How SW:TOR is a major step BACKWARDS for MMOs

[CheckD3]

I only read the bold part, I want to post in some topics and get something before class, but I will say this. You can't judge a game based on the concept of ideas without being able to see them executed in the final context of the game.

Just as Roger Ebert's claims of video games aren't art is dismissed by us because he won't pick up a controller, so to is the claim of anything being bad w/o giving it a shot. A friend of mine won't give Rocky Horror a chance because she says she knows her viewing likes. However, she recently learned something she liked that she thought was gross or she would never do or have done because of personal reasons, but ended up liking it.

Context is an important thing here, it helps defining the ideas, good ideas in bad context can make the idea pure crap, but a bad idea that's used in a good context and make it shine bright and make it look good. Don't judge a game by it's art blurbs lol. That's what books get for being so un-interactive, lol

 

[wadark]

(For TL;DR, skip to the bolded section)

The foundation of "role playing" has been (and will always be) taking ownership of a tiny piece of a virual world--whether it was on paper, tabletop, or a computer screen. The developer/GM/etc presents you a world, usually built on a familiar IP, and you create a character that will be your eyes and hands in this world. Already, you OWN a piece of the game world, as your "you" is now a part of it.

MMORPGs were the logical outgrowth of roleplaying + technology. They allowed the characters you created to step into a much larger and more populated world. The particularly good games even allowed you to leave a footprint in that virtual world (in the form of player housing). For all intents and purposes, your character, your house, your "class" or "profession," were all about YOUR choices and YOUR story.

Single-player RPGs evolved (or de-volved) long ago into more of a character "rental" than creation. Your job is to take an extant character through a strictly laid-out story. It's much more playing with action figures than being an action hero. You don't really own anything in the story.

So, single-player RPGs were a combination of early roleplaying ideas (improving your character over time, specialization of characters, etc) and standard single-player action games. I'd argue, in fact, that that's what they are--action games, no more "roleplaying" than Mario.

MMOs were, in a sense, the opposite. They took elements of video games (graphical avatars, internet connectivity, etc) and combined them with the best elements of tabletop games: character creation, self-determination, and freedom. The game had a framework in which to operate, but it also presented you the tools to make your OWN story.

Enter BioWare.

At first, everyone was so excited about SW:TOR partly because they heard so many of the original SWG Devs had moved to the project (SWG being a landmark MMO, pre-NGE, in terms of the freedom to create your own character and story, no matter how heroic OR mundane you preferred him/her to be). But as more and more info is released, TOR is revealing itself to be the exact OPPOSITE in spirit of what made SWG great in its day.

(By the by, SWG is still great for all the same old reasons. The class system is limiting, yes, but there is still a lot to do in-game besides killgrindkill. Housing, intense crafting, beast mastery, etc.)

First and foremost, TOR is going with the same old class system as every other game. It boils down to DPS, tank, healer, support. Just with Star Wars flavoring. And within each class, two separate (talent) trees. Nothing new there. And that's where the bad news gets worse. As more details come to light, we have learned the following "features" are little more than roadblocks to the freedom MMOs once promised:

1) "The game will be story-driven, and your choices will affect your destiny!" - Great, so that means each situation will boil down to one of three choices (aggressive, defensive, or passive, basically). You can either be a dick, a saint, or a gray blob in the middle. But what's more, it means your character is not YOUR character. It is one of a select handful of pre-made characters that you will rent. And when in these games has it ever really been the BEST idea to "mix and match," rather than go all one way or the other? SACRIFICES CHARACTER FREEDOM.

2) "The game will be fully voice-acted." - So you can't even decide what your character says or how he/she says it. The game will be giving you a script and voice. And, due to the expense of such projects, expect the selection of voices (if there are any) to be extremely limited. It might be that your character gets no voice at all (silent protagonist syndrome) which, to me, is better than being forced into a pre-made voice. SACRIFICES CHARACTER FREEDOM.

3) "You can choose from one of these iconic professions!" - So all smugglers will be expected to behave in X way with personality Y, because that's how Han did it. All Bounty Hunters will be X, Y, and Z, because that's how Fett did it. This is exactly what the NGE did to RUIN SWG. SACRIFICES CHARACTER FREEDOM.

4) "You'll get companion characters to will add spice and variety to your gameplay!" - This one actually sounded GREAT... until we found out that EVERYONE gets the same companion based on his/her class. Yes, ALL smugglers will not just have A wookiee companion (like Han!), they'll have the SAME wookiee companion. You don't even get to pick the name. SACRIFICES CHARACTER FREEDOM.

5) "You'll get your own ship, which you can use to travel or complete missions!" - Again, sounded great... until we found out that you get the same ship as everyone else in your class AND that all space missions play out like Starfox as rail- or arena-style episodes. You can't choose your ship, and you can't choose where it goes. SACRIFICES CHARACTER FREEDOM.

Any ONE of these could put a game on shaky ground... but to do all of them at once? This puts SW:TOR firmly in the realm of an action/adventure game that happens to have online co-op. It's not an MMORPG. It's just a big single-player rent-a-character game for which they'll be expected a subscription fee. BioWare has a lot of strengths. It is unfortunately bringing all of the wrong strengths to this MMO.

(A bit more on what made SWG great, for a Star Wars-oriented comparison):

a) Skill choices, instead of hard classes. You could be a cook AND a bounty hunter, if you wanted. You could be a smuggler AND a medic. You could double up on combat or on crafting if you chose. You decided what you wanted your character to be able to do, and you BUILT a class around it.

b) The sheer variety of non-combat activities. Crafting (including a bajillion types), Entertaining (dancing, music, AND image designing), Housing (decorating structures, constructing player cities), Player-driven economy (if it existed, someone somewhere made it). You could play for years, really and truly playing, and never pick up a blaster.

c) Even combat had a ton of variety. Pistols, rifles, carbines, big melee weapons, small melee weapons, no melee weapons, stealth, traps, etc.

d) You didn't have to be the "hero of the galaxy." You could just be a dude living in the Star Wars universe. You could if you wanted... or you could become an economic powerhouse... or just that guy with a really, really cool house. You decided how "epic" your character was.

I don't disagree with you about ToR, but I do about SWG. All of those things sound good when you say them in that context, but look at them from a different perspective and "what made SWG great" may not have actually done so.

Having total Character Freedom in an MMO is all well and good but it tends to drop the gameplay on its head in favor of all-out roleplaying. The problem being that if you leave every nuance up to the player than you have potentially thousands of combinations of skills and abilities. And someone, somewhere is likely to come up with one combo that dominates the game's PvE and/or PvP aspects.

I think we've kinda moved past the era of a simple black/white statement like "more is better". A "bajillion" is a nice number (figuratively speaking) to brag about in a blurb but it also generates the EVE problem of having such a massive number of gameplay nuances that a newbie is going to have a very hard time getting in, and will probably quit early on because the game is impenetrable.

At the end of the day, and this happens in almost every MMO to some degree, there are people who forsake the entire "game" part in favor of having COMPLETE customization, which may be fun for a time but, at least in my eyes, turns the game into a glorified chat room/Second Life kind of software, instead of a game.

Yes when you say, "Oh ToR is lame because you can't customize outside of a set class structure" or something, it sounds like ToR might be worse of for it. But in reality some of those customization options have to be nixed in order to create a balanced game. Its also worth noting that every customization option that gets added takes time to develop and if a developer doesn't think that such a feature will be used by a significant portion of their player-base, then they are going to want to spend that time on a feature they DO think will be widely used.

 

[Sir_Tor]

Are you saying this game is turning over to the dark side?

 

[Delusibeta]

It's a bit like complaining that Guild Wars 2 will have micro-transactions. Oh, wait, we don't know that.

 

[Nazulu]

Don't be so harsh on a game you have not played yet. Chill out, if you don't like it don't buy it.

His criticising for the fun of it and saying to avoid it is pointless, it doesn't solve anything for anyone.

While I can see your point, the fact that you called Morrowind, and hell, even Oblivion, (RPGs) the same as Mario, of all things, has led me to stop caring for said points.

So you can see his points but don't care anymore because your personally offended? It's like saying you understand them but no longer want to understand them.

Indeed, true, people do get a bit too excited on both sides. However, I find looking forward to a game a bit different then tearing up a game you've never even played. Like I said, it's fine to say 'yeah, I'm not looking forward to it, these are my reasons, etc.' or 'I can't wait for this game, it LOOKS (key word there) great, here are my reasons, etc.'. The problem for me comes when people hear stuff like the fact you can't play an elf or dwarf in the new Dragon Age and instantly shrug it off as them 'dumbing down the game' and such. I'm just saying a game should neither be praised nor torn apart until the product is actually out and playable, I capitalized 'LOOKS' for a reason. Because that's all you're doing, LOOKING at the game, so how do you have any idea how it's going to play? Pre-determined reviews of games make no sense to me haha.

Actually, I find it healthy to criticise or praise idea's before hand because the developer knows what people are looking forward to and everyone get's the idea of what is going to happen. Overall, I found this thread pretty useful.

I don't necessarily agree with the OP that this is a step backwards but I don't see how this is going to work out either, like what happens when you reach the end? Do you simply stop playing or does it turn out like WOW, taking on raids and rewards? Little things like that.

 

[Tyrannowalefish_Rex]

This is all nice, but it's not universal. Subjective experiences may vary. There is good reason to say that immersing in a different role is more playing a role than just adapting to an open ruleset while basically keeping the same personality.
Also what SW:TOR is basically doing is more like improving the average quality of the quests (though most of them will still be a generic waste of time). There is still enough choice, only the world itself has more restrictions, not your character's own story.

 

[The Bandit]

at least to give it a chance before calling it out on being the anti-christ

Step in the wrong direction, albeit huge. Not the anti-christ. The problem is that everyone is hailing it as the Messiah, so calling it any less SEEMS like calling it the anti-christ.

I'm quoting this because I'm too lazy to snip your OP.

First off, are we really talking about innovation in the MMO genre? Really? The fact that this MMO is in space, rather than generic fantasy land, is mind bogglingly innovative.

As for your main five points, only two of them are provable (the companion characters and the space nonsense). And even one of those is kind of wrong. I'm pretty sure you can choose where your ship goes (i.e. which planet). If you wanted to explore the entire galaxy, then you really need to chill out. Expectations like that are so insane they aren't even worth acknowledging.

As for the rest:

1. How is this different from any other RPG ever? Ever ever ever? Not to mention the fact that this is a Star Wars game (remember those light and dark side things?), so expecting variety is a little unrealistic. KOTOR II added the most gray areas of any SW game before it, and everyone fucking hated the thing. So, there you go.

Even though I agree with you that it will boil down to x or y choices (there are no passive choices in SW, seriously, so you're actually being a little optimistic), the game isn't even out yet, so criticizing it for that is just making up your mind before you see it. It's like me saying all JRPGs will suck and will always suck, no matter what happens to the genre (which they will).

2. I honestly don't know if your PC will be voice acted, as in Mass Effect. I don't think this is a negative thing though. The awkward silences whenever your PC says something has always been awkward in every RPG ever. But, that's just my opinion, so there's no point in arguing over it.

As for a script, unless you can't choose your dialog (again, I don't know if you can or not, but Jesus Christ, why wouldn't you be able to?) then every RPG ever has had a script. Again, no difference. If you aren't able to pick your responses, then I'll change my mind and agree with you 100%. But, once again, you're criticizing before you see the game. You do not know how the selection of voice actors will work, so stfu.

3. Actually, no. That's completely wrong. They've mentioned that you can actually have a light side character that starts out as a Sith, or vice versa (and, from my understanding, it's not "you come to the light side" but you are actually a good guy that's being trained as a Sith, which I think is awesome). I don't know if this will play into non-Jedi classes, but I would assume so (maybe a bounty hunter working for the Republic?).

4. Yeah, that's bullshit. How effing retarded.

5. They can't design a separate ship for everyone. Ideally, you would have your own ship customizer similar to the character creator, but whatever. Stuff like that doesn't bother me. It is a legitimate complaint for those that care.

I think your judgments are really, really premature, dude. Just chill out and wait for more info

Also, "sacrifices character freedom" is really fucking obnoxious and I wish you would stop saying it.

Also also, I would've read everything you said if you hadn't suggested I just read the bold. Next time, I wouldn't bold things. Just my two cents.

EDIT: "...awkward silences have always been awkward." I should proof read.

 

[Keava]

*snips to conserve the virtual rainforests*

Oh believe me i am always level headed, i just speak what i actually think instead pretending to like people, both online and in real life. When i see someone 'complain' how game mechanics that are created for consistency of core gameplay and to allow 'casuals' a seamless experience are somehow making -roleplaying- impossible i will judge, and i will be merciless in my judgement. Bullshit is still bullshit even if you draw a happy face on it.

I read the website, i wasn't really impressed, sounds to me like another attempt of political correctness over the internet, something i refuse to follow. There is a difference between critique and simple moaning/complaining. Critique is based on facts, uses arguments and provides solutions, it explains and exposes flaws so that they can be avoided in future and takes context into account.
Problem is the OP misses the context, comparing a -product- like TOR to a 'vision' of a 'perfect game' in his head. Whenever you create something, a toaster, a car or a game you first think - who i want to sell it to. When you design a van it's obvious you are not thinking about street racing in the first place. In case of game, with such high budget you plan it so it appeals to as big crowd as possible, which means cutting on features that only 'hardcore' fans of given genre might desire.

BioWare in their design philosophy is very similar to Blizzard, whenever you consider it as good or bad thing. They know their playerbase, they know the market trends and they move within those bounds. Neither of them is exactly innovative when it comes to the core gameplay, but if you like the type of games they are making you will rarely be disappointed in the products they offer.
TOR is still probably the most innovative big budget MMO of last years (since WoW's release) because they attempt to make it based on an story that is actually tied to your character instead being just a buzz in a background. AoC tried it on small scale and as far as i know Tortage was considered one of best MMO starting zones even with it's limits, instancing and other issues. If TOR manages to get that feeling and additionally expand on freedoms within game then it will be a step forward.

You know why the sentiment of all old MMO players - UO - never got remade with our current generation of computers? Because back then the market was niche, there were only 'hardcore' players and 100k subscription was a massive amount. In UO you had to spend hours doing mundane tasks, often simply macroing them as you read a book to get anywhere. Now you have games played by 10 millions of people from which most doesn't really want something like UO. They want something they can have fun in, something you can turn on, relax for half an hour or more and go to sleep knowing you made some visible progress. That's exactly what WoW did right.

 

[ArmorArmadillo]

I agree with pretty much everything, except for the step backward part. MMOs are already there. WoW can go on forever about customizable skill trees and oodles of unique gear and story-rich quests, but anyone who actually plays it will find that their 80s get one choice to remain competitive, everyone has to look up and use the same talent trees, everyone gets to wear the same collections of spikes and skulls 80 purple heroic gear, everyone gets to hunker down and press 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 3.

MMOs used to be loser and have unique play styles, anyone remember Ultima Online and the fun of being able to build anything from a mage or a chef or anything in between by allocating a pool of points between a variety of skills?

Story is great and all, but as long as MMOs continue to press to be treadmills like WoW they'll stay in the same standardized sea of conformity.

 

[spartan231490]

It seems you value your character and freedom with that character most in RPGs. I personally value the stats and min/max features of my RPGs, especially MMOs. Honestly couldn't care less if my character has a voice, or if his "role playing choices" are limited. Give me lots of talent and customization options for combat, professions, that sort of thing and I'm a happy camper.

This is more or less how I feel, however, to a certain extent i agree with you, rpg's need a little more freedom, but too much is a hindrance. I've nevere beat oblivion dispite weeks of gameplay time just becuase i have enough freedom to run around and kill bandits/goblins all the time and power level my character through side quests.

 

[Acidwell]

Hmm to be honest with you you don't seem to have researched your main tl;dr points too well but anyway aside from that:

1. You say bioware has many strengths and hasn't brought any of them to the game. I think you are forgetting that biowares main strength is story.
You know that one thing that they have been praised for in every rpg they have ever made.

2. how exactly will adding said story remove freedom? It just means that everything you do will actually mean something in your version of the game.

3. You are soooo concerned about freedom just answer one question: Do people play games so that you have a different experience to everyone else? I don't know anyone who does, everyone i know plays games so that they can have something to talk about and/or experience a different world. Does you enjoyment of a game lessen the more sales it makes?

4. You are playing a Star Wars rpg and you are giving out about the professions???????
It would never make sense playing as a warlock/hunter/night elf/druid/paladin in the star wars universe, same way a jedi in wow would be stupid(but awesome). So if you dont want to be something from star wars play another game.

5. How unique exactly do you think your level 80 night elf druid is? Its not but well done for being fooled into thinking it is. There are only certain builds of every character that are used throughout rpgs and its always the best one people go for.

6. Same point for space craft, in eve every player starts with the same ship and there are certain ships everyone buys same a point 5 but in a space context.


Tl;Dr: Basically every mmo has story and its always the same for everyone.
And your character isnt as unique and doesnt have as much freedom as you think, its just other mmos trick you into believing this.

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

You want total freedom? Go play a tabletop RPG. We don't have the technology to mimic true freedom the kinds that you get in a table-top RPG in a timely and cost-effective fashion.

And while you talk about restricting of freedom, I can see where you are coming from. You are somewhat limited to the storyline of the game. But at least in TOR your actions will have effects. The story progresses according to how you played. In WoW that doesn't happen. No matter what elaborate backstory you gave your character, no matter how you talked with other players, in the end the quest givers are going to give you the same quests, in the same manner, just like everyone else. The roleplaying didn't really effect the setting at all. In TOR how you act towards other characters will matter.

Your getting upset by the fact that you are being forced to travel down a somewhat narrow hallway that will occasionally branch off into other somewhat narrow hallways. Which seems limiting at first, but then look at the other choice. You get to travel down a wide and spacious hallway- that never changes and is the same for every other person.

I'll admit, playing a game that gave you true freedom would be amazing. But right now we simply can't make a game like that. It's like getting upset that we haven't invented fly cars yet.

 

[cannot_aim]

I'm to lazy to quote exactly what I think is wrong with the OP's statement, which would probably be most of it, but I will give my 2 cents on this.

If you have ever played a single player rpg you will notice that, at least in recent years, the story is much more open ended and you will almost always become attached to your character because you are making the choices and bending the story around your personality.

In an MMO you are a small piece of a huge world and your personal interactions are always scripted one way and only one way. You have no way to change the story and you don't make any choices besides which race/class you want to be.

MMO's and single player RPG's are both good for very different reasons. MMO's are great for going out with a buch of friends and raiding or stomping on some newbs in pvp. Single player RPG's are great because they give you a more in depth story that you can change and interact with.

Also SW:TOR looks fucking sweet.

 

[Therumancer]

(For TL;DR, skip to the bolded section)

.

As perhaps the reigning king of TLR on "The Escapist" I read all of that and will respond. I just hope I remember it all.

On the subject of the upcoming Star Wars MMO I think your over reacting to some of it. I do not think what they plan on doing is giving players any less freeom or control than other MMOs. In the major MMOS like "World Of Warcraft", "Everquest", or many others they all have very limited quest lines. A common criticism is the whole portayal of your PC as "the epic hero" doing all these great deeds, while there are forty million other people (literally) all doing the same exact quests who are also "the epic hero" as far as the storylines are concerned.

As I understand things, "Old Republic" is simply voicing the quest lines, which are still in the same style as other MMOs. As far as having profession specific plots, games like World Of Warcraft, and Age Of Conan had these also, they were fairly basic, and I see no real harm to having more and longer class based quests, it would certainly encourage people to try all the differant characters to see the various storylines.

Overall what I have heard here seems to be par for the course. They aren't regressing anything, they are simply adding voice and more cinematics to what MMOs are doing already. Even the cinematics aren't anything really new as the last final fantasy game had them too at certain points, and World Of Warcraft added them in for things like the Wrathgate quest line finale, and when a raid group strikes down Arthas.

Simply put, the technology does not exist for a game to spontaneously generate unique epic content for millions of players at the same time, it would be nice of course, but it's simply not possible to do. Indeed I'll also argue that in most PnP RPGs you don't see that either as most GMs plan out adventures beforehand and the players have a lot of freedom, but still act within the contraints of the scenario. Some GMs ad-lib everything all the time, but that's far from being the norm. Indeed you'll notice a lot of Adventure modules out there, and they are a mainstay of a lot of the gaming that takes place, and to be frank while there might be some differances in the specifics and how certain thigns are done or in what order, one group's adventure through say "Desert Of Desolation" is going to cover much the same ground as another. Oh sure one group might have had a clever idea that eluded most others, or another group might fail some rolls and get massively sidetracked due to traps, another might negotiate with the dervishes, while others might say "Your god is dead, we've come to loot your vault!" and just kill everyone in the place. It's stil fundementally the same adventure though. While MMOs by their nature can't give the same range of options or be anywhere near as reactive as a real GM, they do a passable job given their limitations. This is also incidently why I think MMOs will never entirely replace PnP RPGs (at least until someone develops much better VR technology, or AI GMs who spontaneously generate content as needed). They have reduced the market as you've probably seen, but like many other things that have cut back on PnP RPGs they haven't actually killed it.

As far as the other aspects of the game goes, I do tend to think that the reveals on the space elements, and the NPC companions were a big let down.

With the Space elements I can sort of understand since to have dynamic play in space would basically involve desigining a whole sperate game. Sort of like stacking Anarchy Online and EVE on top of each other or whatever. That's cool, and I'd like to see someone do that, but we're basically talking about them developing two entirely differant, but linked MMOs. The time, development, and manpower would be huge, especially if they are only charging a fee for it being one game. There are practical concerns here, and I can appreciate them.

With the NPC companions though, I agree they are being REALLY sloppy. While "Star Trek Online" has tons and tons of problems, it does have a need dymanic where it generates crew members for you and you can bring your own little party with you on adventures (as lame as those adventures might be). While fundementally the same... such as your special edition Borg Bridge Officer being just like everyone else's, you can name them and adjust the graphics a bit, and decide which uniform pieces to put them in. I for example had my crew running around dressed like they were from the Mirror Universe Terran Empire (and snickering at the horrible, horrible beating any universal consistincy was taking by this). If they are going to have NPC companions, I see no practical reason why they had to go the way they did.

As far as the voice acting itself goes, I don't think it's any worse than any other MMO in that the plots are going to resolve more or less the same way. I mean face it, quests have to be scripted in these games to begin with. The most jarring aspect of it is going to be if there is only one voice actor for each gender/class, which would just be sloppy, especially seeing as "Saint's Row 2" demonstrated that you can have differant voices as part of character customization, by just having differant people read the same script in slightly differant ways.

I have my own problems with this game (which I won't get into here, since this long enough) but overall I expect it to be a good MMO, and perhaps the one that will successfully erode some of WoW's player base. I don't think it will "kill" WoW (as in take enough players to shut it down) but might divide the player base somewhat.

That said I don't expect it to be some radical re-invention of the whole MMORPG genere. Like every product it's hyped that way, but that's all it is. Simply put technology hasn't progressed far enough for anything to change radically. A lot of the most annoying conventions about gaming exist because there is no practical way to do otherwise, especially if you don't expect everyone to always have the latest and most bleeding edge technology availible to play with as a toy.


such are my thoughts.

 

[Starke]

edit: Whoops, I confused myself. Never mind.

You can haz cookie? In fairness there's a threshold where a game goes from presenting role-playing choices and moralistic choices. Bioware tends to fall hard on the later while a fair amount of games (particularly Troika and Black Isle) lean towards the former. There's no reason this can't be on a wheel (Alpha Protocol does this more or less), but I'm not aware of a good clear explanation of this.

snip, because there is no way I am reposting that iron wall of text

there is no reason to start a flame war like this, organize your arguments so that you can summarize them cleanly and to the point, rather than murder another thread.

Oh god, if I could murder threads through the internet, I'd have much more important places to be. There's a difference between being snide and insinuating and starting a flame war. I tend towards the former rather than the later.

 

[Nazulu]

Oh believe me i am always level headed, i just speak what i actually think instead pretending to like people, both online and in real life. When i see someone 'complain' how game mechanics that are created for consistency of core gameplay and to allow 'casuals' a seamless experience are somehow making -roleplaying- impossible i will judge, and i will be merciless in my judgement. Bullshit is still bullshit even if you draw a happy face on it.

It's not about pretending to like people, it's about respect. I can appreciate your argument but when you aim to flame then it's hard to take you seriously. Once again, there is no good reason to be a jerk.

I read the website, i wasn't really impressed, sounds to me like another attempt of political correctness over the internet, something i refuse to follow. There is a difference between critique and simple moaning/complaining. Critique is based on facts, uses arguments and provides solutions, it explains and exposes flaws so that they can be avoided in future and takes context into account.
Problem is the OP misses the context, comparing a -product- like TOR to a 'vision' of a 'perfect game' in his head. Whenever you create something, a toaster, a car or a game you first think - who i want to sell it to. When you design a van it's obvious you are not thinking about street racing in the first place. In case of game, with such high budget you plan it so it appeals to as big crowd as possible, which means cutting on features that only 'hardcore' fans of given genre might desire.

Your doing the exact same complaining/moaning, your criticising the OP in the exact same manor. I just want to point that out.

I can understand where you are both coming from and frankly I find both of you are wrong. I disagree with the OP that it's a step-backwards when it's just a different type of game, and I disagree with your views and how people should be quite because it personally irritates you.

 

[Busdriver580]

I wholeheartedly agree with OP.