Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Are classes really a sandbox feature?
azzamasin
Member UncommonPosts: 3,105
When I think of sandbox I think of total player freedom and choice. With the recent speculation that EQN will feature classes does this really fit into a Sandbox mentality?
I am hoping that classes are nothing but a starting point and that there is "a lot" of freedom within the class structure and that it becomes possible that no 2 classes will be the same.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Comments
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Classes are fine providing there are a lot and you have the ability to mix and match them at some level. I really enjoyed the SWG way of doing things. At it's prime I think there were 33 or so different "Professions" each with it's own internal skill system that you could spend points on. You had the ability to pick up additional professions but still had the same amount of points divided between the two. It made for some pretty good customization. I only hope Smed remembers SWG in all of this.
~Hairysun
http://www.straightdope.com/
Classes and skill-based systems are not mutually exclusive, contrary to popular belief.
Pathfinder Online has described a skill-based system in which you could select certain skills in order to qualify you as a certain class, and then gain higher level skills in order to qualify as a higher level in that class. In this way you could unlock class specific abilities, and you could also multiclass. I'm hoping that this is how EQN will be.
To me a sandbox is a concept, not a thing. It is a blank slate and whatever the devs and players put in to it is what the game becomes.
Classes are not a feature, neither is skill based or even skills for that matter. It is all completely subjective.
While I want to see traditional EQ classes in EQN, I hope there is more freedom and customization then any MMO out within the limits of having classes. They can go many different ways and hopefully we get something that can please most.
EQ has 14+ years of lore, I highly doubt they will scrap it and go the skill based system. To me, the EQ world isn't the same without classes, but who knows what they might bring this time around.
Star Wars Galaxies had classes
when i think of sandbox, i think of player created content being the focal point of the game.
not sure why people think freedom = sandbox
there was a lot of freedom in EQ1 to do what you want, to kill the mobs you want to kill for xp.
EQ1 was not a sandbox game.
if you think about what the term sandbox means, it is no longer confusing. but yeah, a lot of people think it means the features they want in their game LOL
player freedom isnt what makes a sandbox. Player made content is.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Not exactly true either. It's the ability for the player to modify and change the open world that defines a sandbox. It's why Neverwinter's Forgery doesn't make it a sandbox. Freedom is an aspect of an open world game which sandbox is a sub-genre of, but that doesn't have anything to do with the class system, but the freedom to when it comes to objectives in the game.
Classes are not contrary to sandbox.
Being locked into classes, or having no control over how your class shapes up - is
No thats a Sandbox element in Neverwinter. the game as a whole isnt a Sandbox.
Not all Sandbox games have Open world, which is why your definition doesnt fit all Sandbox games. All sandbox games have player made content or tools to do so. My definition is vague and fits all sandbox games.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Yes it fits.
Your hopes are the opposite of my own.
Classes in and of themselves are not a non-sandbox element, but how they're implemented... Hell if we look at games with no class system whatsoever people invariably start building their own classes as best they can.
Best system we could have in a game: Freeform skill progression with class templates to follow if one so chooses, this of course with a skill point cap to prevent plated ninja wizards.
Bingo! And the winner is....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Classes are a meta-game feature that makes life easier on the developers. They don't have to work as hard on balance issues, because fewer avenues are available for the player. It's definitely a constriction of player freedom, and sometimes the classes make little, if any sense. In the game's internal logic. To the developer, again, it's a conveniance.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Classes can be a sandbox feuture if their is enough room to differentiate from other players.
but then this game is not going to be a sandbox, sure there will be a lotof sandbox features, but i am still asuming the game will combine the strong things of a sandbox with the strong things of a themeparkand walk themiddle of the road
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
This is really what you need to consider:
Do you want it to be more free from and free style, lacking classes though lacking lots of mechanics and function, of which if they are in place certain ones will stand superior to others in which its essencially a class anyways
or... would you rather a class system, allowing a character to be made in a much more advance way having far more options and a unique flavor in which to strengthen the character and really make characters be different from one another? Balance would be an issue but at the same time classes would actually feel different and it wouldn't be the 'same old same old' for every single character.
Personally, i've felt classes have been vastly stronger then classless systems. Given a good system you can make a class system that does give plenty of options to give a unique character, games like DnD or Pathfinder do this a lot in providing a class template but giving choices which can make a one character of a class very different from another through archtypes and choices, added with the ability mix and max classes in interesting ways.
I consider straight-jacketed classes and roles to be a developer aid, kind of boring personally, but certainly some like that sort of thing. Coming out of Hero systems rules as I do, you could build whatever you wanted. I prefer that sort of approach myself. You are still going to have certain things that are going to be important in any game that features strong combat focus. Close in combat. Ranged combat. Crowd Control. Supply/buffing. Debuffing. The more versatile the system, the more it allows you to choose how you mix and match. Even if the game ends up with certain agreed choices that are best for the one specific role, you can actually decide how you want approach it.
I almost always vote in favor of more options, unless there's a dang good reason not to have it....
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
It's hard to fit them into the EQ lore I think. Then again, it is a parallel world so...