you know the game is gonna have a cash shop and NO ONE will buy items from a cash shop that can be destroyed/degrades or be stolen.
Watch your thoughts; they become words. Watch your words; they become actions. Watch your actions; they become habits. Watch your habits; they become character. Watch your character; it becomes your destiny. Lao-Tze
Originally posted by Kenze you know the game is gonna have a cash shop and NO ONE will buy items from a cash shop that can be destroyed/degrades or be stolen.
Well. that is one point, why i think cash shops and sandboxes dont fit well together. But i dont know, maybe there is some way to do a cash shop well for a sandbox. How is the EvE cash shop?
I would be perfectly content with a rehash Star Wars Galaxies crafting/resource gathering system. Happens to apply to both of the OPs suggestions as well.
Sandbox style game does not mean a total sandbox mmo, EQNext will be an hybrid with some soundbox features.Smed said months ago that it would look more like a cross between EQ and Vanguard with updated features, ill find the interview.
If the OP really thinks that EQNext will have those features then he might as well bow out now lol.
I think he will take Vanguards crafting system and expand it plus he will take Vanguard diplomacy system and expand that. He has already said that the classes will have more in common with EQ than they do with EQ2,Vanguards classes are share more in common with EQ than they do EQ2.
We know it's going to be an open world like vanguards rather than the zoning boxed of world of EQ2. I hope he brings back a feature from EQ, that was being able to drop items on the floor.
The number 1 rule of sandboxes is... "Items must be able to be destroyed".
Every single item must either degrade on use, or be completely destroyed from either A NPC or a Player / Environment.
This in turn creates an ecconomy, and prevents market inflation.
It creates player jobs/crafting/trading etc etc.
I think the number 2 rule should be "Every item in the game can also be crafted"
Just like eve online
Disagree with both. Although crafting is high on my list, I dont particularly like items that degrade over time or are destroyed. A much better way is to have the items be disenchantable for crafting materials, similar to GW2 and Asherons Call.
My #1 rule of sandbox (well ok 2 #1's) is player driven content, and exploration centric. Give me a huge world that is damgerous and exciting.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
In addition to the OP requirements, the 1 char per server is also something i support. Makes people more dedicated to their choice, while also significantly reducing metagaming. That people gets extra accounts is not a problem, shows dedication if they want to use a second for spying, crafting or whatever.
These features is among the things that made SWG fun for me.
Asheron's Call had the best loot system of all time, any none of the items could be crafted, but all could be modified.
Also none of them decayed, yet the economy was steller
100% agreed. Its high time a company followed some of the better things that made AC fun and the loot system is bar none the best I have ever experienced in my 14 years in this genre.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Sandbox style game does not mean a total sandbox mmo, EQNext will be an hybrid with some soundbox features.Smed said months ago that it would look more like a cross between EQ and Vanguard with updated features, ill find the interview.
If the OP really thinks that EQNext will have those features then he might as well bow out now lol.
I think he will take Vanguards crafting system and expand it plus he will take Vanguard diplomacy system and expand that. He has already said that the classes will have more in common with EQ than they do with EQ2,Vanguards classes are share more in common with EQ than they do EQ2.
We know it's going to be an open world like vanguards rather than the zoning boxed of world of EQ2. I hope he brings back a feature from EQ, that was being able to drop items on the floor.
Well.. it could of course be the case. But that wouldnt be a sandbox and even more what the point of that?
As much as i remember Vanguard was a huge mistake and financial disaster. Wouldnt that be the last thing to do, to redo a mistake and financial disaster?
I expect to be in the minority with this, but I think it is something that greatly improves gameworld economy:
Only 1 toon/account.
This allows dedicated crafters to have a important role in the game. If "everyone" has a crafter alt, it kills the market, inflation starts its ugly work from day 1 and soon lower level equipment has next to no value at all.
Just curious; do you really expect corporations to discard profit (on that magnitude)?
Idealism is a cool thing. It would be great if our MMO companies went back to MUD-sized player bases and income models.
But looking at it realistically, I don't really expect corporations to throw away cash voluntarily. There's no 'social conscience' to appeal to.
----------
Of course, you could claim that you're giving them more profits; 1 toon/1account means they have to pay for multiple accounts! But I expect the beans wouldn't quite count out that way. Nor would players 'trapped' in a bad spec or just-nerfed class be thanking you very much.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Sandbox style game does not mean a total sandbox mmo, EQNext will be an hybrid with some soundbox features.Smed said months ago that it would look more like a cross between EQ and Vanguard with updated features, ill find the interview.
If the OP really thinks that EQNext will have those features then he might as well bow out now lol.
I think he will take Vanguards crafting system and expand it plus he will take Vanguard diplomacy system and expand that. He has already said that the classes will have more in common with EQ than they do with EQ2,Vanguards classes are share more in common with EQ than they do EQ2.
We know it's going to be an open world like vanguards rather than the zoning boxed of world of EQ2. I hope he brings back a feature from EQ, that was being able to drop items on the floor.
Well.. it could of course be the case. But that wouldnt be a sandbox and even more what the point of that?
As much as i remember Vanguard was a huge mistake and financial disaster. Wouldnt that be the last thing to do, to redo a mistake and financial disaster?
Vanguard downfall was not the features of the game it was the client, Vanguard has some great features. Smed has already said that EQNext will look more like EQ and Vanguard than EQ2.
Taking some features is not the same as redoing, he didn't say he was redoing Vanguard.
Yeap.. i played EQ Vanilla for a few month.. and i didnt like it. But that is not the point. Not everyone likes the same thing, and it is completely ok.
And, just out of curiosity. Vanguard failed because of the client? Why wasnt the client fixed in the first place? Or why do you think if the redo Vanguard(feature wise) they will do now the client right, or any other problem it might got?
And as much as i remember, no SoE game was really polished at release. Nor EQ, SWG, EQ2 neither Vanguard. But in the beginning ppl were a lot more forgiving then now. I am not sure if SoE is even capable of releasing a polished game.
Yeap.. i played EQ Vanilla for a few month.. and i didnt like it. But that is not the point. Not everyone likes the same thing, and it is completely ok.
And, just out of curiosity. Vanguard failed because of the client? Why wasnt the client fixed in the first place? Or why do you think if the redo Vanguard(feature wise) they will do now the client right, or any other problem it might got?
And as much as i remember, no SoE game was really polished at release. Nor EQ, SWG, EQ2 neither Vanguard. But in the beginning ppl were a lot more forgiving then now. I am not sure if SoE is even capable of releasing a polished game.
Of course, i could be proven wrong. We will see.
Lol Vanguards client not being fully working at release is neither here or their,it is what it is. Again you are assuming Smed said all Vanguards features, he means some features will be taken and expanded. He has also said that EQNext will be going back to EQ not a follow up of EQ2.
You have a problem with SOE so you will never be convinced, i don't care if your convince or not lol, i'm looking forward to Smeds remake of EQ with features from both EQ and Vanguard and features that we may not have seen yet.
Again Vanguard has some great features, we all know how it went at releaee, that's old news and not what this is about.
I would love to see a 'master list' of Sandbox rules. I'm curious as to what they actually are.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
Originally posted by Larloch Can someone explain to me why if an mmo is not crafting focused then that makes it a Theme Park mmo?
Ok. i will try.
Basicly. It is about static vs. dynamic. Dynamic means you can change the world. One point to change the world is to create objects(like a house, or the usual armor/weapons) and place it in the world(house, building streets, cities), and withit changing the world.
If you dont have any mechanismn(like crafting) to change the world, to place objects in the world, or alter objects in the world it will be static. With other words it doesnt change over time. Therefore it isnt a sandbox.
Why it is then a themepark?
If it is static, it is designed from the game designer from stretch and thing were placed in the world like they want, it is like building up a theme park, where other ppl can come in and enjoy what the designer have build up. Rushing through the content designers have build up for them.
Thanks I figured it would be something like that. I guess I simply don't agree that crafting should be the main catalyst for the evolution of a fantasy sandbox mmo world.
For me number 1 is the freedom to choose your alignment. I don't want to be shoed into a faction and be forced to be good or evil depending on race choice. If I decide I want to kill the next guy then so be it. With a good justice system in place you'll forge a tighter community to be sure as there will be a greater sense of danger in the world.
Thanks I figured it would be something like that. I guess I simply don't agree that crafting should be the main catalyst for the evolution of a fantasy Sandbox mmo world.
Crafting is definitely a cornerstone of a traditional sandbox, along with PvP.
Crafters supply equipment and items of all kinds, from weapons and armor to constructions, to the PvPers to fight with. These can be destroyed to create a constant demand for crafting.
PvPers fight over territory containing valuable resources for the crafters to make things with. These are used up in crafting to create a constant demand for the territories containing the materials.
Those two demands interacting with each other is generally what creates the dynamic player-driven world of a sandbox.
That being said, I'm sure it's not the only way to create a dynamic player-driven world. But it's one way that's been proven to work.
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
Originally posted by Roxtarr I would love to see a 'master list' of Sandbox rules. I'm curious as to what they actually are.
yes and will be the joke of the year
The whole point of sandboxes is rather the opposite, what rules?
At this point I pretty much reflexively disagree with anybody who proposes a rule about what a "true" gamer or a "true" sandbox needs to be. The op avoided that "true" word, but he gave us the same thread.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
alternatively...1 char/acc reduces a very fun part of meta-gaming : SPYING.
A recent thread I created polled players about whether they owned multiple accounts in a game and SWG was the hands down winner with several folks claiming to have 12, 16 and even 20 something accounts to get around this limitation of 1 character per account.
So sort of a win win for the Devs and don't worry, people who want to spy will buy more than one account.
Back to the OP. The OP is on the right track, but developing a proper MMO economy with sufficient money drains is a bit more complicated than having your gear wear out or break if controlling inflation is your goal.
Look at the real world, hordes of economists try to figure out ways to control inflation and at the of the day, you actually want some level of it, just at a controlled, predictable rate.
I believe at the end of the day, the agreement is having a slow, steadygrowth of the money supply is the way to go (vs Keynesian policies) and that's where it becomes challenging in MMORPG's.
Since resources in MMO's tend to spring from no where, even if items degrade, it won't do much to control inflation so you have to put in other sinks.
EVE does this by having a strong PVP model at its core to drive the economy, and they make sure that in most fights besides a ship being destroyed some portion of its modules and cargo burn with it.
This permits them to fine tune it some, increase or decrease the destruction rate if you will.
There are other ways EVE tries control the economy, (CCP has a full time staff economist to assist them) and even they can't totally kill inflation, but have done one of the best jobs I've seen in a MMORPG to do so over the long haul
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
Originally posted by Roxtarr I would love to see a 'master list' of Sandbox rules. I'm curious as to what they actually are.
yes and will be the joke of the year
The whole point of sandboxes is rather the opposite, what rules?
At this point I pretty much reflexively disagree with anybody who proposes a rule about what a "true" gamer or a "true" sandbox needs to be. The op avoided that "true" word, but he gave us the same thread.
So... the #1 rule of sandboxes is that it has no rules?
Which is one heck of a contradiction if I ever saw one.
Not to mention that any game is, in essence, nothing more than a set of rules. From chess, as defined by the unique properties of the board and each piece, to any MMO, as defined by it's programming.
Games are, by very definition, rules. A game without rules isn't a game at all, let alone a sandbox game.
We are the bunny. Resistance is futile. ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\ ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o) (")("),,(")("),(")(")
Comments
Watch your thoughts; they become words.
Watch your words; they become actions.
Watch your actions; they become habits.
Watch your habits; they become character.
Watch your character; it becomes your destiny.
Lao-Tze
Well. that is one point, why i think cash shops and sandboxes dont fit well together. But i dont know, maybe there is some way to do a cash shop well for a sandbox. How is the EvE cash shop?
I would be perfectly content with a rehash Star Wars Galaxies crafting/resource gathering system. Happens to apply to both of the OPs suggestions as well.
~Hairysun
http://www.straightdope.com/
Sandbox style game does not mean a total sandbox mmo, EQNext will be an hybrid with some soundbox features.Smed said months ago that it would look more like a cross between EQ and Vanguard with updated features, ill find the interview.
If the OP really thinks that EQNext will have those features then he might as well bow out now lol.
I think he will take Vanguards crafting system and expand it plus he will take Vanguard diplomacy system and expand that. He has already said that the classes will have more in common with EQ than they do with EQ2,Vanguards classes are share more in common with EQ than they do EQ2.
We know it's going to be an open world like vanguards rather than the zoning boxed of world of EQ2. I hope he brings back a feature from EQ, that was being able to drop items on the floor.
Disagree with both. Although crafting is high on my list, I dont particularly like items that degrade over time or are destroyed. A much better way is to have the items be disenchantable for crafting materials, similar to GW2 and Asherons Call.
My #1 rule of sandbox (well ok 2 #1's) is player driven content, and exploration centric. Give me a huge world that is damgerous and exciting.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Asheron's Call had the best loot system of all time, any none of the items could be crafted, but all could be modified.
Also none of them decayed, yet the economy was steller
I dont believe items must be forcefully destroyed, (aka you can repiar everything to full again...maybe at increased price each time or something).
but i still want unique items dropped from super hard dragon or w/e.
jsut make certain dragons* only spawn limited times per week. with limited number of drops. maybe just 1 drop per kill. 1 dragon per day.
Have many many different items that can drop..like 100+
(hell, idc if some have same skin, just different stats, or unique skill attached---item shoots fireball upon hit)
would make having lots of different items easier.
and maybe not let that certain item drop again to other is destroyed. or have max of 3 in world.
This combined with full looting PvP would be awesome xD
idk just a thought
In addition to the OP requirements, the 1 char per server is also something i support. Makes people more dedicated to their choice, while also significantly reducing metagaming. That people gets extra accounts is not a problem, shows dedication if they want to use a second for spying, crafting or whatever.
These features is among the things that made SWG fun for me.
100% agreed. Its high time a company followed some of the better things that made AC fun and the loot system is bar none the best I have ever experienced in my 14 years in this genre.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
and it was not a sandbox.
Well.. it could of course be the case. But that wouldnt be a sandbox and even more what the point of that?
As much as i remember Vanguard was a huge mistake and financial disaster. Wouldnt that be the last thing to do, to redo a mistake and financial disaster?
Just curious; do you really expect corporations to discard profit (on that magnitude)?
Idealism is a cool thing. It would be great if our MMO companies went back to MUD-sized player bases and income models.
But looking at it realistically, I don't really expect corporations to throw away cash voluntarily. There's no 'social conscience' to appeal to.
----------
Of course, you could claim that you're giving them more profits; 1 toon/1account means they have to pay for multiple accounts! But I expect the beans wouldn't quite count out that way. Nor would players 'trapped' in a bad spec or just-nerfed class be thanking you very much.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Vanguard downfall was not the features of the game it was the client, Vanguard has some great features. Smed has already said that EQNext will look more like EQ and Vanguard than EQ2.
Taking some features is not the same as redoing, he didn't say he was redoing Vanguard.
Did you play EQ?
Yeap.. i played EQ Vanilla for a few month.. and i didnt like it. But that is not the point. Not everyone likes the same thing, and it is completely ok.
And, just out of curiosity. Vanguard failed because of the client? Why wasnt the client fixed in the first place? Or why do you think if the redo Vanguard(feature wise) they will do now the client right, or any other problem it might got?
And as much as i remember, no SoE game was really polished at release. Nor EQ, SWG, EQ2 neither Vanguard. But in the beginning ppl were a lot more forgiving then now. I am not sure if SoE is even capable of releasing a polished game.
Of course, i could be proven wrong. We will see.
Lol Vanguards client not being fully working at release is neither here or their,it is what it is. Again you are assuming Smed said all Vanguards features, he means some features will be taken and expanded. He has also said that EQNext will be going back to EQ not a follow up of EQ2.
You have a problem with SOE so you will never be convinced, i don't care if your convince or not lol, i'm looking forward to Smeds remake of EQ with features from both EQ and Vanguard and features that we may not have seen yet.
Again Vanguard has some great features, we all know how it went at releaee, that's old news and not what this is about.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
yes and will be the joke of the year
Ok. i will try.
Basicly. It is about static vs. dynamic. Dynamic means you can change the world. One point to change the world is to create objects(like a house, or the usual armor/weapons) and place it in the world(house, building streets, cities), and withit changing the world.
If you dont have any mechanismn(like crafting) to change the world, to place objects in the world, or alter objects in the world it will be static. With other words it doesnt change over time. Therefore it isnt a sandbox.
Why it is then a themepark?
If it is static, it is designed from the game designer from stretch and thing were placed in the world like they want, it is like building up a theme park, where other ppl can come in and enjoy what the designer have build up. Rushing through the content designers have build up for them.
Thanks I figured it would be something like that. I guess I simply don't agree that crafting should be the main catalyst for the evolution of a fantasy sandbox mmo world.
I'm a unique and beautiful snowflake.
Crafting is definitely a cornerstone of a traditional sandbox, along with PvP.
Crafters supply equipment and items of all kinds, from weapons and armor to constructions, to the PvPers to fight with. These can be destroyed to create a constant demand for crafting.
PvPers fight over territory containing valuable resources for the crafters to make things with. These are used up in crafting to create a constant demand for the territories containing the materials.
Those two demands interacting with each other is generally what creates the dynamic player-driven world of a sandbox.
That being said, I'm sure it's not the only way to create a dynamic player-driven world. But it's one way that's been proven to work.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")
The whole point of sandboxes is rather the opposite, what rules?
At this point I pretty much reflexively disagree with anybody who proposes a rule about what a "true" gamer or a "true" sandbox needs to be. The op avoided that "true" word, but he gave us the same thread.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
A recent thread I created polled players about whether they owned multiple accounts in a game and SWG was the hands down winner with several folks claiming to have 12, 16 and even 20 something accounts to get around this limitation of 1 character per account.
So sort of a win win for the Devs and don't worry, people who want to spy will buy more than one account.
Back to the OP. The OP is on the right track, but developing a proper MMO economy with sufficient money drains is a bit more complicated than having your gear wear out or break if controlling inflation is your goal.
Look at the real world, hordes of economists try to figure out ways to control inflation and at the of the day, you actually want some level of it, just at a controlled, predictable rate.
I believe at the end of the day, the agreement is having a slow, steadygrowth of the money supply is the way to go (vs Keynesian policies) and that's where it becomes challenging in MMORPG's.
Since resources in MMO's tend to spring from no where, even if items degrade, it won't do much to control inflation so you have to put in other sinks.
EVE does this by having a strong PVP model at its core to drive the economy, and they make sure that in most fights besides a ship being destroyed some portion of its modules and cargo burn with it.
This permits them to fine tune it some, increase or decrease the destruction rate if you will.
There are other ways EVE tries control the economy, (CCP has a full time staff economist to assist them) and even they can't totally kill inflation, but have done one of the best jobs I've seen in a MMORPG to do so over the long haul
"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
So... the #1 rule of sandboxes is that it has no rules?
Which is one heck of a contradiction if I ever saw one.
Not to mention that any game is, in essence, nothing more than a set of rules. From chess, as defined by the unique properties of the board and each piece, to any MMO, as defined by it's programming.
Games are, by very definition, rules. A game without rules isn't a game at all, let alone a sandbox game.
We are the bunny.
Resistance is futile.
''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
(")("),,(")("),(")(")