Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Game of Thrones: GDC 2012: Game of Thrones Goes Sandbox Warfare

BillMurphyBillMurphy Managing EditorBerea, OHPosts: 2,365MMORPG.COM Staff Uncommon

It's the week of the annual Game Developer's Conference and you know what that means: TONS of new looks at games that are coming soon. In today's First Look Preview, we check out Bigpoint's just-announced Game of Thrones MMO. A cross-faction PVP sandbox? This is something you don't want to miss! Read on!

To begin with, BigPoint is working fully with Martin and the HBO series teams. The game will take place right at the beginning of the War of Five Kings. Players can create a character and level up in the open world. The game is skill bases so it does not focus on classes. That being said there are options for the characters to choose melee style skills, ranged skills, or commander style skills in the game. This breakdown allows players to spec their characters however they want.

Read more of Garrett Fuller's GDC 2012: Game of Thrones Goes Sandbox Warfare.

image

«134567

Comments

  • BlakkrskyrrBlakkrskyrr Pittsburgh, PAPosts: 230Member
    Why are there so many errors in your post?
  • gostlygostly Fayetteville, NCPosts: 134Member







    Originally posted by Jolander







    Why are there so many errors in your post?










     




    lol, I was gonna mention the same thing.




    More on topic though: I'll keep my eye on this game because I love the tv show and would like to see how the game ends up. Also those couple screenshots look pretty good for a game inside your browser.





     




     

    image

  • RaysheRayshe London, ONPosts: 1,284Member

    HEY LOOK, its a new bandwagon to jump on. 

    Because i can.
    I'm Hopeful For Every Game, Until the Fan Boys Attack My Games. Then the Knives Come Out.
    Logic every gamers worst enemy.

  • umcorianumcorian Boston, MAPosts: 466Member Uncommon

    As I said before...

    Bigpoint + Game of Thrones. I'm feeling a chill.

    Pay to winter is coming.

  • barezzbarezz Granite City, ILPosts: 140Member Uncommon

    Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP.  Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged.  The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP. 

    It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best.  The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch".  Can all of these gams just be that terrible?  Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,119Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by barezz

    Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP.  Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged.  The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP. 

    It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best.  The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch".  Can all of these gams just be that terrible?  Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?

    +1  Sandboxers love to blame everything except the possibility that a sandbox game could ever be popular in the first place.  The only formula that I could see possibly breaking the suckage barrier would be a sandpark game, but I'm sure the purists would whine about that as well.

    image
  • McGamerMcGamer Fairfield Bay, ARPosts: 1,012Member

    Bigpoint = bad

    Sandbox = good

    Browser-based= bad

     

    2/3 bad = bad

    Maybe someday browser-based games will be commonplace, but today's technology is not up to par. While a fan of the novel series, I am not looking forward to this IP.

  • DrWookieDrWookie Portland, ORPosts: 252Member

    I gotta say as soon as I read " The game will focus heavily on PvP and faction warfare between the three great houses: StarkLannister, andBaratheon."  it was pretty clear that they will be dumming down the game for their own devices. I would hardly say that those 3 houses would be considered the "Three Great Houses". What about Arryn, Frey, Tyrell (They are very powerful), Martell. Will they all just be alligned to one of those big three? 

    While it's great that they have 3 "factions", that REALLY oversimplifies Game of Thrones and I suspect they really aren't going to capture the political intrigue that makes the series great.

  • HeroEvermoreHeroEvermore salem, ORPosts: 672Member

    wow browser based. hope it runs good. so i can play on my laptop at work hehe :D truly love the fire and ice story. its top notch. feel the games timing is a bit off but being a browser game has kind of changed my mind on that. i play low end games at work. high end games at home so maybe this will have its place for me! yippy skippy!!!

    Hero Evermore
    Guild Master of Dragonspine since 1982.
    Playing Path of Exile and deeply in love with it.

  • HeroEvermoreHeroEvermore salem, ORPosts: 672Member

    drwookie i think even if this game was made my blizzard they couldnt handle the epic scope of the story. its just to massive politically. an mmorpg cant really eat that much up and translae it into game space. but at least they are making a game with some of fire and ice story. that makes me happy.

    Hero Evermore
    Guild Master of Dragonspine since 1982.
    Playing Path of Exile and deeply in love with it.

  • UnshraUnshra Hanover, MDPosts: 382Member

    While I'm not one who cares about graphics I have to admit I was surprised to see that BigPoint has any talent in the field of 3D graphics. It is still subpar by todays standards but for BigPoint I will say I'm impressed and that is the only thing positive I will most like have to say about this game (ever). One thing BigPoint has shown is they have no respect for IP's for them it's about using the name to generate a quick buck, the series "A Song of Ice and Fire" deserves better then this.

    image
    Because flying a Minmatar ship is like going down a flight of stairs on an office chair while firing an Uzi.

  • mcrippinsmcrippins Dallas, TXPosts: 1,070Member Uncommon

    I am REALLY not a fan of browser based games. I have yet to see one that I could actually see myself playing for any real length of time. This saddens me, as I was truly hoping this would be something to look forward to. I hate to judge, because i know it's still early in the whole browser based thing.. but I just dont see this being epic. 

  • CembryeCembrye Washington, DCPosts: 54Member

    I am surprised Martin and HBO are part of this.  I had heard somewhere that Martin had denied he would ever allow his books to be made into an online game.  Guess money talks.

    Sadly, I suspect all that lore and attention to detail will be wasted when players flock to this with guilds called "Gangstah B1tches" and give their characters names like "Psycho Dumpling."

  • RaysheRayshe London, ONPosts: 1,284Member

    This is great, another successful series going the way of the dinosaur. why must we always rely on IP's for all our games. can no one be original anymore. make up your own story instead of ruining the pre-existing ones.

    Because i can.
    I'm Hopeful For Every Game, Until the Fan Boys Attack My Games. Then the Knives Come Out.
    Logic every gamers worst enemy.

  • Bit_DriverBit_Driver Cordova, TNPosts: 16Member

    Shame on you. I dont post here often, but am a long term lurker. I saw GoT and about went bat shyt in excitement. I read and read and then it hit. Browser based. 3 factions. Instant let down. Kinda like finding out yer gonna go double dating with the head cheerleader, only to find out you get her ugly sister instead. Thanks for the news, but yeah.

  • umcorianumcorian Boston, MAPosts: 466Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    Originally posted by barezz

    Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP.  Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged.  The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP. 

    It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best.  The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch".  Can all of these gams just be that terrible?  Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?

    +1  Sandboxers love to blame everything except the possibility that a sandbox game could ever be popular in the first place.  The only formula that I could see possibly breaking the suckage barrier would be a sandpark game, but I'm sure the purists would whine about that as well.


     

    Why would you even want a sandbox MMO where you can't attack other players? Not trying to be sarcastic, just understand. If your only interest in is PvE, don't theme park MMOs already do that so much better? 

    The idea of a sandbox has always been a world that's player-made, player-driven. I think that's why UO lost its appeal for so many when they split the world into Trammel/Feluccia. It didn't really become a sandbox so much as a kittypool, where you fight monsters that are so easy that you could pretty much faceroll the hardest things in the game. 

  • banshe13banshe13 aurora, ILPosts: 200Member

    Martin need to get off his ass and get on the next book the winds of winter. He's not getting any younger and hes talking about 2 or 3 years till he starts the next book and talking about adding 1 more book.

     

    He's 63 years old and at his pace the last 2 or 3 books wont be out for a good 10-15 years. dance with dragons was a OK book and a vary bad book for all the time it took him.

  • RefMinorRefMinor MyTownPosts: 3,452Member
    Well whining about it won't change the platform or the developer, I like the sound of it and will wait to see the implementation before I judge it.
  • barezzbarezz Granite City, ILPosts: 140Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by umcorian



    Originally posted by Vorthanion




    Originally posted by barezz



    Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP.  Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged.  The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP. 

    It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best.  The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch".  Can all of these gams just be that terrible?  Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?

    +1  Sandboxers love to blame everything except the possibility that a sandbox game could ever be popular in the first place.  The only formula that I could see possibly breaking the suckage barrier would be a sandpark game, but I'm sure the purists would whine about that as well.






     

    Why would you even want a sandbox MMO where you can't attack other players? Not trying to be sarcastic, just understand. If your only interest in is PvE, don't theme park MMOs already do that so much better? 

    The idea of a sandbox has always been a world that's player-made, player-driven. I think that's why UO lost its appeal for so many when they split the world into Trammel/Feluccia. It didn't really become a sandbox so much as a kittypool, where you fight monsters that are so easy that you could pretty much faceroll the hardest things in the game. 

    I'll do my best to offer an explanation :) 

    I never played UO, so I cannot comment.  The first MMO that I played was Star Wars Galaxies.  Before the game changed, it was very much a sandbox game.  PvP was something that you could opt into, so you had the choice of you wanted to be engaged in open world PvP or not.  I found PLENTY to do in that game that did not involve attacking other players.  I spent a lot of time gathering resoirces to help out our group's crafters, leveling, going to the numerous player made shops and shopping 9you had to go to a shop, there wasn't a global AH at that time!), I could decorate my house and I ended up as mayor of our player city and managed city design.  I have not had a game since where I can log in and play for hours every day and still maintain my interest level.  The sandbox elements made the game world feel alive and vibrant, and I felt like I was part of a "real" breathing world.

    So as a player, I enjoyed those sandbox elements.  Most PvE/themepark games do not have those elements.  They are very achievement based.  it is about checking off quests in a quest log, beating bosses, getting this piece of loot, etc.   These games usually do not have the depth that sandbox games have.  I most certainly have yet to find one with all of the elements that SWG had at the beginning.

    Now by playstyle preference I don't care for PvP.  I don't want to be someone's "content", nor do I want them to be mine.  I am more interested in cooperation than conflict.  And that is where things get noncongruent, I like sandbox elements but not PvP.  I don't mind if PvP is in a game, I just want to be able to choose if I want to participate or not. 

  • gordiflugordiflu BarcelonaPosts: 757Member

    Originally posted by umcorian



    Originally posted by Vorthanion






    Originally posted by barezz





    Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP.  Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged.  The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP. 

    It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best.  The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch".  Can all of these gams just be that terrible?  Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?

    +1  Sandboxers love to blame everything except the possibility that a sandbox game could ever be popular in the first place.  The only formula that I could see possibly breaking the suckage barrier would be a sandpark game, but I'm sure the purists would whine about that as well.






     

    Why would you even want a sandbox MMO where you can't attack other players? Not trying to be sarcastic, just understand. If your only interest in is PvE, don't theme park MMOs already do that so much better? 

    The idea of a sandbox has always been a world that's player-made, player-driven. I think that's why UO lost its appeal for so many when they split the world into Trammel/Feluccia. It didn't really become a sandbox so much as a kittypool, where you fight monsters that are so easy that you could pretty much faceroll the hardest things in the game. 

    Sandbox means sandbox

    Themepark means themepark

    And PVP means PVP the same way PVE means PVE.

    Don´t mix up concepts. You don't need to attack any player to have a player-driven economy. You don't need pvp to enjoy a sandbox experience.

    Building your castle in the middle of nowhere has way more to do with sandbox games than having to defend it from other players afterwards.

    So yes, sandbox games that are PVE centric are possible. Sandbox does not mean PVP. Sandbox means sandbox.

  • wrekognizewrekognize salt lake city, UTPosts: 384Member

    Originally posted by gordiflu

    Originally posted by umcorian




    Originally posted by Vorthanion






    Originally posted by barezz





    Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP.  Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged.  The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP. 

    It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best.  The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch".  Can all of these gams just be that terrible?  Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?

    +1  Sandboxers love to blame everything except the possibility that a sandbox game could ever be popular in the first place.  The only formula that I could see possibly breaking the suckage barrier would be a sandpark game, but I'm sure the purists would whine about that as well.






     

    Why would you even want a sandbox MMO where you can't attack other players? Not trying to be sarcastic, just understand. If your only interest in is PvE, don't theme park MMOs already do that so much better? 

    The idea of a sandbox has always been a world that's player-made, player-driven. I think that's why UO lost its appeal for so many when they split the world into Trammel/Feluccia. It didn't really become a sandbox so much as a kittypool, where you fight monsters that are so easy that you could pretty much faceroll the hardest things in the game. 

    Sandbox means sandbox

    Themepark means themepark

    And PVP means PVP the same way PVE means PVE.

    Don´t mix up concepts. You don't need to attack any player to have a player-driven economy. You don't need pvp to enjoy a sandbox experience.

    Building your castle in the middle of nowhere has way more to do with sandbox games than having to defend it from other players afterwards.

    So yes, sandbox games that are PVE centric are possible. Sandbox does not mean PVP. Sandbox means sandbox.

    Agreed. You could have an open PVP game (world of tanks) that is not a sandbox.

  • AkaisAkais Memphis, TNPosts: 274Member Common

    Originally posted by banshe13

    Martin need to get off his ass and get on the next book the winds of winter. He's not getting any younger and hes talking about 2 or 3 years till he starts the next book and talking about adding 1 more book.

     

    He's 63 years old and at his pace the last 2 or 3 books wont be out for a good 10-15 years. dance with dragons was a OK book and a vary bad book for all the time it took him.




     



    Amen. DWD had ben done for years and spent many years more in edits as I understand it.

    This game might wind up being incredilbe, but would have done itself a huge favor by steering clear of this IP.

    Fans of the books know that Game of Thrones is moreso a footnote or a setup for the landscape and players that the actual story takes place in and around. That being the state of their world in winter while a battle for light and dark ensues.

    Lastly, no House Targaryen equals no Game of Thrones.

  • RefMinorRefMinor MyTownPosts: 3,452Member
    Originally posted by gordiflu


    Originally posted by umcorian




    Originally posted by Vorthanion







    Originally posted by barezz






    Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP.  Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged.  The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP. 


    It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best.  The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch".  Can all of these gams just be that terrible?  Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?

    +1  Sandboxers love to blame everything except the possibility that a sandbox game could ever be popular in the first place.  The only formula that I could see possibly breaking the suckage barrier would be a sandpark game, but I'm sure the purists would whine about that as well.






     


    Why would you even want a sandbox MMO where you can't attack other players? Not trying to be sarcastic, just understand. If your only interest in is PvE, don't theme park MMOs already do that so much better? 

    The idea of a sandbox has always been a world that's player-made, player-driven. I think that's why UO lost its appeal for so many when they split the world into Trammel/Feluccia. It didn't really become a sandbox so much as a kittypool, where you fight monsters that are so easy that you could pretty much faceroll the hardest things in the game. 

    Sandbox means sandbox

    Themepark means themepark

    And PVP means PVP the same way PVE means PVE.

    Don´t mix up concepts. You don't need to attack any player to have a player-driven economy. You don't need pvp to enjoy a sandbox experience.

    Building your castle in the middle of nowhere has way more to do with sandbox games than having to defend it from other players afterwards.

    So yes, sandbox games that are PVE centric are possible. Sandbox does not mean PVP. Sandbox means sandbox.

     

    I agree but I think the sandbox needs to decide at the design stage process what it is going to be, I don't think the UO way of just splitting into 2 rule sets is good, do one or the other.

     

    I do also think that a sandbox based on GoT has to have PvP, where's the satisfaction over stabbing an NPC in the back
  • OzmodanOzmodan Hilliard, OHPosts: 7,191Member Uncommon

    First off, many of you confuse sandbox with open world pvp.  A sandbox game does not need open world pvp to be a sandbox game.  SWG is proof of that.

    Secondly if you have open world pvp you better have significant consequences built into it to prevent it from being a gank fest.  Notice the very sparse populations of Darkfall and MO, none have consequences to any degree.  Anyone saying the game population can police it does not understand the genre at all, just does not work that way.

    Thirdly, UO was enhanced by Trammel.  Very few left the game when it was added and many joined.  Personally thought that those that left missed out on a much better game.

    Lastly, if they make this a f2p as I suspect, you can write this game off too, most of us won't touch a pay-to-win game.

  • ThaneThane berlinPosts: 2,232Member Uncommon

    "and players will have a lot to be excited about once more details are revealed" << yea, unless we learned from the last 20 mmo releases and their previews :P

     

    never hype, hope. don't expect.

    "I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"

«134567
Sign In or Register to comment.