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!

We are asking the wrong question.

13

Comments

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by nethervoid
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Yeah, he is putting words into my mouth. Let me be very clear about my position.

    1) I like game certain ways (which i am not going to repeat), and I am not shy about it. D3 is the game i enjoyed most in the past few years.

    2) I don't think *all* games should be made in the way i like. Very simply, i don't have the time to play so many games anyway. So what do i care if some are made not for me?

    3) I do enjoy multiple game types (action combat focus, stealth ...) .. just not boring 20 min boat ride virtual worlds. Heck, how can anyone say i want games to be all the same when i enjoy D3, and WOT, and Dishonored, which are totally different types of games?

    4) Some of the virtual world MMOs fans are too narrow minded, and dismiss new and different gameplay style like lobby and arenas. Not all MMOs need a virtual world.

     

    I think the point most people would make about 4 is those are not really MMOs. If they have a lobby and you create games of like 10 to 20 from the lobby, it's not an MMO. That's a COD style game. COD is definitely not an MMO.

    MMOs have certain traits. None of the games you mentioned I would consider MMOs, and I also play WoT. I'm not saying those games shouldn't exist, but they also are not MMOs. Those games are in different catagories with different attributes than games like UO, EQ, EVE, SWTOR, WoW, etc.

    MMO is just a label. Label changes its meaning all the time. Some may think that WOT, Gundam capsule fighter, D3, LOL are not MMOs .. but

    a) they are listed, and discuss on this stie, and

    b) MMO is a convenient label.

    If you like, i can restate 4) as ...

    .. Some of the virtual world MMOs fans are too narrow minded, and dismiss new type of hybrid games with some MMO features and other gameplay style like lobby and arenas. Not all MMO like game need a virtual world.

  • KuinnKuinn MestaPosts: 2,093Member
    Originally posted by jpnz

     

    One of the most frequent topic on this forum is the whole 'we love sandbox MMOs. Give us sandbox / MMO going in the wrong direction / OMG sandbox are teh winz!!'' which always results in someone (sometimes myself sometimes not) asking 'sandbox lovers are the minority when it comes to MMO and $$$ it generates. Sorry that you have less choice than themepark games'

    The discussion usually dies at that point because that's a factual statement and you can't really debate against it. You can but it tends to be not that fruitful as you really need some proof to argue against a factual statement and there aren't any proof.

     

     

    How would you even know, since there arent any big budget sandbox mmorpgs. However there are a ton of big budget themepark mmorpgs, and almost every one of those are not that succesfull. Just because WoW is helluva succesfull mmorpg and the reason why so many failed themepark games exist today does not mean that sandbox games cannot be succesfull.

     

    What this situation calls for is people stop stupid debates between these two entirely different mindsets and game styles. And what the industry needs is a one single big budget well made sandbox game (where your character is not a little space ship) so we actually can even see if it appeals to anyone or not, which is impossible to say currently with these low budget crap looking half-games that does not even get marketed anywhere.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,310Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by madazz
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by madazz
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by madazz
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by madazz
    [mod edit]

     Um no.  I don't think he has ever said once that a game should be made a certain way, ever.

    He has only ever stated what he likes and why he likes it.

    He has consistently told people that believe a game should be made a certain way that they are wrong, a game does not have to be a certain way.

    Therefore he is actually less selfish than people who people an MMO has only one definition and needs to stick to it for any kind of value. 

    [mod edit]

     I think I've read all his responses.

    Typically it goes this way.  A poster will say a game should be like this and he says why?

    A poster will say this game needs this and he says why?

    He has never said a game or MMO should be of any particular design.  I don't feel he thinks games should be one way, in fact he has stated numerous times that they can and should be multiple ways however he has also stated the type of games he LIKES.  Never stated they SHOULD be that way.  Has consistently asked WHY they should be that way.

    So yes.  He is less selfish because the doesn't feel that they should be just one way as you imply.  He consistently argues against people who say they should be one way.

    Again the biggest question he always asks is "Why"  Why should they be made that way.  He often says most people won't enjoy it, but he consistenly goes against people stating a game should be a certain way. 

    Anyone saying a game should be a certain way is selfish.  He argues against that therefore he is less selfish than those others.

     

    Read his posts and come back.

     I regularly read these boards and thus his posts.

    Actually I find you are arguing far more than he is stating that games should be a certain way.

    [mod edit]

     I took your advice and when through about 3 years of both your post history.  I will retract my statement about you saying games should be made a certain way.  You didn't argue that they should be made a certain way within that timeframe.

    However within that timeframe neither has Nari.  Again he has only stated what he likes, what he would and would not play  and whenever someone does a MMO's should be this he says no and argues that they should not be a specific design.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • madazzmadazz A town, ONPosts: 1,564Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by madazz
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by madazz
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by madazz
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by madazz
    [mod edit]

     Um no.  I don't think he has ever said once that a game should be made a certain way, ever.

    He has only ever stated what he likes and why he likes it.

    He has consistently told people that believe a game should be made a certain way that they are wrong, a game does not have to be a certain way.

    Therefore he is actually less selfish than people who people an MMO has only one definition and needs to stick to it for any kind of value. 

    [mod edit]

     I think I've read all his responses.

    Typically it goes this way.  A poster will say a game should be like this and he says why?

    A poster will say this game needs this and he says why?

    He has never said a game or MMO should be of any particular design.  I don't feel he thinks games should be one way, in fact he has stated numerous times that they can and should be multiple ways however he has also stated the type of games he LIKES.  Never stated they SHOULD be that way.  Has consistently asked WHY they should be that way.

    So yes.  He is less selfish because the doesn't feel that they should be just one way as you imply.  He consistently argues against people who say they should be one way.

    Again the biggest question he always asks is "Why"  Why should they be made that way.  He often says most people won't enjoy it, but he consistenly goes against people stating a game should be a certain way. 

    Anyone saying a game should be a certain way is selfish.  He argues against that therefore he is less selfish than those others.

     

    Read his posts and come back.

     I regularly read these boards and thus his posts.

    Actually I find you are arguing far more than he is stating that games should be a certain way.

    [mod edit]

     I took your advice and when through about 3 years of both your post history.  I will retract my statement about you saying games should be made a certain way.  You didn't argue that they should be made a certain way within that timeframe.

    However within that timeframe neither has Nari.  Again he has only stated what he likes, what he would and would not play  and whenever someone does a MMO's should be this he says no and argues that they should not be a specific design.

    Though we disagree, you have a TON of my respect. Thank you. I will STFU and withdraw. This thread has got out of hand and much of it is due to me.

  • ThorbrandThorbrand West Palm Beach, FLPosts: 1,198Member
    The number one way to make a successful sandbox game. Freedom to play the way you want and build your character the way you want! That is make the game to caters to everyone as far as gameplay goes. Make a world for everyone. It is possible and has been done before but todays games focus to much on one feature and take away the freedom of sandbox games.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Thorbrand
    The number one way to make a successful sandbox game. Freedom to play the way you want and build your character the way you want! That is make the game to caters to everyone as far as gameplay goes. Make a world for everyone. It is possible and has been done before but todays games focus to much on one feature and take away the freedom of sandbox games.

    Paradoxically, a virtual world game without cross server functionalities sometimes is detrimental to freedom.

    Examples:

    1) The way i want to play is to jump into a dungeon right now and hack some bosses. A virtual world game (without fast travel) requires me to walk  20 min before that can happen.

    2) The way i want to play is to play with my friend who has a character on a different server. I cannot play with him unless there is some cross server fucntionalities.

    If you true freedom, a sandbox may not be enough .. you also need additional group forming functionality like x-server and stuff like that.

     

  • WizardryWizardry Ontario, CanadaPosts: 8,430Member Uncommon

    I don't label them Sandbox or anything else,i label it a MMORPG as should be.We are trying to roleplay a character class and the game needs to create the living world.There are very complicated ways to create a realistic world liek adding mobile npc's with various changes,choices and an ECO system.

    Instead most every dev sticks to what is EASY and cheap to design,a bunch of triggered quests that lead you in a linear direction.That is not RPG gaming, i really don't knwo what it is but it is not a mmorpg.

    Once you attach a LINEAR pre planned route for gamers to follow,you remove the tag RPG.I am quite sure developers "GET IT" but they don't want to for sake of creating a cheaper ,easier game.

    There are tons of other concepts that have been around awhile and we don't see them either,like destructive surfaces have been around since Red Faction [years ago].We have the WII showing us human interaction and Physx gives us the realistic physics.Very old games used mobile npcs and eco systems,but for some reasopn nobody wants to put out the effort.

    So the ONLY question you need ask yourself is "Do i really want to support al lthese half ass efforts" just because i am bored and need a game toi play?Stop supporting them and changes will come about.Even if we need to have 90% of the developers fold up shop it helps the MMORPG's in the long run because only the good creative ones survive.


    Samoan Diamond

  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo LondonPosts: 3,221Member
    Originally posted by jpnz

     One of the most frequent topic on this forum is the whole 'we love sandbox MMOs. Give us sandbox / MMO going in the wrong direction / OMG sandbox are teh winz!!'' which always results in someone (sometimes myself sometimes not) asking 'sandbox lovers are the minority when it comes to MMO and $$$ it generates. Sorry that you have less choice than themepark games'

    Tending to think themepark is more pick and go and instantly go and slay a dragon online, whereas sandbox, is more read the manual and see if you are doing simple actions right, if so, carry on learning how everything is supposed to work and don't run out of fuel in an isolated star system!

    So by design, one is more mainstream and the other is more niche?

     Originally posted by jpnz

    Question is, how does a sandbox game appeal more towards the mainstream gamers? I'm not talking about LFG or instant teleport or raid-or-die, that's the sticky thread. I'm talking about more basic fundamental stuff.

    As above, I think the more gamification you make it the more it will be accessible to a mainstream sensibility?

    Originally posted by jpnz

    I play games mostly because I want to be told a good story. That's my preference. Give me a game with awful game mechanics but a good story and I'll buy/play that.

    It always interested me that 'sandbox MMOs' tend to have bad story/char or a story/char that is irrevelent to the players (I'm looking at you EVE-Online!). This is why 'Sandbox MMOs' don't appeal to me all that much. Has nothing to do with it being hard or forced grouping or w/e. 

    A single player game you have a single-story line of the hero. A mmo, this makes less sense, so different personal stories have been done in GW2 or SWTOR but they are limited to a player and companions aren't they? Compare this to EvE which has emergent story from territory control. Ie an actor in a story where events happen to the player compared to a story involving different populations that shape events of the story.

    I think there may be 2 ways to add story to sandbox: 1. microscope type stories that are all over the place and more like hooks to fuel the player's imagination about things that inform about the virtual world or otherwise are as already commented modules from devs that perhaps are instanced areas tailored towards narrative story. 2. Deus Ex story that the devs somehow implement that potentially influences the emergent story of the sandbox rules.

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by Apraxis

    Hmm.. first of all. The game designer were almost always in another age. And yeah, we have other passions, and think about a lot of things differently. But that a alone dont mean, that what we liked dont fit for them at the core.

    Publishers used to design games around roleplaying, for the tiny niche of the general population that really enjoyed that.

    Then, around 2004 plus or minus, the rest of the gaming market arrived...LOLRP was their most typical response.  Some of them only make responses in foreign languages--I claim no psychic powers about what they might want.  But clearly, for this much bigger market, a game designed around roleplaying will not do the job, regardless of how much I enjoyed it in the wayback...they (the vast majority) didn't do any PnP at all, nor do they want to.

    It would be like asking my kid to put down his mp3 player and enjoy this vinyl record album.  I can talk him into listening, maybe, but I really can't alter what he enjoys.  And It isn't Peter Frampton (this album sold gobs when I was a teen--'you're insane old man' glance).

    Gamers are still continuing to arrive.

    We typically espouse not adaptation, not innovation, but a devolvement towards older models of games. We're a force actively seeking to hold back evolution.

    (Don't be fooled by those threads decrying lack of innovation, when the same fellow writes another thread ten minutes later about how cool EQ or UO was, why can't we make games like that any more?)

    Exactly the case.  Whereas many older gamers (of which I am one) used to play PnP games and initially came to MMOs as a means of moving from the PnP analog world to the digital world, the fact remains that the overwhelming majority of people who currently play MMOs did not come from that era and that more and more people are coming to MMOs who were never alive when PnP gaming was at it's height.  The fact is, had MMO developers only made games to appeal to former PnP gamers, the genre would have died a long, long time ago.  The only thing that has kept *ANY* MMOs around, much less the explosion of MMOs that we see today, is the fact that developers were willing to move away from the roots of the genre and adapt games for the mainstream audience.

    Virtually nobody wants to play a game like UO or EQ today, even if they were updated with today's graphics.  People need to accept the reality that actually is rather than the fantasy world they wish was.

    Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
    Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
    Now Playing: None
    Hope: None

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by Onomas 
    He isn't very open minded is he? Lol His way or we are all wrong.

    Careful with that 'we'.

    I see several hundred entitled inviduals demanding exacting specs, pretty much daily.

    Occaisionally you can point out, to one or another of them, that what you {for any given you} want may not be what the industry can, should, or wants to make.

    That causes some hostility, usually.  But it doesn't need to.

    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.

  • nethervoidnethervoid xanex, CAPosts: 528Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by nethervoid
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Yeah, he is putting words into my mouth. Let me be very clear about my position.

    1) I like game certain ways (which i am not going to repeat), and I am not shy about it. D3 is the game i enjoyed most in the past few years.

    2) I don't think *all* games should be made in the way i like. Very simply, i don't have the time to play so many games anyway. So what do i care if some are made not for me?

    3) I do enjoy multiple game types (action combat focus, stealth ...) .. just not boring 20 min boat ride virtual worlds. Heck, how can anyone say i want games to be all the same when i enjoy D3, and WOT, and Dishonored, which are totally different types of games?

    4) Some of the virtual world MMOs fans are too narrow minded, and dismiss new and different gameplay style like lobby and arenas. Not all MMOs need a virtual world.

     

    I think the point most people would make about 4 is those are not really MMOs. If they have a lobby and you create games of like 10 to 20 from the lobby, it's not an MMO. That's a COD style game. COD is definitely not an MMO.

    MMOs have certain traits. None of the games you mentioned I would consider MMOs, and I also play WoT. I'm not saying those games shouldn't exist, but they also are not MMOs. Those games are in different catagories with different attributes than games like UO, EQ, EVE, SWTOR, WoW, etc.

    MMO is just a label. Label changes its meaning all the time. Some may think that WOT, Gundam capsule fighter, D3, LOL are not MMOs .. but

    a) they are listed, and discuss on this stie, and

    b) MMO is a convenient label.

    If you like, i can restate 4) as ...

    .. Some of the virtual world MMOs fans are too narrow minded, and dismiss new type of hybrid games with some MMO features and other gameplay style like lobby and arenas. Not all MMO like game need a virtual world.

    Sorry but this is wrong. Would you call a dubstep song country? Why do you want to say your online games are MMOs? What's in it for you to call them that? Are they not good unless you think they're MMOs? I have cars on my feet. No they're not shoes. I've decided to relabel them as cars. You can quote the dictionary with your closed minded attitude of 'words have a meaning', but in the end they don't! Doll stove sandy snickers Africa silly! (I just said I can redefine words how I please)

    All words have a specific definition, else nobody would be able to talk to each other. You can't change something just because you want your game to be in the sexy category. COD is not an MMO. D3 is not an MMO. MMO is MASSIVELY multiplayer online. It's built right in to the accronym for god's sake.

    No more debate from me on the topic. I've already fell for the trolling.

    nethervoid - Est. '97
    [UO|EQ|SB|SWG|PS|HZ|EVE|NWN|WoW|VG|DF|SWTOR]
    13k subs YouTube Gaming channel

  • Cephus404Cephus404 Redlands, CAPosts: 3,675Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by nethervoid

    Designing a sandbox is really quite easy. All you have to do is create a blank world and systems where players can create things in the world. Then sit back and watch.

    It really is that easy.

    That is the problem. Most players can't create anything interesting.

    And you sound like "creating a blank world and systems" is easy. Why don't you show us how it is done?

    And how do you attract anyone to "a blank world"?

    The problem is, most people don't want to create anything, they play games to be entertained, not to have a second job.  If I buy a product, I don't expect to get a box with random parts that I have to figure out, I expect to have a fully-functioning product that I can actually use right away.

    Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
    Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
    Now Playing: None
    Hope: None

  • nethervoidnethervoid xanex, CAPosts: 528Member
    Originally posted by Cephus404
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by nethervoid

    Designing a sandbox is really quite easy. All you have to do is create a blank world and systems where players can create things in the world. Then sit back and watch.

    It really is that easy.

    That is the problem. Most players can't create anything interesting.

    And you sound like "creating a blank world and systems" is easy. Why don't you show us how it is done?

    And how do you attract anyone to "a blank world"?

    The problem is, most people don't want to create anything, they play games to be entertained, not to have a second job.  If I buy a product, I don't expect to get a box with random parts that I have to figure out, I expect to have a fully-functioning product that I can actually use right away.

    Minecraft disagrees, good sir. Most sold downloadable game on XBOX in XBOX history. Most searches of any game on youtube by over triple. People love blank worlds, and they are constantly talking about how cool it would be to have more systems in minecraft, so they could build even cooler, more interactive stuff.

    nethervoid - Est. '97
    [UO|EQ|SB|SWG|PS|HZ|EVE|NWN|WoW|VG|DF|SWTOR]
    13k subs YouTube Gaming channel

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by nethervoid
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
     

    MMO is just a label. Label changes its meaning all the time. Some may think that WOT, Gundam capsule fighter, D3, LOL are not MMOs .. but

    a) they are listed, and discuss on this stie, and

    b) MMO is a convenient label.

    If you like, i can restate 4) as ...

    .. Some of the virtual world MMOs fans are too narrow minded, and dismiss new type of hybrid games with some MMO features and other gameplay style like lobby and arenas. Not all MMO like game need a virtual world.

    Sorry but this is wrong. Would you call a dubstep song country? Why do you want to say your online games are MMOs? What's in it for you to call them that? Are they not good unless you think they're MMOs? I have cars on my feet. No they're not shoes. I've decided to relabel them as cars. You can quote the dictionary with your closed minded attitude of 'words have a meaning', but in the end they don't! Doll stove sandy snickers Africa silly! (I just said I can redefine words how I please)

    All words have a specific definition, else nobody would be able to talk to each other. You can't change something just because you want your game to be in the sexy category. COD is not an MMO. D3 is not an MMO. MMO is MASSIVELY multiplayer online. It's built right in to the accronym for god's sake.

    No more debate from me on the topic. I've already fell for the trolling.

    I don't. I did not coin the term MMO. The game industry did. I am just using the label for convenience. If the industry, gaming website, including this one, is calling WOW, DDO and other instanced, lobby heavy games MMOs, who am i to disagree?

    Are you saying WOW is not a MMO because you can play it like a lobby game? A thousand website will disagree with you.

    Language is base on common usage, not your whim.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by nethervoid
    Originally posted by Cephus404
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by nethervoid

    Designing a sandbox is really quite easy. All you have to do is create a blank world and systems where players can create things in the world. Then sit back and watch.

    It really is that easy.

    That is the problem. Most players can't create anything interesting.

    And you sound like "creating a blank world and systems" is easy. Why don't you show us how it is done?

    And how do you attract anyone to "a blank world"?

    The problem is, most people don't want to create anything, they play games to be entertained, not to have a second job.  If I buy a product, I don't expect to get a box with random parts that I have to figure out, I expect to have a fully-functioning product that I can actually use right away.

    Minecraft disagrees, good sir. Most sold downloadable game on XBOX in XBOX history. Most searches of any game on youtube by over triple. People love blank worlds, and they are constantly talking about how cool it would be to have more systems in minecraft, so they could build even cooler, more interactive stuff.

    Sure .. some people want to make stuff. But most people? Don't tell me you think Minecraft players outweigh Halo, COD, WOW and so on.

    Minecraft is currently behind Diablo 3 on the xfire chart, and it is the ONLY game that allows you to make stuff.

    If creating stuff is so hot, Second Life would be a lot more successful. I am not saying no one wants to do it but a) i don't think MOST would want to .. and b) even if some want to create, they are not really putting in major effort, or make anything worthwhile.

    My kids play minecraft for a while, and they just made some simple stuff like a house or two. I highly doubt they (or most minecraft players) are dedicated enough to make good content for others' to play.

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Wizardry

    I don't label them Sandbox or anything else,i label it a MMORPG as should be.We are trying to roleplay a character class and the game needs to create the living world.There are very complicated ways to create a realistic world liek adding mobile npc's with various changes,choices and an ECO system.

    Instead most every dev sticks to what is EASY and cheap to design,a bunch of triggered quests that lead you in a linear direction.That is not RPG gaming, i really don't knwo what it is but it is not a mmorpg.

    Once you attach a LINEAR pre planned route for gamers to follow,you remove the tag RPG.I am quite sure developers "GET IT" but they don't want to for sake of creating a cheaper ,easier game.

    There are tons of other concepts that have been around awhile and we don't see them either,like destructive surfaces have been around since Red Faction [years ago].We have the WII showing us human interaction and Physx gives us the realistic physics.Very old games used mobile npcs and eco systems,but for some reasopn nobody wants to put out the effort.

    So the ONLY question you need ask yourself is "Do i really want to support al lthese half ass efforts" just because i am bored and need a game toi play?Stop supporting them and changes will come about.Even if we need to have 90% of the developers fold up shop it helps the MMORPG's in the long run because only the good creative ones survive.

    You started of good but by the second sentence it started going south really fast. With your definition, well over half of the RPGs wouldn't be RPGs.

    I remember reading some time ago that the ecosystems you advertise really did not work as intended as they were exploited, broke under player influence or went unnoticed. Really hard to justify spending time and effort making such features when a mere fraction is there to appreciate it. Plenty of features sound good on paper, but are entirely something else in practice.

    Also, as I understand it, physics is a very resource-intensive to the server, which already has to handle hundreds of players in the same area. And the resources needed grow exponentially. So far, elaborate physics have only been done with single player games or in games with a controlled amount of players in the same area. I'm all for having physics in an MMO but the first step is to have it in a game such as DDO or GW1 which are entirely instanced. And seeing as most of the people who bring up what "real MMORPGs" should be are purists, I don't think you would be happy with that either.

    You are basically mad because the games and the technology they use has not met your expectations. Are you also mad because you don't have a hoverboard yet?

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by nethervoid
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
     

    Sorry but this is wrong. Would you call a dubstep song country? Why do you want to say your online games are MMOs? What's in it for you to call them that? Are they not good unless you think they're MMOs? I have cars on my feet. No they're not shoes. I've decided to relabel them as cars. You can quote the dictionary with your closed minded attitude of 'words have a meaning', but in the end they don't! Doll stove sandy snickers Africa silly! (I just said I can redefine words how I please)

    All words have a specific definition, else nobody would be able to talk to each other. You can't change something just because you want your game to be in the sexy category. COD is not an MMO. D3 is not an MMO. MMO is MASSIVELY multiplayer online. It's built right in to the accronym for god's sake.

    No more debate from me on the topic. I've already fell for the trolling.

    You know Listerine, the mouth wash? It has been used as a detergent to clean floors and a disinfectant with the same exact formula. Still want to call it a mouth wash?

    I imagine people who have issues with labels are the same people who make sure the pens in their breast pocket are in the correct order and exactly parallel.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Language is base on common usage, not your whim.

    But just try to convince a pedant when the spelling of a word has changed to something not found in his dictionary.

    (See: Donut)

    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.

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by nethervoid
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
     

    Sorry but this is wrong. Would you call a dubstep song country? Why do you want to say your online games are MMOs? What's in it for you to call them that? Are they not good unless you think they're MMOs? I have cars on my feet. No they're not shoes. I've decided to relabel them as cars. You can quote the dictionary with your closed minded attitude of 'words have a meaning', but in the end they don't! Doll stove sandy snickers Africa silly! (I just said I can redefine words how I please)

    All words have a specific definition, else nobody would be able to talk to each other. You can't change something just because you want your game to be in the sexy category. COD is not an MMO. D3 is not an MMO. MMO is MASSIVELY multiplayer online. It's built right in to the accronym for god's sake.

    No more debate from me on the topic. I've already fell for the trolling.

    You know Listerine, the mouth wash? It has been used as a detergent to clean floors and a disinfectant with the same exact formula. Still want to call it a mouth wash?

    I imagine people who have issues with labels are the same people who make sure the pens in their breast pocket are in the correct order and exactly parallel.

    Wouldnt something which retained its name while changing its formula be a more apropriate example? :)

    Flame on!

    :)

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    Sure .. some people want to make stuff. But most people? Don't tell me you think Minecraft players outweigh Halo, COD, WOW and so on.

    Minecraft is currently behind Diablo 3 on the xfire chart, and it is the ONLY game that allows you to make stuff.

    If creating stuff is so hot, Second Life would be a lot more successful. I am not saying no one wants to do it but a) i don't think MOST would want to .. and b) even if some want to create, they are not really putting in major effort, or make anything worthwhile.

    My kids play minecraft for a while, and they just made some simple stuff like a house or two. I highly doubt they (or most minecraft players) are dedicated enough to make good content for others' to play.

    Most people dont care about online games, lets drop that idea altogether :)

    And as for worthwile, look at flash/apple/android stores, what we are really interested in is the one (guy or gal) of 100 000 that does something worthwhile.

    So i am not really saying that you are wrong, just that this is a tricky argument, i am quite sure MOST people did not care about the wheel back then :)

    (Or we could always go back to singleplayer just with achievments from people all over the world popping up in the top left corner and call it a mmo revolution and progress :) )

    Flame on!

    :)

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member

    Some interesting comments but it too focused on 'what is a sandbox?' I feel.

    I don't care what it is, but if 'sandbox MMO' is something that this community loves, how do we add something to that design without touching the 'sandbox' of it?

    Adding a good story / char in a sandbox doesn't hurt the 'sandbox' of it.

    Adding a good gameplay (maybe an interesting combat system like DMC) element doesn't hurt the 'sandbox'.

    Actually, a better phrased question might have been, 'if you can improve Skyrim what would it be?'

    Once again, mine would have been 'how about an NPC that I want to remember because it is a good char? I mean the only reason I remember Lydia at all is because once again, she is in my way!'

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,757Member Uncommon

    The baulk of the player base is migratory casuals, any MMO coming out now faces that. Sandbox or not after two months they will leave. Regardless of the industry starting to face up to this, regardless of how good the new sandbox is they will not stay after a couple of months.

    This has lead to some soul searching in the gaming industry which as usual has led to the wrong answer. They cannot just make the games more sandbox and go back to having players with long term commitment. They let the genie of the casual player out of the bag, he is not going to just go back into his bag!

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by Scot

    The baulk of the player base is migratory casuals, any MMO coming out now faces that. Sandbox or not after two months they will leave. Regardless of the industry starting to face up to this, regardless of how good the new sandbox is they will not stay after a couple of months.

    This has lead to some soul searching in the gaming industry which as usual has led to the wrong answer. They cannot just make the games more sandbox and go back to having players with long term commitment. They let the genie of the casual player out of the bag, he is not going to just go back into his bag!

    I don't see anything wrong with the casual migration to be perfectly honest.

    Gamers experience more games and more MMOs will be played by lots of players.

    There isn't an infinite amount of MMO players so as long as the game makers make smart business decision, both the player and the game makers win.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Scot

    The baulk of the player base is migratory casuals, any MMO coming out now faces that. Sandbox or not after two months they will leave. Regardless of the industry starting to face up to this, regardless of how good the new sandbox is they will not stay after a couple of months.

    This has lead to some soul searching in the gaming industry which as usual has led to the wrong answer. They cannot just make the games more sandbox and go back to having players with long term commitment. They let the genie of the casual player out of the bag, he is not going to just go back into his bag!

    I admit migrating from game to game but I am far from casual. When I play games, I really get into it. The short while I spend in the game I often know more than some veterans. Back in 2005 when my guild won the European Championships in GW1, I had clocked about 800 hours playing that game. And I know some people had close to 3000 hours by that time. One of the finalist teams in the latest League of Legends World Championships had a player, who had played the game for just 2-4 months IIRC. It is not how many ours you've spent playing but how you've spent them.

    Some players just play more "efficiently".

    I was done with WAR in just 2 weeks. I had seen most Eve has to offer in just 6 months.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,641Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jpnz

    Some interesting comments but it too focused on 'what is a sandbox?' I feel.

    I don't care what it is, but if 'sandbox MMO' is something that this community loves, how do we add something to that design without touching the 'sandbox' of it?

    Adding a good story / char in a sandbox doesn't hurt the 'sandbox' of it.

    But in the very first post I explained not only that it does but how it does that. :/

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

Sign In or Register to comment.