TERA Review

[Ringwraith]

0:30 PAUSE.

Alright... where to start:

Looks exactly like WoW's map, I heard at least 5 exact sound effects that are used in WoW, I see a quest giver text screen that looks exactly like WoW's, I see backpedling, I see subscription, and worst of all: I see a damn panda.


Pass.

If there's anything to say to that, TERA's nothing something you can judge on appearances alone (not that you should judge books by their covers and all that anyway), as the combat is what you're there for, and it's difficult to give justice unless you actually just try it out. Although reviews are meant to be read in their entirety anyway, so you know all of the good and all of the bad.
Shame they've got a missed opportunity with no free trial, as that's what would draw people in.

 

[LilithSlave]

Okay, here's the problem. I don't think you're supposed to be playing an RPG for the combat in the first place. You're supposed to be playing it for the "role-playing", whatever all that term entails. And why have I heard almost nothing about the so called political system?

Nobody ever talks about it. That would be the biggest selling point of the game to me. But it is hard to be excited about if when nobody ever talks about it. Also, the lore seems boring and all the characters look like strippers. I know some people would say "it's about gameplay and that's superficial blahblah". But it seriously feels... greasy or something. Not only do I have a moral opposition to all the oversexualization of women in video games. But I just have a gut reaction of "ew". Especially to all the advertising that literally puts scantily clad women everywhere.

I think if I played as anything in this game it would be the elf guys. They're hot. Much hotter than the Final Fantasy elf guys.

 

[Zeriah]

I don't see the point in comparing GW2 and Tera.
I have played both and they are unique games, even to each other.

Same genre, same focus on action-adventure combat. They are naturally going to be compared and there's nothing wrong with that. It makes no sense to claim that two games of similar design can't be compared. If this were two different genres, perhaps, but not when they are the same genre and subtype.

Also, not quite sure when Tera was announced but it was originally released in Korea in 2011, and then brought out to NA, EU and so forth. I think that still makes it even, Gw2 probably being announced earlier, but no details about combat, where as Tera was released first with similar (they are far from being the same) combat.

GW2 has been in development since 2007, TERA at around the same time. However, TERA was first being sued in Korean courts by NCSoft around the same time for stealing trade secrets, so I'd think it's fair to say GW2 did it first.

Wait, this confuses me, GW2 does combat better than Tera because there is no tank? It is the design of Tera to include DPS, Tank and healers. It is the design of GW2 to supposedly get rid of those 3 subsets of classes. Just because of the design of the classes doesn't make GW2's combat better than Teras, because that is how it was designed to be originally. If they both had tanks, healers and DPS then you could make that argument.

No, I'm saying that I feel like GW2 does it better because movement-based combat should require movement. Yet the idea of the tank is to draw aggro and then hold still while the damage-dealers drop spike and AoE damage on the balled-up enemies. The two are somewhat contradictory models in general, and as the video demonstrated, the tanks can stand still and survive. Yet a player doing likewise in GW2 is deader than a dodo after a few seconds of sustained combat against more than one opponent.

I'll grant that 1-vs-1, I barely had to move except to dodge the highly-telegraphed death attacks. But I did it anyways, because the practice helped when I got into fights where I was facing several guys ALL trying to squash me at once. If I tried standing still against multiple people, I would die. Over and over and over. That tells me that the combat is designed to force movement, which is how precisely movement-based combat should work.

Spoiler: Will put the rest in spoiler tags to avoid it being too massive to read, and since it's not directly related to TERA.

I enjoy mounts. Why? Because there are specific areas for specific levels. And, seeing as each area for each level obviously can't be too close, they have to be spread out. And how do we get there quicker? Mounts. Just comes down to the overall design of how they want their game to work, again.

Which harkens back to the point I made earlier: impatience. If you simply can't wait to get from one spot to the other, and simply REFUSE to use waypoints or other such methods, then you will see value in mounts. Otherwise, they're rather useless except as status symbols.

You don't need to buy character slots in Tera. Or more accurately, I am pretty sure you can't. For each server, you can have 8 character slots I think. Which is enough for 1 character of each class. His argument wasn't that Tera is cheaper. It is that when you buy it, you feel like you get the game as a whole.

With his character slot example. With Tera, you buy the game, and you get 8 character slots for each server, which is 1 for each class. With GW2 (I am assuming) you probably get around 4? Which isn't even enough for each class. So, In order to have a character for each class, you have to dish out $10 for each additional character you want past your 4 standard ones. Tera feels more like a full game, because you can have 1 of each class and not have to buy anything else, where as with GW2, if you want one of each class, that is an additional $40. (Of course, all that is under the assumption that, if I remember correctly, there is only 4 character slots and 8 classes).

You get five slots in GW2. That's one for each race, but yes, not one per profession. That's $30 for the extra slots, assuming you HAVE to have one of every profession. But that's not a required cost, nor does it make GW2 "less of a game", so the argument is still absurd no matter how you twist it, really.

I realize that my statement came off as snark but I was genuinely asking a question, I would love it if you could link me a video of someone playing GW2 and moving and dodging about and making the combat look interesting, my point was just that *from what I saw* GW2's combat was boring WoW style tab-target, I would love to see something prove me wrong becuse I would like an MMO with combat even better than TERA

Seeing as someone else has already covered this, I'll leave it to that as it's a good video archive.

Also worth watching are some of GW2's actual boss fights.
Tequatl the Sunless (a "small" dragon)
Shadow Behemoth (the boss I spoke of in a previous post)
The Shatterer (another "minor" dragon)

It can be difficult to see in some of them, but they're generally dropping AoE all over the map and summoning minions to attack you. The way boss fights are designed, there are multiple roles to fulfill during combat that MUST all be fulfilled for the group to survive. For example, in the Shadow Behemoth fight, portals open throughout the fight that allow countless minions to pour out and slaughter people while they try to pound away at the boss, so some players have to focus on killing those minions and closing up the portals. Other times you'll find that some players got caught in an AoE blast and need to be revived or are close to being downed, so you'll have to hurry over to their defense.

While that does sound interesting I was also referring to cities and how they are supposedly massive as well but there isn't going to be anything going on but lots of walking. The primary thing that got me worried about this is when I saw someone GUSHING about how they got lost in a large city for fifteen minutes and still hadn't found whatever it was they were looking for and how that alone was PROOF that GW2 was the best MMO ever, when that just sounds painful to me

Cities ARE massive. Absurdly so, actually. I remember being impressed at the sheer size of their cities, and how realistic they feel as a result. The travel problem isn't a pain honestly, for a couple reasons:
1) You gain experience for locating "points of interest" or waypoints anywhere on the map, including cities.
2) Once you have visited a waypoint once, you can travel back to any point in the town using the waypoint system. As long as you're inside the town itself, going from one waypoint to another is entirely free. Waypoints in the outside world cost a small amount of copper to travel to (the amount is pretty trivial though, I never found myself strained for cash and I used waypoints generously).

So traveling around in a city is actually pretty painless if you want it to be. But it's also enjoyable to just wander around and soak it all in, too. It's really quite beautiful.

The thing about "enjoying the world" is that if I want to look at scenery there is this place called "outside" if a big world in a game is going to be enjoyable there either needs to be a way to get from point A to point B quickly(mounts or waypoints), or things need to happen between the two points and GW2 seems to be one of the first to try the later.

Er, no. I understand that this is a matter of personal taste, but I happen to hold strongly to the belief that your taste is just wrong.

A game world should feel as genuine as the real one. It SHOULD immerse the player, it SHOULD keep you interested, and it SHOULD look good because you're going to be looking at that world for hours and hours and hours. When you start saying that game worlds shouldn't be realistic because "that's what the outdoors is for", I have to just dismiss your point entirely out of hand. Putting no effort into a game world's LOOKS is just lazy and sloppy game design in an age when players should not have to choose between fun combat, engaging story, and a game that looks beautiful. If a player must wander between Point A and B at all, the experience between those points had better be enjoyable, or at least look pretty, or your game will feel like a grind and you won't retain players forever that way. When people complain about bad textures or how stupid something looks, that's not accidental, it's because they want their game to feel authentic enough that they can get lost in it and devote hours of their time into it. When you submit the notion that game worlds don't have to provide immersion, you're basically saying that MMOs should feel like a grind to get from A to B all the time, and that's basically throwing in the towel on the notion of a GAME. Games are for fun, they're not supposed to be a second job.

Sorry, but I feel strongly about this one. You can't possibly try to argue that a game should include mounts because you're supposed to just rush from point to point, and grind it out like you're working the 8-to-5 shift. I happen to like it when my game decides to let me explore and faff around for a few hours if I want to. A game that's linear won't hold my attention for long.

not to me they aren't, as my standard practice in RPGS is to level one of every class to an early milestone and then decide what I like most.

This is a personal problem, though. It's not the game's fault you have an inherent need to play every profession and/or race. Not to mention, I'll note that TERA doesn't provide enough slots to play every class and race combination (since that would be ridiculous) yet you don't seem to feel like this makes it less of a game. This seems entirely like a personal issue, not something that "ruins" or even remotely damages the quality of the game. 3-5 save slots is very common in video games, and I don't think 5 slots with the option to expand that limit indefinitely is outrageously low in a game with 8 total professions.

Plus, the cost of storing extra character data ain't exactly cheap. Does it cost 10 bucks? Eh, I doubt it, but it's their call how much they decide it's worth. Most MMOs won't give you the option at all.

I have one of every class on one sever and one other on a PvP server and the game hasn't given me any trouble so if there are limits they are very high, while I assume the the defualt limit in GW2 is going to be two or three, otherwise no one would feel the need to pay ten buck for more.

Again, it's five with the option to expand that pretty much indefinitely, so long as you buy the extra slots in the cash shop. It helps to go look for information about the game rather than guessing.

TERA is limited to eight (one per profession) per server, with no option to expand that.

I'm not trying to say that what I am trying to say is that A. I dislike my game being sold to me in pieces, that's one reason why I'm done with CoD is i'm sick of the inevitable three or four map packs and B. for *me personally* TERA is actually looking like the smaller initial investment at $50 for the game and at most $100 for the sub (and that' a full year)as compared to GW2's $60 for the game $30-$60 depending on how many you start with for enough character slots to try all the classes, and on top of that IIRC armor is purely cosmetic and bought from the cash shop, with stats being determined by dropped items that don't make any visual difference, and while I don't care what other people think its going to start bothering me when I hit 30 and still look like I just waltzed off the starting platform, so that's another $20 to not look retarded, and suddenly I realize that at least the sub fee spreads it out over time. (the part about the armor is based off something I heard from a friend and may be total bullshit so feel free to correct me on that one)

Except that, as another user mentioned, TERA also has a cash shop in the States. So much for that point.

As for the costs, assuming you live in the States: TERA costs $50 to buy and then $107.40 if you choose to buy a one-year subscription during the inaugural period (prior to May 31st, 2012), if you buy later than that then you're paying $119.40 per year. That makes for a total initial cost of $157.40 (or $169.40 after the 31st) for exactly one year of play.

This, of course, assumes you purchase in yearly quantities, otherwise it's $14.99 per month, meaning an upfront cost of only $64.99, with an overall cost of about $229.88 after one year of play.

Guild Wars 2 costs $60 to purchase, and has no subscription fees. Assuming you MUST have your extra three character slots ($30 for that, assuming you indeed pay with real money....though as explained below, that may not be necessary), that's still an overall cost of $90 after one year of play, and you can keep playing the game after that first year because of the lack of a subscription, meaning the differences in cost will only get more and more massive as the years pass.

Furthermore, your point about armors is uninformed. Armor is purchase-able in the game every five levels for in-game gold or craftable with the crafting system, and it also drops from random monsters, AND special sets of armor are available from the game's dungeons. The statistics of an armor can be matched up with the cosmetic appearance of an armor that you think "looks cooler" using an item called a transmutation stone, and those are indeed sold in the cash shop. However, prices on those are not 100% set in stone yet. Also, the game's micro-transaction shop runs on a different system of money called "gems". Gems are obtainable within the game from other players for gold, meaning that with enough gold (and enough gem supply), one could potentially purchase micro-transaction currency in the game without paying real money for any of it, and could then spend that money as they wish. This is part of GW2's effort to introduce a player-driven market economy and to reward players for their in-game effort by giving them a way to turn hours of gameplay (and piles of gold) into benefits that they could only buy with real cash in other games.

So, sorry, but you're not going to win the "cheaper" argument. Not only is TERA significantly more expensive after only one year of play, but GW2's cash shop allows players to potentially purchase micro-transaction stuff entirely for free, provided they are willing to invest their time and effort into actually playing the game. Will this model work out? I hope so, honestly, because it seems like the RIGHT way to do a cash shop rather than the "screw the customer" way to do a cash shop.

I'm not sure if you are aware but action based MMO's are not a new thing. Action MMO's have been around for far longer than 2007.

0:30 PAUSE.

Alright... where to start:

Looks exactly like WoW's map, I heard at least 5 exact sound effects that are used in WoW, I see a quest giver text screen that looks exactly like WoW's, I see backpedling, I see subscription, and worst of all: I see a damn panda.


Pass.

The quest system is very similar to WoW but the art style couldn't be further from any other western MMO. If you could walk around in the game world your jaw would most likely hit the floor, mine did (it was breathtaking). Also backpeddling is literally impossible in this game. The S key turns your character around instantly and you starting running forwards in the opposite direction. You will not be using this at all though, straffing is so important in this game, you might as well unbind the S key (I haven't used it more than once to see how it worked). The 'Panda' is one customization available to the teddy bear race, 99% of them look like teddy bears or cats. The combat and game world is so different from WoW you really wont be feeling like it is similar to any of the WoW type MMO's.

 

[Sean Deli]

Ok, I'll get flamed for this hard, but "action-based fighting in an MMO"...

DC Universe Online. You don't just need to direct attacks, you need make combos of basic attacks and use abilities ("powers") that stack nicely with the combos you are using.

And you can pick up a bus and throw it into enemy...

OK, I am not saying DCUO is very good (it's decent, but not very good) - but I am saying that the fighting system of DCUO could have been refined into a very engaging one by a few minor twitches.

(most of which will never be done, because it would require cutting down list of combos and powers to a balancable set, which runs completely contrary to what most DCUO subscribers - meaning comic book fanboys - want from DCUO)

Which would only leave a cardboard-cut out plot and none-existant player-base involvement as remaining problems.

Give me an MMO, that
- inspires interaction and competition between players as much as Eve: Online,
- has a fighting system as complex and multi-facet as a balanced fighting game or a competitive team-shooter,
and
- has a player-influenced well-written story and quests with a non-cliche over-arching theme.

 

[Zeriah]

I'm not sure if you are aware but action based MMO's are not a new thing. Action MMO's have been around for far longer than 2007.

Er, not sure if *you're* aware, but in this very same thread, I actually stated as much in a previous post. Hell, a user at the top of the page quoted that post, in fact.

Hell, it's not even fair to say GW2 is doing something new as far as that style of combat since it's pretty standard action-adventure style combat.

And given that the thread is only 2 pages long, there's really no excuse for you having not read through the thread to be aware of the ongoing conversation before you butted in, except sheer laziness. But thanks for jumping in because you felt the need to contribute exactly one line as a retort to my entire post's list of valid criticisms.

I saw the thread, you shouldn't be insinuating that GW2 has influenced Tera. This is not true. Tera's combat system is based on hundreds of Korean games, most of which are probably unavailable to us. This GW2 comparison of who did what first is just irrelevant as it is simply wrong. Tera is based on Korean MMO's. This goes just as much to the person you are were arguing with. I'm looking forward to GW2 as well (can't wait for the pvp) but their combat systems are just different, there's no reason why somebody can't find one more fluid than the other. GW2 is using things from WoW type mmo's as well like targets and some auto aim spells and some people find that less interesting than the way Tera does it. The only new ground Tera has made is westernizing Korean MMO's with a large budget. I just don't understand what this has to do with GW2, they are really as different as night and day and both aren't particularly pushing new grounds.

Also the reason why I didn't respond to anything else is because I more or less agree with the other things you said.

 

[Graill]

TERA Review

Bold new MMO combat, but same old quests.

Read Full Article

Not bold, not new. Three MMO's did this to death already, Tera shows absolutely nothing new. The Chronicles of spellborne was far more interesting and shows just how much Tera copied from that game, combat, runes, etc, etc.

 

[Ringwraith]

Okay, here's the problem. I don't think you're supposed to be playing an RPG for the combat in the first place. You're supposed to be playing it for the "role-playing", whatever all that term entails. And why have I heard almost nothing about the so called political system?

Nobody ever talks about it. That would be the biggest selling point of the game to me. But it is hard to be excited about if when nobody ever talks about it.

Well, hardly anyone plays a MMORPG for the 'role-playing', as the 'RPG' part is mostly just demoted to character development in most games of the genre, therefore it's not much different from most MMORPGs in that it's light on the actual 'role-playing'.

The political system only got added fairly recently and is mostly an end-game thing from what I understand it, as you have to be a level 50 guild master to be eligible for election.

Ok, I'll get flamed for this hard, but "action-based fighting in an MMO"...

DC Universe Online. You don't just need to direct attacks, you need make combos of basic attacks and use abilities ("powers") that stack nicely with the combos you are using.

I've heard from a few DCUO players that they feel TERA has a greater weight to the combat, like you'll do full damage to any enemies other than your primary target with your attacks rather than splash damage. If you hit them, you hit them properly. TERA has combo systems too, with certain skills performed quicker or with extra effectis if done after other ones. All classes also gain MP from hitting enemies with normal attacks, with most of the melee classes actually having their MP constantly drain away when not attacking. So it certainly encourages you to keep up the momentum.
From what I heard DCUO had a good idea but the execution was a bit off the mark, or at least TERA does it better.

 

[nyysjan]

So basicly, they changed what i did not mind (combat), kept what i was fed up with (quests nobody cares about the story of), and on top of that, they went over the top with what i hate (stripperific outfits for all females, yay).

I think i'll pass and keep to SWTOR, and try The Secret World when it comes out.

 

[Ringwraith]

So basicly, they changed what i did not mind (combat), kept what i was fed up with (quests nobody cares about the story of), and on top of that, they went over the top with what i hate (stripperific outfits for all females, yay).

They're not for all females just so you know, and it varies between races, and the males are similarly afflicted anyway, so at least they're being equal!

 

[Zeriah]

Snip

I was actually playing Tera when I posted it originally with a group and such, I didn't have time to check over it completely before posting. I added a few things when I had time to read over it, fixed some errors and removed a small line saying "why are you being so hostile" (as I believed I had done nothing to offend) but after reading it I thought it might make you more upset. It wasn't changed much.

This is the line that made me believe you were unaware of where Tera's origins lie and why I thought you were insinuating guild wars 2 was influencing Tera

That's fine, it's a matter of personal taste. I just get sick of people trying to pretend TERA is doing something new when it's not. GW2 was announced before TERA and offers the same action-adventure style of combat (though arguably does it better since the combat requires movement, whereas TERA enables people to continue using the traditional MMO role of a tank....which sort of defeats the purpose of having movement in the first place, IMO), and WoW offers precisely the same questing system. You can say you like the way TERA hybridizes the two just fine, but you can't say that it's doing something new when it's not.

This and your follow up post is what made me believe that you thought Guild Wars 2 was some sort of innovator of Action MMO's with the whole 'first' thing and when you don't even mention where Tera got all of its influence (the multitude of other Korean MMO's) it was a natural conclusion for me to come to, that you were unaware of Tera's origins. I wasn't trying to insult or be snarky, it was what I honestly thought.

Also the combat systems really are very different, you'd have to try Tera or give the multitude of free Korean action MMO's a go to really see how different they are. They both have you strafing and dodging to avoid some direct damage, yes. However the fact that you must aim all your abilities and that literally everything in this game is avoidable, including spells and all player damage is what really sets these games apart. This isn't even going into how different the mobs are in these types of games. You will often be fighting hordes of enemies, gathering them up and avoiding them all while aiming off your spells and abilities. This is a lot different from what you would be doing in GW2. It is quite difficult to describe, all I can say is the combat has a very different feel.

I'm not going to argue with you on why GW2 still uses a targeting system, complete with pre-guided spells. I believe GW2 will be awesome and the combat videos look damn fun. What I was trying to point out is the double standard I believe you have presented with your arguments of including tank classes, when aiming your spells, swings and abilities are just as integral to a pure action RPG as tanking your own bosses. For many people GW2's combat will feel less like an action MMO because of this. These are opinions and neither are more right or wrong.

They also didn't 'borrow' the kind of tank system from the western MMO's and the damage you have to avoid as non-tank classes in dungeons are also completely different. They borrowed these from the Korean MMO's with tank classes and believe me, you will be avoiding plenty of damage in a completely different (and in my opinion, much more difficult) way than you would avoid them in a game like WoW.

As far as not moving while attacking goes, it is what makes the game difficult. This game would be a joke if you could attack while moving, they would need to have literally 10 times the mobs, moving twice as fast to make it a challenge (in Korean MMO's you will generally be fighting 20-50 things at once). What it does do (for me at least), is make the game feel more clunky and I don't enjoy it more than what I was doing in Dragon's Nest for example.

Spoiler: This is an excerpt from my first post in the thread explaining more in detail what I think of this.

The biggest draw back for me though, is that you cannot move while casting (not even your basic attack). I believe they did this to retain some of the, and I say this with the biggest of quotation marks, 'strategy' of the slow passed MMO's like WoW, as knowing when you will be able to cast or not is incredibly important. In that respect it succeeded as many of the things that are difficult in this game would become trivial with the kind of freedom one has in the many other Korean action MMO's. You would need a small army of BAM's to take you down, as finding time to cast while soloing a BAM as a sorcerer is the hardest part. However in the end it makes the combat feel somewhat clunky and sluggish. I really wish they would have gone all the way with a combat system like the many other action based Korean MMO's like Dragon's Nest (funnest MMO I've played with the most poorly implemented gearing system I've ever seen), while differing from them with a breathtaking triple A funded MMO, without pretty much mandatory micro-transactions. If the combat was like Dragon Nest I could have seen myself playing this game for years. In the end I can see myself having a lot of fun with this for a few months and with GW2 on the horizon I may finally be able to say goodbye to WoW styled MMO's forever.

I still believe they aren't really in any more direct competition than they are with any other MMO on the market. In my opinion Tera is a Westernized Korean action MMO, with the core gameplay being Korean but trying to attract the west with a questing and UI system more similar to what they are used to. Guild Wars 2 is a Western action MMO. They both have some things in common but at the end of the day they are quite different. As different as comparing say, Tales of Vesperia (an action JRPG) to something like Skyrim (an action WRPG).

 

[DugMachine]

How is the real time action combat new for MMOs? Out of boredom one day I stopped playing WoW and looked for a F2P MMO instead and found something called... DragonNest or something. Anyways, it pretty much had the same thing you just described. Gotta aim to land hits, use los, dodging.

I don't know, I don't venture too much into the MMO world outside of WoW.

 

[Syzygy23]

Wow, one of the few reviews that didn't mention the loli race, how professional. Anyway, I wouldn't buy this game if I lived in Sweden, if I were you.

But you can tell for sure these weren't modeled after real children because they have bunny ears. Real children don't have those.
It's totally safe to play the "loli" race, guys.

I'm going to side with the majority here, though - that's a mighty price tag.

Yeah, having to accept that you might be at least a little bit of a pedophile is too steep a price to pay.

 

[Zeriah]

That sounds rather exactly like GW2, to be honest. Are you sure you've played a lot of both games? All I remember doing in GW2 events was running around, fending off enemies from every side.

I have, you don't exactly fight hordes of enemies in GW2, think the kind of stuff you fight in Diablo or Torchlight type games. Give Dragon's Nest a go or something if you're honestly curious at all about Tera's combat, you may be pleasantly surprised and it won't cost you a dime.

There are a multitude of action-adventure or RPG games which feature auto-aim functionality, which makes the analogy flawed and inaccurate. You are forming a very poor strawman here.

There's also a multitude of action RPG's with tanking or pet classes which tank things for you. If my argument is strawman, yours is as well. Also this is just my experience but I've played very few action games with auto aiming (the only one I can think of after the N64 era is the Zelda series and even then only with some things). I've played hordes of games where you must aim every strike however.

That's not how it will show up in the stores, and you should know that. Every MMO is in competition with another as far as subscriptions are concerned, as few people can afford several MMO subscriptions at once. TERA and GW2 are in competition mostly because they will seem pretty similar to the average consumer. And right now, the latter is generally going to win that fight for most people because it lacks a subscription. Ergo, it doesn't matter how technical you try to make it....TERA has to do something very clearly unique and distinct, something that other games don't do. And so far as I've heard or seen, it does not differentiate itself enough from the pack to get a huge loyal following in the States.

They will of course be in competition. I only meant that I believed they are in no more competition with each other than they are with WoW, Rift, the billion other MMO's or even Diablo III.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

I'd probably be all over this game if not for The Old Republic. After playing that game... I just don't want to go back to the impersonal text boxes.

Now if a game came along that combined The Old Republic's focus on story with Tera's combat, well... I may never be heard from again.

Somebody needs to make this happen.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Travel powers/mounts are a must >>
And I like Gild wars 2 pricing scheme far more than pay to play...

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Can't help but notice how the map looks near-identical to WoW's original map; two fairly-vertical continents opposite each other. Not to say the game in any way is trying to clone WoW, but you'd think that they'd try and steer away from a map that makes it seem like they are.

At any rate, if I get into any other MMO, it'll probably be this one, just to see how it plays out. Probably won't be for a while, though.

 

[Vrach]

Bleh, that looks completely unappealing. When they said action combat, I was expecting much more than that, if that's action combat, so is GW2 (and hint, neither are). Looks a bit like Two Worlds.

Can a game company please go dig out the Jedi Knight games? Seriously, single player or MMO (considering that game is now 10 years old and ran on a Quake 3 engine, I reckon they should be able to pull off the damn thing, even in an MMO), I don't care, I just wanna see a game like that again, it's been way too long and most of the games I've seen that advertise on being "action" end up being as far as possible from the term through ridiculously stiff combat.