Slashdot Mirror


Star Wars: the Old Republic Launches

Today marks the official launch of Star Wars: the Old Republic, a new MMOG from BioWare, EA, and LucasArts. The game's population has been building throughout the week as players who pre-ordered were granted early access, but now the gates have been thrown open to everyone. By using the Star Wars universe and a 'story-driven' approach to MMO gameplay, BioWare hopes to draw in a new group of players who don't typically consider themselves MMO gamers. Since the game is still largely unexplored, comprehensive reviews have yet to be written, but Shack News has a write-up about the early game. An article at Eurogamer discusses whether this sort of game launch marks the end of an era for the MMOG industry — the game's budget is estimated to be as high as $100 million, and it relies on a traditional subscription model when many games are making the switch to free-to-play.

36 of 389 comments (clear)

  1. Looks like a good game, but I wont be playin'. by Kenja · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Its going to be too full of Star Wars fans. I learned my lesson from the Sony Star Wars MMO.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:Looks like a good game, but I wont be playin'. by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow, the rare guy who wasn't completely pleased with his Star Wars Galaxies experience.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Looks like a good game, but I wont be playin'. by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Believe me, it wasn't the fans that ruined Galaxies, it was Sony. They drove that property into the fucking ground. The "New Game Enhancements" killed it permanently back in '05, it just took them 6 years to put that final nail in the coffin.

      Sony should never be allowed to touch a fucking MMO again.

    3. Re:Looks like a good game, but I wont be playin'. by idontgno · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your analogy would work perfectly, if you include the necessary bit.

      I won't eat at a restaurant because there are too many slobbering, loud, annoying food fanbois there.

      If you can eat and enjoy yourself without ranting endlessly how the executive chef sold out years ago, complaining about how the lobster shot first, or otherwise being a overzealous and clueless food otaku... then you won't detract from my enjoyment of the restaurant. But if you are, I'll go someplace else. And it's just unfortunate that this particular restaurant franchise has some of the worst customers ever.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  2. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by Kenja · · Score: 4, Informative

    Subscriptions or other revenue generating methods have been traditional since games went multi-player past the point where a server in some guys basement was sufficient. Costs money to run these games, so they cost money to play.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  3. WoW 2.0 by aaronfaby · · Score: 4, Informative

    Played the beta. WoW Improved with lightsabers. Same old borefest. Yes, I know there are companions and mass effect style conversations. Things are slightly different and improved. Yay. Stop pretending it's this awesome new MMO experience. It's not.

    1. Re:WoW 2.0 by dward90 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't understand who you're talking to. It's the best leveling experience I've ever experienced in an MMO. Sure, it's not a completely new genre. If you were looking for something that doesn't play like an MMO, then you were looking in the wrong place. You can downplay the effect that the conversations and story have all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that those elements make leveling feel extremely different from World of Warcraft (unless you spacebar every conversation, in which case you're missing the point of the game).

      What you seem to be saying is that you don't enjoy MMOs. That's a valid opinion, but it's not a valid criticism for this game.

      --
      My other sig is clever.
    2. Re:WoW 2.0 by Moheeheeko · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's the best leveling experience I've ever experienced in an MMO.

      This. I dont even pay attention to my level so much, I just wanna get that sonofabitch who STOLE MY GODDAMNED SHIP.

    3. Re:WoW 2.0 by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Indeed. I've leveled just about every character class in WoW. I can barely remember any of the quests. The only one that comes to mind is the Lolita-like quest between Duskwood and Westfall. Other than that, it was just a bunch of "Collect 6 Bear Pelts" quests with completely uninteresting text thrown in just to say they gave the story telling a try. Leveling was a chore that was to be endured so that you could get a class to end-game.

      SW TOR is different. I literally have no desire at all to do anything at end-game. Raids and such are the last thing on my mind. I just want to quest. Any game that makes questing actually the thing I log in for rather than a penance I must pay to get to the "real" game deserves a nod.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    4. Re:WoW 2.0 by fallen1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      (Some quick background - I beta tested and played SWG until the NGE nerf. I beta tested and played World of Warcraft up until about 18 months ago. I have also played multiple other MMOs including DDO, Ultima, Tabula Rasa, A Tale in the Desert, and so on.)

      It actually IS this awesome new MMO experience, and please stop WoW fanboying by playing down the impact of the fully voiced universe and the fact Bioware has done what Blizzard did - borrowed from the best of in other MMOs and refined it. As dward90 says above, if you're skipping the voiced scenes then you're missing the point.

      It is definitely NOT WoW with lightsabers - I don't see any orcs, goblins, or pandas running around. Oh? You mean it PLAYS like Word of Warcraft somewhat? Yes, it does. In as much as World of Warcraft played like Star Wars Galaxies, and Ultima Online, and Asheron's Call, and the other MMOs that came before it.

      I have been in multiple betas of SWTOR and I have been playing since December 13th of early access. I can tell you now, this game has longevity and inventiveness on its side. It is fresh and new and compelling in ways that other MMOs "walls-o-text" quest/missions are not. It engages you in both your class storyline and in the world at large. It doesn't have the sandbox open worlds of an MMO like Galaxies or an RPG like The Elder Scrolls series, but there are hints that Bioware may be moving that direction as the game grows. The game is great visually and gameplay is engrossing. The mission/gather system is an amazing combination of previous MMOs like Eve and WoW. The crafting system is fairly solid, interesting, useful and will come into its own as more players inhabit the universe and expand the player economy.

      As for the so-called "end game" that hard core players and game sites seem to want to focus on, well, that will be a while in coming for casual gamers like myself (although my main character is level 22 at this time). Those hard core players with no life and a caffeine drip in their veins can probably give you a review in another 5 days or less :-p My hope is that Bioware ignores their outcries when they consume the game inside of 14 days and start looking for something else. Your revenue stream is NOT the hard core players, it is the casual gamers who will play for years on end.

      --

      Dream as if you'll live forever.
      Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
      ~Anonymous~

    5. Re:WoW 2.0 by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So you're tired of the genre, it's like saying you're tired of running around with guns shooting people - well then all FPS games are going to suck for you. I loved Skyrim, but you could say it's exactly the same as almost every other RPG, you got your fighter, mage and rogue skills, same old go into dungeons and beat the crap out of the usual assortment of bad guys and monsters, level up, get better gear and so on. Yay another game with a fireball spell. There's just a limited way of doing things, a lot of things have changed between I played Civilization 1 and Civilization 5 but a lot more stayed the same. It's the same discover technology, found cities, build units and buildings, deal with other nations and all that stuff. Or all the "Tycoon" games, they all more or less work the same even if you're building a roller coaster or a hospital. If you've tired from that basic game play no game is going to satisfy you.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  4. Irking by Jackdaw+Rookery · · Score: 4, Informative

    You see, I'd love to be playing this, but at 60 for the game and 15 a month, that's just too rich for my tastes.

    I think the game itself should be free and downloadable, then charge a monthly fee for the online access. I'm going to wait for the cost of the game to come down :(

    But damn, it's so tempting to buy ...

    1. Re:Irking by bazald · · Score: 3, Informative

      The first month is included, so it would be fairer to say that it's $45 for the game and then $15 per month. There are slightly cheaper 3 and 6 month plans available if you're planning on sticking around.

      --
      Insert self-referential sig here.
    2. Re:Irking by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 4, Insightful

      $60 for a game, then $15 per month vs paying $60 for a game you're done with in a month, so then you're bored and go buy another one at $60. Which is cheaper?

      --
      TODO: Something witty here...
    3. Re:Irking by Stormtrooper42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Do you really have to play games as soon as they're out?

      You could buy them a year (or 2 years) later, when they cost $15.

      It's just a matter of preference. For the same amount of money, would you rather play 1 game all year long, or 10 different games?

  5. Wrong title..... by mseeger · · Score: 4, Funny

    The title doesn't really fit....

    My suggestions:

    - Return of the Grind
    - A new quest
    - The sleep deprivation strikes back

    Yours, Martin

  6. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And fully voiced quest interactions with very good writing.

    I personally burned out on WoW a good while back. Several months before Cataclysm came out I quit playing. When it came out I resubed and leveled one character from 80 to 85, but then quit again shortly thereafter. I've tried many of the free-to-play games, Rift, EVE Online, and many others in the meantime. Nothing grabbed my attention.

    I got early access to SWTOR 5 days ago and have already played at least 15 hours and can't wait to knock off work so I can play again.

    I can honestly say that I see myself leveling at least 1 character of every class to max just to see the quest chains. Its that good.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  7. WoW with lasers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've played beta. I won't be rushing out to buy this. As a previous poster said, it's WoW with Blasters/Light Sabers.

    What a waste of Bioware talent and a Star Wars License. They would've been much better off using the Mass Effect 2 combat system as a basis. Instead, it's no different than the hundreds of WoW like clones out there ... EA wanted this game to cut into WoW... The sad thing is they will succeed because there are millions of people out there willing to play WoW with a Star Wars skin on it.

    I'm disappointed to say the least. I anticipated much more from Bioware. If the game mechanics were anywhere near the quality of the cut scenes, I wouldn't be posting this. There seems to be very few gaming companies ready to break any molds in the MMORPG realm. EVE Online is one of few, and that game came out in 2003.

    Hopefully I'm wrong, and my beta impression was due to limited time in the game. But I fear it's what it is, and what could've been a game I would be playing for years is one I'm just going to pass over.

  8. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 3, Informative

    "This is wow with light sabers"

    No it is not.

    Disclaimer: I have not played the game yet, and my opinion is based on reviews and people who have played the beta.

    World of Warcraft is based on a fantasy world where you can participate in it as time goes by. SWTOR is a world based on YOU. You are the center of attention and the choices you make constantly change the quest tree and storyline. For example you can play single player and the game will be different than if you play in groups according to www.arstechnica.com.

    Another difference is your companion system is very advanced. At level 15 you have your own personal robotic servant too kind of like 3cpo who can help you do your profession gathering, and even your companion can go to the auction house for you and sell things while you are at work. The companions can eventually leave if you have enough dark side points or if you are an ass to them. They can even fill in for a raid while you wait for more players. They are much more than actual pets.

    In essence Wow has more atmosphere and story with much richer environments that seem more realistic (sun, moon, nightime, weather, weeds moving in wind etc) while STWOR is an interactive movie with you as a star where there are no saves and the story keeps changing and so the quests. You can have 2 of the same jedi or sith, and depending on lightside or darkside points you will have different quests. Add that to playing ina guild and you will have 2 more different quest, gear, and talents.

  9. early access by Ogive17 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've had access since last Tuesday. I'm currently at level 24 (out of 50) and so far the story has been enjoyable. It does not feel like a grind, in fact most missions to kill x # of creatures are just bonus quests that you can easily skip.

    The game is not revolutionary and they did take most of the best features from WoW. I really enjoy it.

    Right now the only thing negative I have to say about the game is the artifcial cap they put on every server. Almost every server had a 20+ minute queue to log in during peak hours last week. My brother said he had to wait 10 minutes at 10am this morning to log in. If I have to wait more than a couple minutes I will be raising hell.

    --
    "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
  10. Re:$100M really? by dward90 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Napkin math:

    200 employees (random guess, but my gut says that's a low number)
    x $75k per year (another random guess, but I don't think it's absurd)
    x 5 years in development
    = 75 million. Add in marketing, management, and server costs, and you might be there.

    Oh, and don't forget license fees. I won't speculate on what Lucas is charging them, but I bet it's mindboggling.

    --
    My other sig is clever.
  11. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Informative

    Dont forget the quest chains are always different depending on your choices and lightside vs darkside points. Infact there are lightside and darkside quests too and then they change again if you group a lot with your guild.

    You can have 4 sith inquisitors and will have a completely different story line for each one with dark/light and solo and group alts. Cool stuff

  12. .... and fails. by gweihir · · Score: 3, Informative

    Waiting queues on all early-access servers, up to 1:15 on the German servers at this time despite grand announcements that this will not happen to them. They are also claiming that they increased server capacities today, which, as far as I can tell was either by an insignificant amount or an outright lie.

    I predict that this will either kill Bioware or at least bring them to the brink.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:.... and fails. by Supermike68 · · Score: 3, Informative
      It is estimated that Bioware spent 135M dollars on the development of SWTOR.

      Early estimates put pre-orders at ~3M.

      You don't need to be a mathematician to figure figure out that they will make money off of this title. Thus your prediction is far from correct.

      I for one am impressed with what Bioware has added to an increasingly bloated genre. I know they will continue to do amazing things in the future.

      PS. Turn down the hate.

  13. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by bloodhawk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What a load of crap, as someone that played in 2 of the betas for SWTOR and is in the game now as an imperial agent, "Wow with light sabers and laser guns" is actually a perfect description. The game is much richer in story with a lot more effort put into the quest dialogue and story but apart from that it is a skinned version of wow. It is a nice change but even as a star wars fan I don't think this game will last as the "just another wow clone" syndrome will hit this game hard within a few months.

  14. Re:$100M really? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Funny

    the game's budget is estimated to be as high as $100 million

    What in the world could they have possibly spent that on?

    My guess: 2 Death Stars and franchise rights from Lucas.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  15. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by bmwEnthusiast · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I agree %100. I was in the last beta weekend and logged 10 hours playing to level 15. WoW with lightsabers and blasters and speeders instead of flying horses. Want to know why this game is an epic fail? There is no free space flight. It's all scripted combat on rails. DUMB. The name of the game is called STAR WARS... yet your ability to have a war amidst the stars on your own terms does not exist. I canceled my pre-order shortly after the beta weekend. Will wait for the first expansion that adds free space flight.

  16. Re:I give it 12 months until it's free to play by BaldingByMicrosoft · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Free to play" is a misnomer. It should accurately be "Pay to win" or "Pay to play well regardless of your skill level".

    I hate it. It's a crappy way to do a game, and represents one of the more reprehensible expectations of sociopaths on this planet.

  17. Aimed squarely at children by Snaller · · Score: 3, Informative

    With 20/20 vision and their nose pressed against the screen - as an adult I can apparently get lost - their interface is composed of a font so tiny that I can't read most of it which is a bit of a problem even though quests are spoken, you still need to read stuff... this is where the kids butt in and say you can adjust the chat font size - and I have to compose myself and point out, ITS THE WHOLE DAMN INTERFACE - tooltips, skill trees, subtitles, their 'codex' (and no, you can't just change resolution, they make sure to scale it so it remains at the same visual size regardless of actual resolution)

    You'd think in this day and age the technology to adjust font size wouldn't be totally unheard of? Apparently Biowares programmers feel this is to abstract a concept, or perhaps they only want kids to enter their hallowed halls. The rest can bugger of back to WoW.

    Well ok then.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  18. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by Ubergrendle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    GW1 sold around 7million copies and is now a major franchise. A few things it didn't bring to the table was a persistent, instanced world and large (20+) player 'raiding'. Both of these have been addressed in the sequel that just entered beta testing... and still with no monthly fee.

    SW:TOR bring the RPG back to MMORPG. But I think GW2 has the chance to be truly revolutionary -- it destroys the 'holy trinity' model, no monthly fee, and the graphics and gameplay look to be a substantial improvement over the current generation of 'hotkey' MMOs.

    --
    John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
  19. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think one of the long term players from beta who is a friend of mine put it best.

    "I played the entire early part with my friend. We share start point for our characters, so we can "watch" each other's plot lines. So I walk with the quest giver NPC, and he says "Now that we're finally alone..." and my friend's character is right next to me. Jarring".

    The best question was "so if this truly is MY story, why are there twenty guys who look just like me talking to the same NPCs and doing the same quests?"

    Fact is, you just can't make a good, immersive story about a "hero that stands above the crowd" in an MMO. You have to be one of the masses, and by extension, not really a hero that stands above others. When MMO's pretend it's not so, like TOR and some of the new/remade zones in WoW, it looks silly and breaks immersion in a very bad way.

    Difference is, WoW doesn't hype it up as a major selling point. TOR does, and while it works for people who are experiences with MMOs and don't really expect anything truly new, just an improvement, those who actually do expect something new end up sorely disappointed. Which is what happens to people who believe that TOR is not WoW with lightsabers. Because in the end, under all the extra fluff, there's still going to be twenty guys who have a story largely identical to yours right next to you reminding you that you're not the "hero that stands above the crowd" that game tries to make you believe you are.

  20. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by Kelbear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    MUDs preceded MMOs. They were also by and large F2P.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUD

  21. Actually... by Moraelin · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, as someone who's been there for a week or so now, I can tell you that you can hardly tell. I haven't run into much nerdiness about anything movie-related. If anything, it comes across more like a bunch of KOTOR fans, plus the occasional (and frankly expected) "OMG IT'S WOW WITH GUNS!!!111eleventeen" trolling.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  22. Not really, no by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Also as someone who actually plays it, I think it's inexact. It's like calling Skyrim "Fallout 3 with swords."

    The only similarity to WOW is that both are games in the same genre. So, yes, certain mechanics are going to be shared between the two, by necessity. Some because frankly, they're part of the whole MMO premise, and some because we have a decade and a half of figuring out what players like and what players don't like. In a new game you want more of the former and less of the latter.

    And it's not even a bad thing. We had an attempt at ignoring everything that other MMOs showed that works or doesn't work. It was called Tabula Rasa. Yeah, Lord British thought he's so great that he can simply wipe the slate of everything that had been learned in a decade of MMOs and reinvent everything his way. It wasn't much fun to play for most people who've tried it and it bombed badly.

    And really, most of that stuff isn't even particularly specific to WoW. As someone who's played half a dozen MMOs before, I don't see why I should reduce a whole genre to one game. It's called MMO, not "WoW clone". You could just as accurately say it's Everquest 2 with lightsabers, or City Of Heroes with lightsabers, or, really, whatever.

    The classes for example are not really clones of WoW, suprisingly enough. The companions mechanic is also not very WoW. Actually branching available quests based on what you did before (e.g., alignment) is also not very closely mirroring any WoW mechanic I can think of. Having a choice of how you want to end a quest is also not very WoW-like. Etc. The point is that it's different enough to feel different and interesting, and in the end that's all that matters.

    As for what happens in a few months, meh, nothing is for ever. I bought a game, not entered a marriage and made a kid, you know? If it stops being fun to play in a few months, for whatever reason, I'll move on then. And hey, at that point I will have got a couple of months of fun. Am I right?

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  23. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by osu-neko · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, yes. Guild Wars wasn't designed to be an MMORPG (the creators initially referred to it as a CORPG -- "cooperative (or competitive) online RPG"). Everyone mistook it for and insisted upon calling it an MMO anyhow, and eventually they stopped attempting to correct people. But yes, in terms of gameplay, it was all instanced -- they basically took the "chat rooms" of Diablo II Battle.net realms and moved them in-game into cities, but it was otherwise like D2 realm play -- you left the city and were in your own instance of the zone with only your teammates, and possibly a few enemy teams if it was PvP. There was no persistent world. At the end of the day, it was no more an MMO than Diablo II Battle.net realms had been an MMO, because that was the model they were basing it on. It should be noted that they released just shortly after WoW. They had no idea just how popular the MMO market was going to become, and thus it's understandable why they weren't planning on making one to begin with. GW2 is basically their attempt to take their ideas and making an actual MMO out of them -- it's probably what GW would have been if they'd realized an MMO was the way to go.

    As for the trinity effect, the gameplay in GW won over every similar game I've tried precisely because there were no tanking per se. It was pretty much impossible for one character to draw everyone's aggro (there are no "aggro" skills in the game), nor any characters suited to the role of simply soaking damage while everyone else dishes it out safely. Tanking in that sense simply doesn't exist in the game. They still had and needed healers, but short of body blocking there was no real way to keep creeps off the "squishies" -- the usual tactic for protecting healers and caster was to block and try to delay enemies reaching them, and when that inevitably failed, to simply quickly kill whatever was attacking them. It did help that Warriors had the highest consistent DPS, rather than the lowest as in the case in games where proper tanking exists, and as such could usually hold an enemy's attention once they got it, but since all battles were basically group on group, that wasn't of huge value.

    --
    "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  24. Re:So, when did subscriptions become traditional? by Xugumad · · Score: 4, Informative

    Okay, I brace yourself not to laugh, but I've gone back to the MUD FAQ...

    "Because of their size and their constant computational activities, servers can be extremely CPU-intensive and can even be crippling to any other work done on that computer. Even if they're not CPU-intensive, most MUDs can take up a fair amount of disk space - anywhere from 10 to 90 megs, which could impact the other users on the machine. Do not ever run a MUD server on a machine illicitly or without express permission from the person responsible for the machine. Many universities and companies have strict policies about that sort of behavior which you don't want to cross. "

    - http://www.mudconnect.com/mudfaq/mudfaq-p2.html#q9

    The point being, when MUDs were the main form of multiplayer online gaming, they were not trivial in hardware requirements.

    And yes, I'm sure your mouse does have more storage than that these days...