If you say so. I think you just don't quite know what MMO actually means. Or that all those strangers you see around you aren't your friends or AIs.
SWG 2.0?
- Thread starter Owain Taggart
- Start date
I know exactly what it means. It certainly not that nonsensical misnomer you apparently subscribe to.
The one that suggests a bunch of people all together in the same room button-smashing Street Fighter II machines against AI Balrog is somehow a "multiplayer experience."
By definition, if it involves more than one player then yes, it is a "multiplayer experience." Whether one happens to like that particular experience or not is immaterial.
Nope.
The world "multiplayer" didn't exist before videogames. The first games labeled as such were games that literally could only be played by more than one person. There was no single player option.
The whole point of the word was to imply that the game required more than one player.
When arcade machines started popping up, they were advertised having both single player and multiplayer modes. The implication being there were two versions of the game to be played on that machine. It didn't matter if there was one machine or 100 in the same arcade.
Around that time, the first multiplayer online role playing games started popping up--MUDs and what not. The were listed as strictly "multiplayer" meaning that you either played together with others or you didn't play at all.
This persisted through the early 90s MMOs up through EQ/UO/etc. While you could run around and muck about by yourself, anything of any significance required a group.
Same with vanilla WoW. Even basic fetch/kill quest grinders required grouping to complete.
Multiplayer modes in FPS imply running around and blowing up your friends.
The word has been twisted in meaning to adhere to a business model and completely ignores the very slight but still important semantic deference between "multiplayer" and "multiple players."
To use another analogy, say golf, it's the difference between multiple players out on the coarse at the same time trying to better their handicaps and a "multiplayer" tournament.
The world "multiplayer" didn't exist before videogames. The first games labeled as such were games that literally could only be played by more than one person. There was no single player option.
The whole point of the word was to imply that the game required more than one player.
When arcade machines started popping up, they were advertised having both single player and multiplayer modes. The implication being there were two versions of the game to be played on that machine. It didn't matter if there was one machine or 100 in the same arcade.
Around that time, the first multiplayer online role playing games started popping up--MUDs and what not. The were listed as strictly "multiplayer" meaning that you either played together with others or you didn't play at all.
This persisted through the early 90s MMOs up through EQ/UO/etc. While you could run around and muck about by yourself, anything of any significance required a group.
Same with vanilla WoW. Even basic fetch/kill quest grinders required grouping to complete.
Multiplayer modes in FPS imply running around and blowing up your friends.
The word has been twisted in meaning to adhere to a business model and completely ignores the very slight but still important semantic deference between "multiplayer" and "multiple players."
To use another analogy, say golf, it's the difference between multiple players out on the coarse at the same time trying to better their handicaps and a "multiplayer" tournament.
When did I ever even insinuate I didn't like it? Quite the contrary. I just liked it a lot more when it was an MMO. But it just isn't now.
The whole mission statement of the last major patch was to turn the game into a single-player one. It was right there in all the publicity language. For months leading up to the release, all they talked about was "getting back to the Bioware of old" with endless nostalgia tugging references to their single-player classics. And the new prevailing end game mechanic they added to game is there for the sole purpose of reminding players of the Bioware single-player classic the game was based on.
And it was right there in the patch notes: "Solo mode flashpoints. With the help of new companions, all heroics can now be soloed. The new leveling system focuses on main storyline solo quests." Solo. Solo. Solo. It's like they're daring people to call it multiplayer.
A person can now play about 90% of all the significant content (And someone would argue the other 10% isn't that significant.) without ever having to engage or interact with another person. The only exception might be the GTN. But no one ever needs to use it, and, even then, it's so heavily regulated that it hardly counts.
On top of that, you spend so much time trying to Tiffany your way through instanced areas, that you hardly ever run into other players either.
The game was so heavily instanced to begin with, and not just with the story. The planet instancing is such that, you often find yourself in lonersville in the open world, especially on the higher level planets on any server not named Harbinger or Red Eclipse.
But now, between leveling being pipelined directly through the main story lines (which is where all the instancing occurs), solo mode flashpoints (also instanced), the new storyline that is almost completely instanced, and hosing that eliminates almost any need to ever go to the fleet, most new characters (especially alts) will probably spend 60-70% of their total lifetime in their own private areas. And much of the other 30% they think they're alone because there doesn't seem to be anyone else around.
Are you sure I'm the one in denial?
The whole mission statement of the last major patch was to turn the game into a single-player one. It was right there in all the publicity language. For months leading up to the release, all they talked about was "getting back to the Bioware of old" with endless nostalgia tugging references to their single-player classics. And the new prevailing end game mechanic they added to game is there for the sole purpose of reminding players of the Bioware single-player classic the game was based on.
And it was right there in the patch notes: "Solo mode flashpoints. With the help of new companions, all heroics can now be soloed. The new leveling system focuses on main storyline solo quests." Solo. Solo. Solo. It's like they're daring people to call it multiplayer.
A person can now play about 90% of all the significant content (And someone would argue the other 10% isn't that significant.) without ever having to engage or interact with another person. The only exception might be the GTN. But no one ever needs to use it, and, even then, it's so heavily regulated that it hardly counts.
On top of that, you spend so much time trying to Tiffany your way through instanced areas, that you hardly ever run into other players either.
The game was so heavily instanced to begin with, and not just with the story. The planet instancing is such that, you often find yourself in lonersville in the open world, especially on the higher level planets on any server not named Harbinger or Red Eclipse.
But now, between leveling being pipelined directly through the main story lines (which is where all the instancing occurs), solo mode flashpoints (also instanced), the new storyline that is almost completely instanced, and hosing that eliminates almost any need to ever go to the fleet, most new characters (especially alts) will probably spend 60-70% of their total lifetime in their own private areas. And much of the other 30% they think they're alone because there doesn't seem to be anyone else around.
Are you sure I'm the one in denial?
For what it's worth, I kind of agree with you. Been playing it a lot lately, and the dynamics of the game changed a lot with the 4.0 patch, to the point that guilds have lost their meaning and feel more like social hubs more than anything now. Not to say I don't like it either, as I'm enjoying it a lot for what it is, but it's really quite a different game from when it launched as an MMO. It's lost a lot of that social engagement. They've done this a way to get more people via the new movie, for more of a casual experience. The only time you really need to engage with others is when you're forced to during certain points in the story, but all that really says is, "Hey, look at me! I'm an MMO, remember?"
And that's why I wonder how long the game can hang on in its present state. Even early on, they had to struggle with the game not being as big a success as they had hoped, leading them to FTP. This current direction is even more drastic, leaning away from most of the familiar MMO trappings. It's what leads me to feel that they're winding down, in preparation for something else on the horizon.
And that's why I wonder how long the game can hang on in its present state. Even early on, they had to struggle with the game not being as big a success as they had hoped, leading them to FTP. This current direction is even more drastic, leaning away from most of the familiar MMO trappings. It's what leads me to feel that they're winding down, in preparation for something else on the horizon.
I don't think anyone is claiming that SWTOR hasn't been moving away from a dependence on group finding towards more solo gameplay. But to declare it's "not an MMO" is just pure histrionics.
It's the same mentality that insisted that Mass Effect 2 wasn't a "real" RPG simply because it ditched the superfluous and indeed cumbersome loot/inventory system.
So SWTOR is now less of a carbon copy of WoW than it used to be. Whoopty doo.
It's the same mentality that insisted that Mass Effect 2 wasn't a "real" RPG simply because it ditched the superfluous and indeed cumbersome loot/inventory system.
So SWTOR is now less of a carbon copy of WoW than it used to be. Whoopty doo.
That's nonsense. And a fallacy.
More nonsense.
Guild Wars 2 is by far the most massively multiplayer game currently on the market. Everything in the game promotes/encourages or requires grouping. The games primary feature revolves around 100s (or even 1000s) of players playing together and against each other.
It's also nothing like Warcraft.
I still enjoy logging in twice a week to run an highlighted OPs and then work on Revan HM.
The new content is very much a solo experience, but I get the intention behind it.
Not all that happy about the long delay in between releases of new group content, but I still enjoy poking things with a light saber in a group.
So for me its still an MMORPG.
The new content is very much a solo experience, but I get the intention behind it.
Not all that happy about the long delay in between releases of new group content, but I still enjoy poking things with a light saber in a group.
So for me its still an MMORPG.
Dear Lord, please no. No more Batman style melee mechanics in an open world setting, I cannae take it no more!
NOBODY ASKED YOU
As I understand it, the Batman games just use a simplified version of the combo systems that spectacle fighters and old school beat-um ups have been using for years. And with good reason since it's to date the best way to make someone feel that they're in an elaborate fist/melee weapon fight with a controller.
So yeah, if they were to do a game that involved Jedi style combat than I'd prefer they use a system like that. I could live without the open world and obsession with claiming radio towers though.
So yeah, if they were to do a game that involved Jedi style combat than I'd prefer they use a system like that. I could live without the open world and obsession with claiming radio towers though.
Yeah, and frankly, for a Batman game, it made a lot of sense. And for once, there was a Batman game that didn't suck.
Similar threads
