, and not engage in forum PVP, change your posting style and THEN perhaps we will talk.

 

Until then I continue to find your claims suspect and ignore your baiting. I would expect that will not change any time soon. If you truly do not care, then you will likely not have an issue with this point of view.

 

And there it is.

 

Oh Jesse. You still can't answer a simple question.

 

Ok cards on the table I have done this:

 

Level 1-60 with agent and trooper post 4.0 and level 1-18 with Jedi knight. I've also done level 50-62 with my consular (who was done to 50 pre4.0)

 

I have no datacrons, not unlocks and none of my companions are past level 22 in influence.

 

I have done most flash points, a couple of +2 heroics.

 

Throughout everything since 4.0 my companion has soloed it since I realised I wasn't needed anymore.

 

Please tell me something I haven't done that my companion can't solo. PLEASE I'm begging you because I am bored stiff with attacking a trash mob and my companion killing 3 npcs for each of mine.

 

I will literally drop everything and go straight away to the thing you say (unless it's inside kofe and I won't because I'm not finished doing everything I want to in the old stories.)

[sentientomega]

That's not what I'm talking about, I'm talking about the three roles you can select for companions to fill, make them equally effective for every companion, just to make it beyond utterly clear:

 

If Kaliyo is in the tanking role, she should not be better than ANY OTHER companion IN the tanking role.

 

If Quinn is healing, he should not exceed any other companion's healing IN THAT ROLE.

 

If Nadia is dpsing, she should not exceed the dps of any other companion IN DPS MODE.

 

ALL the values for ALL companions doing the same role should be exactly the same, the ONLY thing that should change the power of a companion vis-a-vis role is Influenced/Presence.

 

Therefore, assuming that all companions have the same influence; all tanking companions should do the same damage, have the same capacity for self-healing, and generate the same threat, dpses should do EXACTLY the same dps, and healers should have exactly the same healing, whoever they are. If I'm a tank, and I'm forced to use Khem Val, he should NOT suck at everything other than tanking, is that so unreasonable?

 

Also, I think tanking companions suck; if they were a tank in group content, they'd be kicked/ignored, they're paper tanks with minimal threat generation at best.

 

I am not saying that should all be able to heal/dps and tank ALL AT ONCE, where the hell did any of you get that from?

 

I do, however, think that tanks should be able to SELF-heal, yes, JUST self-heal, NOT heal anyone else, just THEMSELVES, with MASSIVELY high threat generation accompanying said SELF-heals.

[maidelken]

And to make it even fairer I will FILM IT ON MY PHONE. (Pc can't handle the game and fraps, it's old...)

[Ghisallo]

True, but then some story REQUIRES that you bring a specific companion, so if you were a tank or healer STUCK with a tank companion who's REQUIRED, you're utterly screwed.

 

How about bringing the same companion to the fight, but CHANGE their role, hmmm? We can do that, theoretically, but we should not be punished for doing so.

 

There is a third option, see those green checkboxes in non-default companion abilities? Uncheck some of them, especially the channelled heal, and see how it goes. By the by, they are intended, since BW:A put them in in the first place, for, I can't imagine, any other reason.

 

But the thing is those companions were chosen rather carefully for each class. While not necessarily ideal the companion that was THE companion was chosen because it was the best balance between the roles for the class. Example, Morgan for Trooper. He dps and a trooper can either tank on one sub class or heal on the other.

 

As for the last bit, you just raise another "well if you want it harder play the game NOT as intended". Yes they are there but they were not there to be used as a " difficulty slider", rather they are there because there are actually times when you will not want certainly abilities cast.... Example you may not want your companion using AoE abilities, it was not a "well lets let them make things harder by gimping their companions."

[LordArtemis]

And to make it even fairer I will FILM IT ON MY PHONE. (Pc can't handle the game and fraps, it's old...)

 

Your going to film all of that, on your phone, and post it?

 

If you can film all of that, show it, show your level, influence levels, legacy, datacrons and presence then MAYBE I will say that perhaps you are being straightforward.

 

Until then I call shenanigans.

 

If you feel that my opinion is that important to you....prove what you are saying.

Edited November 15, 2015 by LordArtemis

[maidelken]

Your going to film all of that, on your phone, and post it?

 

If you can film all of that, show it, show your level, influence levels, legacy, datacrons and presence then MAYBE I will say that perhaps you are being straightforward.

 

Until then I call shenanigans.

 

If you feel that my opinion is that important to you....prove what you are saying.

 

Absolutely.

 

You tell me something that I should find companions underpowered on (that doesn't involve me grouping up or sound kofe) and I'll film every darn screen (except my account details.)

[LordArtemis]

Absolutely.

 

You tell me something that I should find companions underpowered on (that doesn't involve me grouping up or sound kofe) and I'll film every darn screen (except my account details.)

 

Oh. Heh.

 

No, you claimed 1-60. Show me that.

 

Heck, I can show you one fight where my comp is OP. I can show you MANY fights where my comp is OP. The onus is on you to prove that in EVERY FIGHT, EVERY SITUATION your companion is OP from 1 to 60 (well, 10 to 60 of course unless you count HK).

[maidelken]

Oh. Heh.

 

No, you claimed 1-60. Show me that.

 

Heck, I can show you one fight where my comp is OP. I can show you MANY fights where my comp is OP. The onus is on you to prove that in EVERY FIGHT, EVERY SITUATION your companion is OP from 1 to 60 (well, 10 to 60 of course unless you count HK).

 

 

Oh for goodness sakes.

 

Ok, I've filmed 2 minutes of my screens and now you pull that crap.

 

Look pick any flashpoint or heroic you think I'll find difficult. Heck I've only been playing for 3 months, I know squat about this game. Anything, your pick of the entire games non-grouped content.

[sentientomega]

But the thing is those companions were chosen rather carefully for each class. While not necessarily ideal the companion that was THE companion was chosen because it was the best balance between the roles for the class. Example, Morgan for Trooper. He dps and a trooper can either tank on one sub class or heal on the other.

 

As for the last bit, you just raise another "well if you want it harder play the game NOT as intended". Yes they are there but they were not there to be used as a " difficulty slider", rather they are there because there are actually times when you will not want certainly abilities cast.... Example you may not want your companion using AoE abilities, it was not a "well lets let them make things harder by gimping their companions."

 

Carefully chosen, my arse; "not necessarily ideal", biggest understatement since the Big Bang. Vette, SW companion number 1, dps, SW can either tank with one AC, or all dps with the other; oh yes, seems really "ideal" that does(!) You tell me this, what percentage of any class with their first companion as a dps companion would have their characters go dps? Not certain, but I'm pretty sure most people's characters go dps. Which, pre-4.0, was a bloody nightmare. If BW:A really wants the players to be able to use any companion they wish, and do every role equally effectively, barring Influence Rank, they should stick to that, or issue the following "We're going back to making you use companions we know you want to DIAF, in roles you find utterly indispensable." Basically, only making Quinn a remotely reasonable healer again, for instance.

 

Most ACs have more than one role, why should companions therefore be restricted in what they can do, and have the effectiveness with which they do it gimped?

 

If I want to be able to have Skadge and Khem Val as well as other healers of the same Influence Rank, I should; BW:A said so, from the 4.0 patch notes.

 

All companions are now capable of performing all three combat roles (Tank, DPS, Healing), and can be freely switched between roles (so long as they're not currently in combat). No need to worry if you love M1-4X but really need a healer!

 

What would it say if BW:A gimped 4X's healing to 25% of every other trooper comps' healing? THat is exactly how things are with Hk-51 and melee tech healers right now, they're utterly crap as healers (their healing channel deals 25% of the healing their ranged tech counterparts heal for). My serenity shadow cannot use Qyzen, with whom that character has a hell of a lot more affinity than with Tharan, or any other healing comp there.

 

You may have no issue with using a dps comp with a dps char, I do; I've no actual evidence, but I strongly suspect that I'm not alone.

 

Being taught what I have been about roles, I follow the following models for character/companion role combos: tank/dps, dps/tank, healer/dps, dps/healer, mixing any roles together is inadvisable, especially tank/tank, and dps/dps.

 

Aric should heal as well as he damages, and as well as he tanks, in those three SEPARATE roles, same for everybody, again, BARRING Influence Rank. And the same for EVERY.SINGLE.COMPANION, I cannot think who'd reasonably be unhappy with such occurring, it's not that different from being able to field-respec your char's discipline.

Edited November 15, 2015 by sentientomega

[Ghisallo]

Carefully chosen, my arse; "not necessarily ideal", understatement since the Big Bang. You tell me this, what percentage of any class with their first companion as a dps companion would have their characters go dps? Not certain, but I'm pretty sure most people's characters go dps. Which, pre-4.0, was a bloody nightmare. If BW:A really wants the players to be able to use any companion they wish, and do every role equally effectively, barring Influence Rank, they should stick to that, or issue the following "We're going back to making you use companions we know you want to DIAF, in roles you find utterly indispensable." Basically, only making Quinn a remotely reasonable healer again, for instance.

 

Most ACs have more than one role, why should companions therefore be restricted in what they can do, and have the effectiveness with which they do it gimped?

 

If I want to be able to have Skadge and Khem Val as well as other healers of the same Influence Rank, I should; BW:A said so, from the 4.0 patch notes.

 

 

 

What would it say if BW:A gimped 4X's healing to 25% of every other trooper comps' healing? THat is exactly how things are with Hk-51 and melee tech healers right now, they're utterly crap as healers (their healing channel deals 25% of the healing their ranged tech counterparts heal for). My serenity shadow cannot use Qyzen, with whom that character has a hell of a lot more affinity than with Tharan, or any other healing comp there.

 

You may have no issue with using a dps comp with a dps char, I do; I've no actual evidence, but I strongly suspect that I'm not alone.

 

Being taught what I have been about roles, I follow the following models for character/companion role combos: tank/dps, dps/tank, healer/dps, dps/healer, mixing any roles together is inadvisable, especially tank/tank, and dps/dps.

 

Aric should heal as well as he damages, and as well as he tanks, in those three SEPARATE roles, same for everybody, again, BARRING Influence Rank. And the same for EVERY.SINGLE.COMPANION, I cannot think who'd reasonably be unhappy with such occurring.

 

I didn't say "perfectly" chosen...there is no such thing... But in terms of the 3 choices these companions were the "least" problematic. Regardless come Tuesday there are big changes in the offing for the companions and I suspect, from your posts here, you will be among those displeased.

[SlaveV]

Completely agree with you, OP.

 

The funny thing is...the game is no less challenging now, compared to how it used to be. Combat is just more fast-paced, and fighting through mobs is more streamlined. If my companion is dps, I can burn through mobs a bit quicker. If my companion is a healer, I don't have to worry about taking the time to heal up after a fight. Pre-4.0 however, companions did minimal damage/healing, and you would have to take time to regen after 95% of fights. I just found that to be tedious, and I don't miss it.

 

Also, pre-4.0 I only ever ran with treek or HK as a companion, I don't miss that either.

 

I agree with this. For once, I, as a veteran player, finally got rewarded with all my hard work in the game and my companions are powerful. But, please Bioware, don't nerf. I know new players that are struggling and think the game is too hard, by comparison. I urged them to continue on as they will get more powerful as they play. Anyone saying the game is too easy should try to create a new account and play from scratch. See what they say, then... lol

[LordArtemis]

No you don't. Your entire post history is supporting the nerf. That's literally only time you have ever posted. People who vote with their wallet don't complain like a spoiled child on the forums all day.

 

I think you are confusing Mikahrone with maidelken RA. The former has a post history that demonstrates a strong support for the current companion strength, the latter is the forum member that has the post history almost entirely comprised of complaints about companions. They are not the same person to my knowledge.

 

Probably not a good idea to call people names either. Criticize the opinion or the post, not the person.

Edited November 15, 2015 by LordArtemis

[EnkiduNineEight]

Most would not, that's why the market was so tiny then compared to now

 

Yeah, WoW was released ten years ago.. The market was SOOOO small. (WoW was more difficult than SWTOR)

[EnkiduNineEight]

Well, this is the deal - if i cannot solo SF on tuesday, its end of the line with refund request for me.

 

I tend to vote with my wallet.

 

I am not sure you would be missed. How much were you spending for your sub? How much in cartel Coins?

 

Just saying, people who spent a lot more than you, I am guessing, have quit and they didn't really seem to affect BioWare's decisions.

[Jumajin]

Yeah, WoW was released ten years ago.. The market was SOOOO small. (WoW was more difficult than SWTOR)

 

Well, technically, 11 years ago as of next Monday.

[robertthebard]

And this is a complete distortion of the position of the people posting that this expac is TOO easy (emphasis on too). No one is calling for some return to old school EQ where you could not tell a heroic rat from a push over rat and when that heroic was HEROIC. All they are saying is that a game where you can literally walk away mid fight and find the mobs dead is TOO easy. This game, currently, requires you, in a non-heroic environment to only navigate to mobs, your companion can do the rest. A Heroic2 only requires you to have the appropriate gear to solo it, at least before you had to be over geared to an extent.

 

When was that? I solo'd the heroics on Hutta on my Operative at level, in at level gear with Kaliyo in at level gear, while Oricon was still a thing, so a cap of 55. Soloing the Heroics on Tython and Korriban were a thing back then too, under the same circumstances. I don't recall needing to over level or over gear score Ord Mantell either. That's the starter worlds, DK and Cor were done in a two man group with comps, including the then H4s. If this wasn't something you could do back then, it wasn't because the game was too hard, because people were doing them back then.

 

The simple belief that the current expac is simply too easy is NOT a niche view. You may disagree with it, exaggerate the argument being made and then call it niche in order to bolster your position as you don't want to address the contention that is actually being made, but that is more about you not wanting to address the actual issues. I honestly can't tell if you are simply arrogant or disingenuous at the moment.

 

Exaggerating the argument by including things like "I can solo with my tank and a dps comp"? Because I've seen that argument used, and it left me thinking "I'm a God amongst men, I've been doing Oricon like that on my Assassin, Shadow and Jugg since I got to it". So, to be sure I understand you here, the level sync complaints are pure hyperbole? Nobody can possibly be struggling with the game even with sync? I hope you wear flame retardant clothes if you go over there to post that assertion, because they're going to be all over that.

 

If it wasn't too easy why would people be reduced to saying "well dismiss your companion then.". I mean seriously, the main answer to the argument is to not play the game as intended by the developers? When you have to tell people to NOT play a game the way it was intended to address an issue, there is a problem.

 

What do we tell the people that were soloing w/out their comps from whenever they started doing that? That being able to do it doesn't mean anything because it's not "how the game was intended to be played"?

 

More than one review of the game, not " complaint" by a player has raised the issues of losing the MMO of an MMORPG and the dangers of lack of replayability, and need of others in the Heroic 2s. Even for story fans this is a danger as the expac is so quickly completed due to the ease of play and identical story.

 

Pure hyperbole. Nothing MMO was removed. The story content has always been solo mode. Those people are going on about no new operations being added. It's been their rallying cry since it was announced. However, none of the operations have been removed, which would be what is required to remove MMO from MMORPG. In fact, they were all made "relevant", since they can now be run at cap for relevant rewards. Not wanting to run content does not equal the removal of said content.

 

As for easy being desired more than anything, well the history of video games and psychological studies of then prove this contention wrong. Now, you don't want a game too hard either mind you but you do want to find that sweet spot between too easy and "hard". A game that is too easy bores players and they stop playing. This is a documented fact. We are hardwired as humans to want at least the illusion of challenge, which is completely lacking here. Now a story can distract from this BUT even if the story rocks, when it is only ONE story and, thus far, the decision wheel doesn't actually produce any actual change or consequence beyond a different email a but later, at best you will have a lot of players play through once but shrug atba second time through. This is DEATH for a game with SWTORs current financial model.

 

So yeah...

 

Really, so the only reason Blizzard dumbed down WoW was because they were mislead by their community? Care to explain why not all games are Korean Grinders, and why games that release with a significant difficulty lower it or die horrible, empty server deaths? As an afterthought, care to provide links to all this "research", or is it a case of "It's on the internet, and they can't put anything on the internet that isn't true"?

[Erasimus]

.....

Really, so the only reason Blizzard dumbed down WoW was because they were mislead by their community? Care to explain why not all games are Korean Grinders, and why games that release with a significant difficulty lower it or die horrible, empty server deaths? As an afterthought, care to provide links to all this "research", or is it a case of "It's on the internet, and they can't put anything on the internet that isn't true"?

 

Everything is relative. I've played SWTOR since release and have also played WoW since release. There is no comparison between the current "challenge" level of WoW and SWTOR. WoW is much more challenging, even with the efforts to simplify gameplay. Most of which were centered around ability pruning.

 

The difference, to me, is that the open world gameplay in current content (current being the latest and previous expansions) is still challenging. It is easy to die out in the world if you make mistakes especially if you are solo questing and new to the game.

 

WoW has added a number of options from scenarios in MOP to LFR that are geared toward letting more casual, and younger players, progress through the content. These new options have lesser rewards but let everyone see the story and progress. WoW also has different raid/dungeon modes to challenge people from normal to heroic to mythic each with progressively better rewards. Long time players have special gear available that gives XP buffs and levels with them to make leveling faster when creating new characters.

 

Of course, outside of Time Walking Dungeons, WoW hasn't tried to make old content relevant outside of leveling, I wish they would.

 

SWTOR has some of these features. What I don't believe they have yet found is the balance between accessibility and exciting/challenging gameplay. Which is, in my opinion, the core of the current discussion about companions. Some people don't appear to want any challenge in open world gameplay others, like me, would like to see more challenge in open world gameplay.

 

Finding a balance between accessibility and exciting/challenging gameplay is, I believe, important to widening the appeal of a game like SWTOR. Wider appeal means more subscribers. More subscribers will mean more money, and hopefully more content.

 

SWTOR, because of the emphasis on the items from the cartel market, is already much more grindy than WoW or many other games for people that don't have the real world cash to buy CC. It seems to me that many of the complaints about the changes boil down to just making grinding easier when I feel the emphasis should be on reducing the need to grind.