It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by maccarthur2004 Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by CreepProphet Originally posted by nariusseldon
Died? DCUO, LOTRO, DDO, and many not only are thriving, new content are released this year. How many sandbox MMOs release new content in 2012?
Sandbox games should not have to release new content as often as theme park games.
A sandbox game that has done it's job should give players the tools they need to enjoy gameplay and hopefully create their own content therefore becomming less and less reliant on developers to feed them new content endlessly.
Sandbox games with events similar to rifts, could keep the game interesting without introduction of a new zone or additional raiding content. Having player built defensible structures that could grow over time is another way to keep people logging in to invest in their own content, once again, not content designed by the developers. Letting people focus on trading or transporting goods, defending the transport from other players looking to loot the spoils. That creates constant game play that is not developer driven.
It's all a matter of how the game desingned. A good sandbox game shouldn't have to add another corner to the sandbox to keep people entertained, it should be giving them components with which they can build new swing sets, or the option to upgrade their shovels so they can build bigger sand castles.
That is a cop-out. Look at Eve. How many expansion does it have?
Play a fantasy game without new monsters, items, and locale? And don't tell me let the users create those. 99.9% of user created content is crap. Nothing entertain better (for me) than professional produced stuff.
Users dont create AI characters, they create in-game politics, economics, military and social challenges.
So the devs still have to build locale, NPCs, skills, and a thousand things. Plus, user created politics, econ, mitiary & social challenges may not be fun & compeling.
Do you really want to make guild (or corp or whatever) dramma (aka politics) as part of your gameplay? I don't.
And all of this goes back to my original point:
Thank you for highlighting it.
Please note it says "should not have to". This does not mean that they shouldn't if they choose to. It just means that if a game has provided a sufficent framework for the players, constantly grinding out new content to keep players entertained should not be necessary.
Now let's get hypothetical. Let's say that a developer has designed a game where players can place their own defensive structures and create their own factions.
All of this is "player driven" content.
The Developers provided a game world, they provide the 3D assets and code in the abilty to place 3D assets. The Developers script Events that spawn incursions. The Developers set up harvesting systems that allow players to obtain required materials.
The rest is up to the players.
This requires only minimal updates,
This gives Developers MORE time to focus on generating new content. Content which will be powered through in a matter of hours leaving players thinking "well what do I do now?" Content also, which will most likely sit idle.
Not a very savvy investment in time, money, or talent.
To me the sandbox method not only sounds fun, but it also sounds like a fairly cost effective method of providing a game to players.
Again I'll link William "Bill" Murphy's article on systems in games and how they add more depth to the game, hence making them more fun to play. It was posted on this website and is a very good read.
Waiting on The Repopulation.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
I did play all those things. But no you can't do that in MMO's. With legos we could build anything we want. With GIJoe we could use the action figures and use anythign eles in our room, backyard, forest, build to enhance that. We could even alter the toys themselves, make them superheroes if we wanted.
We cannot do that in any MMO to date. We have very very very limtied ability, if any to alter the world, rules, gameplay. Everything we do is completely in our imagination and not in the world. Lego's and action figures started in our imagination and we would translate that into the real world. MMO's so far don't.
What I stated about the player stories is exactly what goes on. Oh players might create their own backstory and roleplay something else but you do that in every game including WoW. The only thing that goes in the gameworld is exactly what I stated, player craft, player attack, player defends. That isn't a story.
I think VengeSunsoar has it right.
With all the games that are on the market, it would be nice if a few more of them gave MMO gamers the ability to actually have an impact on the game world.
What is the point of battling the end boss when he respawns a few minutes later so the next group can have a go at him?
That has no impact on the game world. It just gives you an achievement.
We want to be able to have an impact on the game world by essentially building up the game around us and feeling like we aren't just wandering heroes/grave robbers. But that we are part of an ever changing landscape.
Not just trapsing through everchanging content.
Originally posted by CreepProphet Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by maccarthur2004 Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by CreepProphet Originally posted by nariusseldon
There is absolutely no reason ALL of this (and I like it btw....) cannot sit right smack bang in the middle of a themepark world.
The long-held belief that you cannot have your cake and eat it is crapola.
Sandbox and Themepark can and should exist as an integrated whole - it just requires a developer with balls and a truly creative approach.
See my thread on;
Originally posted by Caliburn101 Originally posted by CreepProphet ...
I agree. It is nice to have something else to do once you've ridden all the rides right?
Originally posted by Caliburn101 There is absolutely no reason ALL of this (and I like it btw....) cannot sit right smack bang in the middle of a themepark world. The long-held belief that you cannot have your cake and eat it is crapola. Sandbox and Themepark can and should exist as an integrated whole - it just requires a developer with balls and a truly creative approach. See my thread on; http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/369912/The-Ultimate-MMO.html
First of all.. i could have posted this response in your thread, but i didnt want to derail it.
Theoretically you are right, you can mix a lot of ideas and approaches from both worlds into one game. But a few systems are contradicting.
Raid/Gear Loot/Gear progression vs. working ingame community/crafting gear
You cant have both. Either the best gear comes from Raids and you give your Game gear progression or the best/top class gear comes from crafting with no or limited gear progression comes from crafting, and withit supply and demand and a virtual economy arise.
A compromise may be, that you cut out the gear progression and give something else for Raids or that the gear from Raids will have a limit to it.. but i dont know if a lot of Raiders/themepark player would like it that way.
Vertical Progression/Gated content vs. more horizontal progression and flat content(flat vertical progression)
Progression is one key stone of rpg playing. But how you progress, and how you build up your world is vastly different. There are some good reasons for themeparks to have a huge vertical progression and gated content, and there are different reasons for it:
a) Your content is limited reusable anyway, not a lot lost if your gate your content on rails
b) gated content separated players, separated with it player density. Less server load/graphic load, or at least more controlled server/graphic load. (including zoning and/or phasing for more or less the same reasons, and the not so huge trade off in a theme park game
For further points i will quote Raph Koster: http://www.raphkoster.com/2005/12/22/do-levels-suck-part-ii/
Originally posted by Raph Koster, http://www.raphkoster.com/2005/12/22/do-levels-suck-part-ii/ Whether it’s intentional or not, there’s a host of powerful psychology effects that levels as currently implemented give, and it’s not all about Skinner Boxes: The aforementioned random reinforcement: you don’t know exactly when you’ll skill up, so you keep doing whatever gave you a little bit of reward What Robert Cialdini might call “the commitment fallacy” — once you have a few, you figure you’re in for the ride and may as well finish off the ladder. People don’t tend to like leaving things half-done. Another powerful tool of influence: social validation. Levels are publicly displayed, and serve as a significant social marker of status. And humans are hardwired to seek status and validation. The “gated community” effect. It’s been observed many many times that people want what they haven’t got. Just as clubs will intentionally create lines outside a door to drive traffic, and just as it’s a time-honored technique of retail and carnies to hire a claque of folks to make the business seem popular, exclusivity in online games is a powerful motivator. Levels effectively put content behind a velvet rope, which just makes us want to get inside. Finally, one of the most compelling aspects of levels is the lure of power. Levels promise increments to a player’s health, their damage per second, and so on. People like feeling more powerful — it’s not social validation, it’s the game system itself giving them validation.
In a sandbox environment you will have problems with deep vertical progression and gated content. Because
a) Your world/content is thought to reuse, to change, to interact. It is not one time used content in comparsion to themepark games, with it you would lose a lot, if you would gate your content and separate your community.
b) Sandbox games live because of the "one world" feeling, if you separate your world through gated content/huge vertical progression you would lose this
Problem: Technical problem of a seamless world, and the technical problem of crowded hot spots. Both zoning and even more phasing/instancing will hurt your game a lot.(which would be one technical solution often used in themeparks)
Of course, you could make a compromise here, too. But in one way or the other you will hurt the one or the other part of your community.
And there would be a few more points, which dont fit well together from themepark and sandbox gaming. So you have to sacrify one or the other thing. You can of course include a lot of the advantages of themeparks in sandboxes or the other way around, but in both cases you will lose something from the other spectrum.
But, ultimatly, there is no reason not to do it and let all boundaries behind you and just create something completely new, with the advantages of both worlds, which might be actually good. But you cant merge them and satify both to 100%.
Edit: missed the not in my Resume. And as reply to the post below, i agree with you. But as i said both will have to suffer some, you cant have everything from both without sacrifice something.
I'm not sure if it is impossible to combine the two or not.
It's not so much a matter of whether the two types of games couldn't play well together, it's just a matter of finding a way to do it that works best with the technology, game design, and the player base.
Even Ralph points out that while levels do bring something to the game, there may well be ways to play a game without them.
In this instance it would be a matter of players being willing to step outside their comfort zone and try something that isn't what they are used to. And a game with these aspects would be a big change from the standard MMO as the market currently sits.
Originally posted by Apraxis
The creative part is taking out the parts that no one will miss.
Originally posted by CreepProphet With all the games that are on the market, it would be nice if a few more of them gave MMO gamers the ability to actually have an impact on the game world. What is the point of battling the end boss when he respawns a few minutes later so the next group can have a go at him?
That is very dangerous and open up for all sort of exploit, and griefing. What if some player build stuff just to block others' passage? There are million way of how this can go wrong. If you think bad behavior is bad now, wait till you give players more power to cause grief.
The point of killing end boss again and again? Fun in combat? Challenge? Progression?
You don't have to change the game world to have fun. Otherwise, WOW won't be so popular.
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by CreepProphet With all the games that are on the market, it would be nice if a few more of them gave MMO gamers the ability to actually have an impact on the game world. What is the point of battling the end boss when he respawns a few minutes later so the next group can have a go at him?
I'm going to take a page out of the grouper's playbook and suggest that if you want to change the world, you should go play single-player games where you can change the world, at least on your own particular copy of the game. The problem with MMOs is you have hundreds of thousands of people who are playing the same game at the same time as you in a common playspace. It's not possible to allow hundreds of thousands of people to change the world in noticeable ways or to produce individual content so that every one of those hundreds of thousands of people kill different bosses or perform different tasks. It's just not reasonable to expect.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots moreRelatively 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 moreNow Playing: NoneHope: None
Problem is that some people want to build worlds and some people want to destroy what others create.
MMORPG form of Minecraft would end up with 50% players building castles and monuments and exploring etc. and 50% players removing blocks in said castles and monuments to form penis shapes - and then burying your mine shaft entrance in gravel.
Just like what makes my Skyrim world so cool and great?
Because YOU'RE not in it!
*insert whomever as "YOU'RE"*
Originally posted by BadSpock Problem is that some people want to build worlds and some people want to destroy what others create...
Hundreds of thousands of people have been doing just that In EVE for many years. It works very, very well, allowing PVE and PVP players to form the perfect symbiotic relationship. I played on both sides of the coin during my 6 years with that gem of game, so it's likely easier for me to comprehend how incredibly well CCP's vision delivers.
Understandbly, the game is not for everyone. However, there is no problem with such a system, assuming it is logically thought out and implemented properly.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
I agree to the idea I want MMOs to be worlds, not theatre stages or mere theme parks. I dont mind MMOs being theme parks with quests, I mind they are ONLY games, ONLY theme parks and nothing more.
Yes, MMOs need a big dose of Ultima Online again!
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Originally posted by Cecropia Originally posted by BadSpock Problem is that some people want to build worlds and some people want to destroy what others create...
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Being a newer Game Designer because I got tired of seeing Bad games, I turned a hobby into a career but when this happens, people like us see the other side to why, they aren't gonna make the next UO and such...
There are to many games that you can make and make more money off of, like IOS, facebook games etc, so looking at MMO's your like screw that, it takes to long and cost to much, would I like to do it sure I wrote a game for 10years and everything about it I see now in some games, but small parts. We do see games that can be good the issue is like myself we do not have million of dollars to do it.
Also some gamers only have themselfs to blame, because do you think an investor will take a chance with a nobody no, fat chance, also a new idea, again no.... The AAA companys aren't gonna do it because they do not make money as these Themeparks do, they are easy to play you can jump on for 30 mins and play the game , sadly most indies do not have the money that these AAA companys do, also the staff. So most gamers who end up going to school and before they went wanted to make MMO's come out and dislike MMO's... I still like them but I see why... SO the day of games made my gamers are not gonna happen as much as they did...
Yes we have kick starter which is a great thing but some of those people from kickstarter do not have the correct staff to begin with, and some don't have any buisness sense ...
Only way we will see better games is if you people stop spending so much on Themeparks and support indies more, I'm not just saying that because I'm a new Dev its what I see as a gamer to....
Well said Sir. Well said.
It IS the dev's (our, if a can go that far) right to decide to go for financial security, especially in respect of age (you can live on cheese toast only so long) and family.
But they are NOT entitled to blame the customer for this decision.
The thing is though that even the big publishers are starting to see that 'Emergent Gameplay' and Sandboxes are ways to make money and do keep people in game longer.
They are looking specifically at Mine Craft and EVE online.
Take look at this article http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2012/11/future-of-mmo-games/
Building a world to just sit and look at it is not going to keep people playing. These kind of games need the 'watch the world burn' players just as much as Mine Craft needs creepers. Blowing things up every once in a while forces you to re-build, it gives you something to do.
Even the PvP in EVE gives you something to do and forces you to make sure the insurance on your ship is up to date. Mining to just mine would become incredibly boring if people didn't ninja your cannisters or try to shoot your barge. Endlessly transferring cargo from one sector to another would just be a grind if people didn't try to shoot at your cargo ship.
Yes it sucks when you lose. Yes you feel like you've been griefed by annoying kiddies. If none of these things were in place, the game would get boring after a while.
I may be crazy for seeing this, but it can be quite a rush.
Originally posted by karat76 Worlds would be great but unfortunately the best part of gaming worlds is also the worst the other players. A world game would definately need different server types to help spread the douche bags out.
THe community breaks or makes the world. Doesnt matter if you have a 10v10 world or a 5000x5000 world, if your community is bad it doesnt matter what game or where they play. I would rather be in a larger world so i can avoid these people. No matter what genre or what platform you will always bump into bad people. But for the most part, the ones that stick around and help create a better game environment far out wiegh the bad ones.
Originally posted by Darkcrystal Being a newer Game Designer because I got tired of seeing Bad games, I turned a hobby into a career but when this happens, people like us see the other side to why, they aren't gonna make the next UO and such... There are to many games that you can make and make more money off of, like IOS, facebook games etc, so looking at MMO's your like screw that, it takes to long and cost to much, would I like to do it sure I wrote a game for 10years and everything about it I see now in some games, but small parts. We do see games that can be good the issue is like myself we do not have million of dollars to do it. Also some gamers only have themselfs to blame, because do you think an investor will take a chance with a nobody no, fat chance, also a new idea, again no.... The AAA companys aren't gonna do it because they do not make money as these Themeparks do, they are easy to play you can jump on for 30 mins and play the game , sadly most indies do not have the money that these AAA companys do, also the staff. So most gamers who end up going to school and before they went wanted to make MMO's come out and dislike MMO's... I still like them but I see why... SO the day of games made my gamers are not gonna happen as much as they did... Yes we have kick starter which is a great thing but some of those people from kickstarter do not have the correct staff to begin with, and some don't have any buisness sense ... Only way we will see better games is if you people stop spending so much on Themeparks and support indies more, I'm not just saying that because I'm a new Dev its what I see as a gamer to....
If there was any evidence that themeparks make money this might be acceptable.
But by and large they don't. The only really successful themepark was WoW. But that's all the mindless publishers ever see anyway.
Originally posted by DavisFlight If there was any evidence that themeparks make money this might be acceptable. But by and large they don't. The only really successful themepark was WoW. But that's all the mindless publishers ever see anyway.
So you're saying that AoC, DDO, LOTRO, EQ2, Wizard 101 and all the other themepark style MMOs that have been running for five or more years have been doing so at a loss each year?
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
Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by DavisFlight If there was any evidence that themeparks make money this might be acceptable. But by and large they don't. The only really successful themepark was WoW. But that's all the mindless publishers ever see anyway.
Weird isn't it, yes for some there were reductions in staff. But they have made expansions, made new games and been running for several years. Hard to do if they weren't making money.
It may have something to do with the fact that their yearly and quarterly earnings are not posted in major gaming magazines and perhapse not to the players themselves.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Originally posted by Reklaw Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Regarding the whole players create their own story. To me this is largely bs. The stories that individuals tell in sandbox games including eve is, "I started at this time, I got these skills, I joined this clan and then repeated ad nauseum we attacked this outpost, we crafted this item, we attacked this outpost, we defended this outpost, we attacked this traveller..." That is not a story. Or rather it may be the literal definition of story, "A statement of events" but there is nothing there that will entertain another person. It is the weakest form of story there is. Now if the game let you create more of a backstory, and decide on a plot that can grow and change over time. That may be interesting but as of today, no Sandboxes do not let you create a story.
Probebly people who experianced Lego/Playmobile/StarWars figurines/GIJoe's/Martel type of toy's understand how one may tell his/her own story as we did with our toy's back then. Now or atleast with the more virtual type of MMORPG we're back at our childhood again creating our own story's. Shame Themeparks don't allow for this freedom. And understandeble that those who grew up during mainstream internet might find it hard to graps players own created story in a MMORPG.
So NO it's not BS, it's just that you might not have experianced playing with things where you needed to use your own imagination instead of being told what to do.
Same with your view on EVE, I mean there are countless of story's told and experianced by players/corps. It's just that you might not get them. noting wrong with that really. But just don't say it's BS.
I do agree with having the way a players play's or wants to tell a story would be awesome if it had real impact thru out the gameworld.
But I stand that sandbox creates the oppertunity for a player to create his or her own story.
Sorry VengeSunsoar you might have misunderstood me, I was talking pure about story, not every possiblity we had with our toy's, cause then obviously I agree with you as we can not do all those things, but that's not what I "tried" to say.
So I still stand that in a sandbox MMORPG you are able to create your own story, your own adventure, your own missions/quests.
But then again these day's people seem to rely on everything handed to them, they need tools/feature's to be able to create a story. They lack the use of their own imagination and perhaps are afraid to share thoseidea's of story with others.
But like I also have said I wished that our personal made story would impact the gameworld or even changed certain things in the world. Eve is a good example, I mean there are dozens of website's with player made stories in the EVE universe.
And well my backstory and roleplay was completely different in SWG then when I played the themepark game WoW because my backstory and roleplay actually meant something in the SWG universe towards other players, in WoW it meant nothing other then to read it but it had no effect in the gameworld.
Originally posted by Reklaw
No one lacks anything and I suggest turning away from making such claims to avoid making yourself look even more foolish.
Look, I played with Legos, I played PnP games, and I could say "I've grown past that age", but I know better. You liking what you like and me liking what I like has nothing to do with imagination, maturity, intellect, laziness or anything else - so just drop it. Patronizing gets you nowhere.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky