| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (61)

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 9:07AM Tom in VA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Evil Emperor = Blizzard/WoW
Luke Skywalker = Bioware/SWTOR

Love the imagery. ;)

I have to say I love the story-telling/characterization that Bioware does. The "shopping list" illustration is apt. Bioware games also have players getting "shopping lists", but at least you're doing that shopping for characters (and WITH characters) with real voices, facial expressions, etc., who seem real. As far as I'm concerned, that alone makes a world of difference.

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 9:09AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
People need to stop comparing every new MMO to WoW. It's just stupid. Every game builds upon those that came before them. It's called innovation. It's how creativity works. And WoW built upon many games that came before it.

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 10:44AM Itanius said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It's not about who implemented or developed what magical trick first, it's about comparing your upcoming product to the most popular/successful product currently available. It's a viable marketing strategy regardless of the product.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 10:51AM MrGutts said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

You mean two games right?

Tell me, if you where spending over 100 million dollars in development costs and over 5 years of your life working on a game what MMO would you like to compare with? List me off a a few real MMO's that have been successful.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 3:14PM Integral said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

It's like when every open world game was labeled a "GTA" clone. There was probably also a time when 2.5D first person shooters were called "Doom clones".
I think as the market matures these comparisons will die out.
Reply

Posted: Mar 17th 2011 1:36AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@MrGutts

1. Spend 5 years to develop a brand new game and system...
2. Compare it to a six year old game built on outdated tech for marketing purposes...
3. ???
4. le Profit?

Really now, WoW is an ancient game. It's pretty immature to compare what can be done with brand spanking new systems to WoW's old one that Blizzard have continually had to work around in.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 9:11AM Arkanaloth said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
interesting... that's pretty big talk for a game that isn't going to show up until much much later this year, if this year at all. I won't necessarily disagree with the shopping list feel, after the 2nd or 3rd alt you get used to various zones.. collect all the quest you can... figure out which ones are in similar areas and what they need... and go get them done as swiftly as possible.

It'll be interesting to see if TOR changes things up enough to step beyond this.

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 9:14AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Everything they've released about the gameplay of this game suggests it's going to be like a single-player game that you pay a subscription to. I don't get why there's so much hype around this one.

Not a single one of the gameplay videos is interesting either. Is that why they mostly only release pre-rendered cinematics?

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 9:15AM Greymantle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Funny thing is I have always looked at EA as the evil empire in gaming with Sony taking top dog. Blizzard has done nothing but give me great entertainment over the years so it's hard for me to look at them as the evil empire.

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 10:27PM Tovrin said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Greymantle Hmmm ... funny. I've always thought of EA and Activision as the two evil overlords, constantly vying to outdo each other. In the meantime, Blizzard and Bioware are the two sons, who head out to the pub with each other and have a good laugh at their father's shenanigans.

I think I prefer my imagery. ;-)
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 9:25AM FrostPaw said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I was watching the flashpoint dev walkthrough yesterday and was wondering if the conversations your group has when picking up a quest were mandatory.....on the one hand it would suck to have the rest of the group want to skip through the conversation if you hadn't seen it before on the other it would suck if you do the same flashpoint several times and each time you have to have the conversation.

As for this...yeah. Really wish devs wouldn't talk sh** about other games when discussing their own game. You never see Blizzard talking sh** about anyone. There is significantly more class in just delivering a great game then there is in talking your opponents down in an attempt to make you look good.

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 9:58AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@FrostPaw

I don't see where Bioware/EA is talking sh** anywhere here. They just took a known value (in this case how Blizzard does it's questing) and contrasted it with how they plan on doing it themselves. There is nothing antagonistic about that. The only thing in this article that is antagonistic is the creative way that Jef chose to portray it. Granted Jef may delight in agitating the fan bases more than he should, but this was done really well here so props to him on that.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 9:37AM Greyhame said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
The Star Wars universe lost it's appeal about the same time the prequels came out. At least it did for me. There are much more appealing fantasy and sci-fi universes out there (since Star Wars is a bit of both anyway).

And while Bioware is good at making single player games, I'm not sure if the story part is actually going to be worth it, or if in the end it will feel any different than WoW once you've been through the same content a few times. Plus WoW does have that higher level story (it's part of the quest text), they just don't shove it in your face.

The fact that they seem to be taking the time to get it right (which is what a lot of developers say, but execute to different degrees of success) is a good thing.

As for if it will take some of WoW's players? Sure it will. Will it keep them is the next question. I'm sure some will stay, some will go back, and some will play both.

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 10:06AM Kalec said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@Greyhame I don't know if you have ever played a fully voiced mmo b4, but I can tell you this: There is no comparison between a text base mmo and voice over (for quests). It's like comparing an iPhone (not perfect but popular) with a rock (has nothing in common). This fact alone will retain most if not all players who play the game for the journey not the destination or are very much into the story. For example, if Age of Conan had FULLY voiced over quests, I would have never bought wrath of the Litch King or even Cataclysm.

Second thing: I understand that star wars has lost appeal to some but not all. Most of us understand that the prequels were utter sh@$, and we moved on (at least I did). As a universe Star Wars should in theory be way more compelling through the fact that it has a way more rich background (WoW ain't 2 shabby also) and Bioware are better story tellers than Blizzard (who make a great story, one of the best since Tolkin and then proceed to murder it with every expansion @ WoW)

I hover have my doubts about the game. Attacking WoW directly can only do them harm. Borrowing ideas from WoW is a good thing, always borrow ideas from good games, not bad ones. However introducing the "Holy Trinity" to a space MMORPG is a disaster in my book ... having a super - duper over powered god like light saber wielding blood thirsty maniac that shoots lazors from his eyes and lightning from his fingers ... stand there and be a healbot .... is just ... well it makes me puke!
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 10:15AM Greyhame said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Kalec
To be honest, fully voiced doesn't make something any better at conveying the story than text does to me. I'm perfectly fine getting the story in either form, and one does not make it overly more immersive than the other. I just don't think that voice acting really is something that is so overly appealing and so game changing that it's going to redefine the way the story is told on MMOs.

And yes I realize that Star Wars still has some appeal, but it's honestly not a draw to me. If this had been about 5 years ago, it would be a draw, but now I have a lot of other things that are a lot more appealing as far as sci-fi goes (and I'm one of those who now happens to think that Star Wars isn't really sci-fi).
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 10:27AM Kalec said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Greyhame Well, yes it can be more or less appealing to one person than it is for someone else. But generally speaking (not you or I) voice acting is better than text, it conveys story better and no matter how tired / sleepy you are you can listen to a guy speaking rather than straining your eyes in the middle of the night to read :P

Also voice acting is more immersive. And yeah, star wars isn't rly sci-fi :P
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 10:32AM Greyhame said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Kalec
Eh, I suppose I can't disagree with that. But I also don't think, in the end, that once you've been through the same dialog more than once you're going to be anymore inclined to listen to it again. Kind of like how, when first going through an area, I always read the quest text. Other times? Not so much. Which is the impression I get they are trying to say, that their new method will make people want to listen more than once.

We can agree to disagree on the voice acting thing. Personally, I think it depends on how it's used more than it being there at all.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 11:17AM Tom in VA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Greyhame

I have been playing Bioware's Dragon Age 2 (and enjoying it) and in reading these posts I wondered what effect changing the voice acting to straight text would have on Dragon Age. Basically, it would really damage the game to make it text-only. The voice work adds as much to the game as does a soundtrack, ambient sound, and/or battle sound effects, in my opinion.

I agree with Kalec. While I am unlikely to read quest text over again (if I even bother with it the first time), but good voice work is fun to listen repeatedly, imo. Although I get where you're coming from, I think Bioware's trademark voice work is going to add tremendously to my enjoyment of SWTOR.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 11:40AM Greyhame said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Tom in VA
When I played Dragon Age, I liked the voice acting in combination with the text. But by about the 5th or 6th time through, I just starting skipping most of the cut scenes and some of the character responses. Same with Mass Effect 1 and 2. Why? Because I'd seen them all already, know what they contained, and just wanted to get on with the rest of the story. I find I do the same with quest text. So while voice acting may be nice, I don't see it, in the end, being all that different from actual text, and possibly more annoying. For some it may be a big deal, and it probably will be interesting to see at the start. But like quest text, people will start skipping it.

I honestly just do not think that voice acting is a big as deal as people make it out to be.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2011 2:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@Kalec Hmmm... full voice acting for everything? Jeez, that sounds painful. I disabled the voice acting in Age of Conan because it was tedious listening to it all. Oblivion had full voice acting from what I remember and was a worse game for it. Why the assumption that people want to listen to badly done voice acting instead of reading a few lines of text?
Reply

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW