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

Reader Comments (55)

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 12:37PM NeoWolfen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nice write up Larry

Couldn't you just toggle off corso's Grapple ability Larry? Wasn't that there big thing about customising companion control? Or was that not implemented yet in the build you tested?

also with regard to UI layout, how many action bars can be added? are they all stuck in the centre to the primary or can we detach them and move them horizontally and vertically about the screen? Just "HOW MUCH" customisation of UI is "some parts"?

enquiring minds wish to know :)

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 2:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@NeoWolfen

Yes, he could have disabled that companion ability, guess he didn't expand the companion's bar to see that ability.

There are 4 action bars. By default only one is displayed at the bottom of the screen and you can scroll between the 4 available. The bottom action bar can be expanded to 2 rows and 1 row can be added to the left and right of the screen. If you display all for bars then you cannot scroll between them on the main bar.

The one thing related to bars that I am minorly disappointed in is that if you display 2 bars at the bottom your main bar is at the top and cannot be moved to the bottom. This is an issue for me as I like to map my secondary bar to F1-F12 and it is confusing when the bars are not arranged in the same manner as the keyboard.
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 4:01PM Brianna Royce said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) Larry specifically mentions this functionality: "All the Smugglers I talked to in beta turned off Corso's grapple ability as soon as they figured out how to pull up the companion toolbar."
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 4:29PM NeoWolfen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Brianna Royce

My query was in the form of a question Bree not a dig. I was asking why he couldn't toggle it off. I.e did he play an earlier build or some such.

It just struck me as odd that if his companion was doing something to cause problem and that a means to resolve that existed, which he knew about why didn't/couldn't he use the same reoslution.

Would seem to have been the easier option, as opposed to having the companion cuase issues with it over and over.
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 5:47PM gamegamerson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

this is how i map them also, and it was just a matter of remapping the "1,2,3..." to the bottom bar and same for the top bar. Easy fix.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2011 1:12AM Mystal said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@NeoWolfen He indicated within the article that it could be toggled off, so I don't really know why you'd be asking unless you just have a hard time understanding plain English or something.

In any case, toggling off an ability because it cripples you, when each companion is specific to a single class, is an indicator of poor design. Maybe it's only intended to be used if you solo as a healer, and use the ranged tank, because as a DPS it's obviously pretty terrible to even have.
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 12:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Awesome article Larry, can't wait to see how the game develops as time goes on. You and I had pretty much the same experience

Posted: Oct 22nd 2011 1:20AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)

Yeah, I was worried a bit about the game before I got into the beta. I liked the beta so I decided to give the game a try.
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 12:44PM Cendres said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nicely written. I would like to say more but cannot until full NDA lift, just wanted to say I appreciate your fair view of the game.

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 12:46PM Lucidus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Chapter one of the smuggler is good because it really tries to invest you emotionally into it, although the end is nowhere as good as it should have been. Chapter two... sucks.

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 12:47PM CheesecakeBandit said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't like the look of the interface much myself, but from what they said they have plans to open it up and allow mods after they get the base hammered out, so it shouldn't be a permanent issue(although it would be nice if it went in live), I would really like to move the health and resource bars closer to your character on screen so that even if you have to focus on the interface you can at least see your character.

I get the feeling some of the stories share some of the issues that a lot of books have where they start out giving too much information making it wordy and rather boring, but getting better later. Thankfully you can skip dialogue if it starts taking too long.

As far as the crafting goes, I never liked the idea of spending half an hour to queue up crafting for overnight. You essentially make the game run on autopilot and that isn't fun for me. I didn't like it in Fallen Earth and I don't think IPs make it any better.

I am still looking forward to this game but hopefully they listen to direct feedback about the interface since you can't tell those problems with the numbers and statistics they like to use.

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 12:52PM SiML said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, read both accounts;

Kinda sounds like an OMG (Online Multiplayer Game) - perhaps I should look at this as just that; an OMG KoTOR 3-10.

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 2:09PM bobfish said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@SiML

That is how I'm treating it. I'll play it through largely single player, interacting with others when I feel like it.

It will be the first time I play an MMO solo, but I think it is the best way to do it with SWTOR, at least for the storyline quests.
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 4:16PM Seldra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@bobfish
That's how I plan to play this game as well.
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 4:21PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@SiML It's a themepark MMO. You'd come closest if you treat it like WoW post-Cataclysm or like AoC or LotrO, a themepark MMO but with story invested questing in it, in the line of AoC's and LotrO's story quests but with a larger and richer abundance of it.
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 8:03PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@SiML Yep. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but just another multiplayer game that I see myself liking the journey, but not worth a subscription.
Reply

Posted: Oct 21st 2011 1:42AM Bhima said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@SiML

Yep, if you are going to treat it like a single player RPG, you'll have fun for the most part (the VO and story are fantastic).. except for those parts where you HAVE to do the monotonous side quests just so you can keep your level in line with your story quest. Oh and you'll have to pay a subscription for that KotoR III experience.
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 12:54PM nimzy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Crew skills were interesting... and not. I found crafting to be a somewhat trying experience -- items on par with quest rewards, with optional methods to improve their stats (and that portion of crafting is a whole other kettle of fish) that you will probably grow to loathe if you were ever an alchemist, enchanter, or engineer in late-game WoW. Let's not forget how much time it takes your crew to complete their tasks, either.

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 1:11PM KorbenDallas said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
This 4 pillar nonsense for a mmo is actually derived from a single player rpg in an attempt to give the term mmo something meaningful, when massively-multiplayer is non-existent in its’ game-play. Combat, exploration, and progression & story; there is “nothing” massively-multiplayer” about those pillars!

So, thanks for confirming, again, Larry, that this game has shown, yet again, to NOT being a MMORPG. Heh - just continuously saying something is so, doesn’t disguise its' reality. . .its’ reality as a MORPG [multiplayer-player online rpg] / CORPG [cooperative online rpg] of 100’s of players gaming simultaneously on the same server for single-player achievements and 4-team instanced play, based on all the reveals from Bioware.

Again, no demonstrated or video evidence this there is anything “massively” about this game, other than the spin-zone on the panel parroting that it is by being able to host 100's of players simultaneously on a server as they, the players we assume, will complete single-player quests while shouting in chat "lfg for a 4-player instance".

Erickson did clearly admit recently that there will be more cooperative team-based instanced content at launch than any other supposed mmo, which is actually CORPG game-play. And I wonder if his “puzzle-heavy” comment isn’t more deception or spin for lack of content.

None-the-less, Bioware’s definition of PvP is akin to a shallow lobby-system third-person shooter, as World of tanks is, but with fewer team members I bet. From what we’ve seen…perhaps 10 vs 10. And Bioware still can’t say anything about “massively-multiplayer” open-world content that has large-scale meaningful cooperative and competitive objective-based territorial control game-play with any confidence, because it doesn’t exist, I bet, otherwise they would have shown it.

So yea. . .all evidenve points to being introduced to a heavily scripted cinematic single-player game experience in a multiplayer server for $15/month.

Sure, the apologists will bang the solo-rpg pve / lobby-system third-person shooter capture the flag themepark drum as their entertainment nirvana, juxtaposed to the actual sterilization and dumbing-down of the mmorpg meaning. But the best definition, following hours of viewing past and recent videos, combing through all the reveals, and seeing answered the same regurgitated questions that have been asked and answered in the past, is that Bioware’s interpretation of massively-multiplayer is not about community-centric large-scale engaging, interactive, cooperative and competitive organic game-play necessarily, but about being in a way-station lobby with our avatars “looking” for another 3 players to play along-side with in an instanced flashpoint.

So, yea, a MORPG / CORPG. Bioware still can’t demonstrate a keystone massively-multiplayer element, of which world pvp is, aside from giving one the impression that it is WoW’s Wintergrap 2.0. This while ~70 of box purchasers of other pve heavy, solo-independence themepark, supposed mmorpg’s, have historically unsubscribed from about every other multiplayer online game, within 6-months, following launch of those games over the last several years. Maybe that’s all Bioware wants; their own niche audience. That's cool.

But 100% of the game-play revealed and demonstrated, 2-months from launch, is either single-player rpg-esque or cooperative party play, which appears to be heavily instanced shoe-box 10 vs 10 capture the flag and control points, in addition to 4-player Flashpoints.

I’d like to be proven wrong, though I’ll still enjoy a well produced Single-Player / CORPG in a multiplayer environment as much as the next person, though not for $15/month for a prolonged period of time.

Posted: Oct 20th 2011 1:39PM hereafter said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@KorbenDallas

tl;dr
It's not your cup of tea.

But I do have to question this vague definition of MMORPG. If WoW could be considered an MMORPG, the TOR can be as well. It's massive (1000s of players on a given server), it's multiplayer, it's online and it's an RPG. I agree that there's room for more player choice and modifiable game worlds, but then that's the downside of the themepark model.
Reply

Featured Stories

The Daily Grind: I'll miss you, Vanguard

Posted on Jul 31st 2014 8:00AM

Leaderboard: Which dead MMO is your favorite?

Posted on Jul 30th 2014 12:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW