I've been around the gaming community since it was first born. Every new game takes steps forward and back and makes sacrificies for numerous features. I can't say that I don't want a world to inhabit. This is why Ultima Online and similar games were so enjoyable to me.
I'd also like to thank Lobotomist for making thought provoking and interestings threads and posts since he joined this community. You're one of the very minute members who contributes to the very fundamental reason why forums exist. The sharing of ideas and the debates/arguments surrounding those ideas. Your posts are a pleasure to read.
Meh, I think of him more as more of a firestarter, he gets the threads burning but then bails on the conversation, apparently doesn't enjoy the controversy they stir up.
I bail on the conversation because i was banned so many times on this forums. I just can not risk getting into debate. Also I think that the point was made and the number of posts in this topics do resonate with general feeling of the community
Fair enough I guess, though I don't find it particularly difficult to present my points without suffering the wrath of the ban hammer, try to keep the emotion out of it seems to work best for me anyways.
If you read the thread from end to end, (something I've actually done), you'll see a pretty strong split between those looking for virtual worlds vs those who want a more in and out experience.
While I'd love to see the two sides peacefully co-exist it will never happen, just too polarizing unfortunately.
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
sandboxers should be able to ignore themparkish aspects they dont like and play a game, if they chose to do so.... but themeparkers cant "make believe" themepark elements in to a game.
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
Supporters of worlds cry out for a world as the gaming industry do not provide them, supporters of instanced games disagree because a virtual world game will take away a new game to try for a month or two before becoming unhappy with the shallowness of it all.
"It's a sandbox, if you are not willing to create a castle then all you have is sand" - jtcgs
Originally posted by lizardbones Anyway, their peak users had to be at least a million. They had a million accounts as of the pre-order period just before launch. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/108017-Rift-Tops-the-One-Million-Account-Mark. They could have had five people playing one month later, but they sold at least a million boxes before they went global.
You can have an account even without paying for the game. This is the same argument back from the rift forums, if rift would EVER have a million live subs, do you think Trion would have kept it a SECRET, just so that a few guys could argue over it on teh internetz?
That was really my only problem with your post, even if i stupidly commented on the box price vs sub number thing.
You may carry on bashing purist sandboxes. I made my point sufficiently clear a few pages back when you argued with yourself
Greed Monger (though im starting to lean away from this one)
And few others as well
Never seen so many sandboxes getting ready to explode on the market. We will see changes soon enough.
My main problem with themepark junkies is they want their games easy and linear. Fine, ok. But they can play that way in a sandbox. A sandbox junkie can not play their way in a modern new age themepark. There is no way, because there is no depth or freedom.
And its sad they are satisfied with suck low balling games its not even funny. Better to have and not use, than not to have and want it. MMO's have gone backwards, and many can not see this. Even see some hardcore themepark players in here wanting more now. Even themeparks from 4-6 years ago were three times the game that most new release themeparks are.
Its not a matter of themepark vs sandbox, but a matter of poor game vs a real epic mmo. That is what most of us want. Well minus that one that thinkgs all games should be MOBA and lobby style LOL.
I would like an MMO where you can walk for days and build a house or town in some remote part of the world if I want to. I would like it to be a mixture of UO and SWG, with as much, if not more complexity to all aspects of the game. I'd also like there to be castles, moats and land control, battles with seige eqiupment and 1000's of players on screen without the server or my PC taking a dump. Also aim based combat with no tab targetting.
If you can have that ready for next year that'd be great.
I've been around the gaming community since it was first born. Every new game takes steps forward and back and makes sacrificies for numerous features. I can't say that I don't want a world to inhabit. This is why Ultima Online and similar games were so enjoyable to me.
I'd also like to thank Lobotomist for making thought provoking and interestings threads and posts since he joined this community. You're one of the very minute members who contributes to the very fundamental reason why forums exist. The sharing of ideas and the debates/arguments surrounding those ideas. Your posts are a pleasure to read.
Meh, I think of him more as more of a firestarter, he gets the threads burning but then bails on the conversation, apparently doesn't enjoy the controversy they stir up.
I bail on the conversation because i was banned so many times on this forums. I just can not risk getting into debate. Also I think that the point was made and the number of posts in this topics do resonate with general feeling of the community
Fair enough I guess, though I don't find it particularly difficult to present my points without suffering the wrath of the ban hammer, try to keep the emotion out of it seems to work best for me anyways.
If you read the thread from end to end, (something I've actually done), you'll see a pretty strong split between those looking for virtual worlds vs those who want a more in and out experience.
While I'd love to see the two sides peacefully co-exist it will never happen, just too polarizing unfortunately.
Who ever said sandbox and themepark exclude each other ???
Even EVE has themepark missions and lot of themepark elements.
Bare in mind that themepark lovers eventually suffer from themepark game , because the content is always bound to come to the end. This is why sandbox is needed and perfectly also dynamically generated "themepark" missions
Missions that are created depending on your actions in the world.
For example if you have been killing lot of goblins, humans in the area decide you are "goblin slayer" and give you mission to kill goblin leader. This spawns goblin leader in goblin fortress and you (or others) can kill him.
I've been around the gaming community since it was first born. Every new game takes steps forward and back and makes sacrificies for numerous features. I can't say that I don't want a world to inhabit. This is why Ultima Online and similar games were so enjoyable to me.
I'd also like to thank Lobotomist for making thought provoking and interestings threads and posts since he joined this community. You're one of the very minute members who contributes to the very fundamental reason why forums exist. The sharing of ideas and the debates/arguments surrounding those ideas. Your posts are a pleasure to read.
Meh, I think of him more as more of a firestarter, he gets the threads burning but then bails on the conversation, apparently doesn't enjoy the controversy they stir up.
I bail on the conversation because i was banned so many times on this forums. I just can not risk getting into debate. Also I think that the point was made and the number of posts in this topics do resonate with general feeling of the community
Fair enough I guess, though I don't find it particularly difficult to present my points without suffering the wrath of the ban hammer, try to keep the emotion out of it seems to work best for me anyways.
If you read the thread from end to end, (something I've actually done), you'll see a pretty strong split between those looking for virtual worlds vs those who want a more in and out experience.
While I'd love to see the two sides peacefully co-exist it will never happen, just too polarizing unfortunately.
Who ever said sandbox and themepark exclude each other ???
Even EVE has themepark missions and lot of themepark elements.
Bare in mind that themepark lovers eventually suffer from themepark game , because the content is always bound to come to the end. This is why sandbox is needed and perfectly also dynamically generated "themepark" missions
Missions that are created depending on your actions in the world.
For example if you have been killing lot of goblins, humans in the area decide you are "goblin slayer" and give you mission to kill goblin leader. This spawns goblin leader in goblin fortress and you (or others) can kill him.
But then you get people complaining about the goblin killing grind they have to do to get the goblin leader quest and how unfair it is.
"It's a sandbox, if you are not willing to create a castle then all you have is sand" - jtcgs
I've been around the gaming community since it was first born. Every new game takes steps forward and back and makes sacrificies for numerous features. I can't say that I don't want a world to inhabit. This is why Ultima Online and similar games were so enjoyable to me.
I'd also like to thank Lobotomist for making thought provoking and interestings threads and posts since he joined this community. You're one of the very minute members who contributes to the very fundamental reason why forums exist. The sharing of ideas and the debates/arguments surrounding those ideas. Your posts are a pleasure to read.
Meh, I think of him more as more of a firestarter, he gets the threads burning but then bails on the conversation, apparently doesn't enjoy the controversy they stir up.
I bail on the conversation because i was banned so many times on this forums. I just can not risk getting into debate. Also I think that the point was made and the number of posts in this topics do resonate with general feeling of the community
Fair enough I guess, though I don't find it particularly difficult to present my points without suffering the wrath of the ban hammer, try to keep the emotion out of it seems to work best for me anyways.
If you read the thread from end to end, (something I've actually done), you'll see a pretty strong split between those looking for virtual worlds vs those who want a more in and out experience.
While I'd love to see the two sides peacefully co-exist it will never happen, just too polarizing unfortunately.
Who ever said sandbox and themepark exclude each other ???
Even EVE has themepark missions and lot of themepark elements.
Bare in mind that themepark lovers eventually suffer from themepark game , because the content is always bound to come to the end. This is why sandbox is needed and perfectly also dynamically generated "themepark" missions
Missions that are created depending on your actions in the world.
For example if you have been killing lot of goblins, humans in the area decide you are "goblin slayer" and give you mission to kill goblin leader. This spawns goblin leader in goblin fortress and you (or others) can kill him.
But then you get people complaining about the goblin killing grind they have to do to get the goblin leader quest and how unfair it is.
Who cares? Atleast it is there and they have the chance to do it. Better than not having it at all. Thats the problem with new mmo's they want everything fast and easy. Thats why we are complaining. If you cant take a minute and go kill some goblins when you are leveling to earn a title, you should just be handed a title
UO came out during a different time period. It's subscriptions were decent for the time. A big MMORPG was considered in the hundreds of thousands not millions. We were also on dial up and a lot less people were actually online back then.
WoW was a perfect storm of pulling masses from it's developers popular games, being more polished and more casual. It also had good marketing. Blizzard to a degree is the Apple of game developers. People buy their games because it's Blizzard and they have a loyal fan base. Or did at least.
For me to find MMORPG's was essentially looking for a multiplayer Ultima 7 or multiplayer mod. I found Ultima Online and have been hooked.
I am looking for a world. It seems to me the whole point of MMORPG. WoW was sucessful and we've had two semi failure AAA sandbox games and sandboxes have been dropped almost altogether. Of course it ignores all of the failed WoW clones. It's a waste that nobody is trying to make these games.
These days 99% of MMORPG's are soloable in every aspect outside of PVP/mini raids. The reason being is it seems the easest thing to do is make a single player style game with other players and WoW quest hubs and change the skins and a couple of gimicks. It's made most MMORPG's unsubscribeable and free to play mostly is annoying. It's to the point that even EQ1 is considered sandboxy. EQ1 is a sandbox. The world was very static, but it was a pure MMORPG.
I want player housing, player shops, crafting areas. A world designed to feel like a world not a leveling step stone. Give me interdependance where other players need each other. Bah it's all been said before. Just want something different that's not total crap. I'd support a sandbox that's done well but they are few and far between.
Who ever said sandbox and themepark exclude each other ???
Even EVE has themepark missions and lot of themepark elements.
Bare in mind that themepark lovers eventually suffer from themepark game , because the content is always bound to come to the end. This is why sandbox is needed and perfectly also dynamically generated "themepark" missions
Missions that are created depending on your actions in the world.
For example if you have been killing lot of goblins, humans in the area decide you are "goblin slayer" and give you mission to kill goblin leader. This spawns goblin leader in goblin fortress and you (or others) can kill him.
Suffer? Suffer?! What bullshit is this? No one suffers! Everything ends. It doesn't make it bad or worse.
Also, generated quests kill the story element. You can't make them or mask them well enough to not feel like generated. I can't feel attached or interested in something like that. It is bound to feel like a grind after a short while once you figure how things work.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Who ever said sandbox and themepark exclude each other ???
Even EVE has themepark missions and lot of themepark elements.
Bare in mind that themepark lovers eventually suffer from themepark game , because the content is always bound to come to the end. This is why sandbox is needed and perfectly also dynamically generated "themepark" missions
Missions that are created depending on your actions in the world.
For example if you have been killing lot of goblins, humans in the area decide you are "goblin slayer" and give you mission to kill goblin leader. This spawns goblin leader in goblin fortress and you (or others) can kill him.
Suffer? Suffer?! What bullshit is this? No one suffers! Everything ends. It doesn't make it bad or worse.
Also, generated quests kill the story element. You can't make them or mask them well enough to not feel like generated. I can't feel attached or interested in something like that. It is bound to feel like a grind after a short while once you figure how things work.
Arent you one of the themepark junkies? Most all themepark quests are generated lol. Everytime you restart or make a new character, its the exact same quest = boring.
I've been around the gaming community since it was first born. Every new game takes steps forward and back and makes sacrificies for numerous features. I can't say that I don't want a world to inhabit. This is why Ultima Online and similar games were so enjoyable to me.
I'd also like to thank Lobotomist for making thought provoking and interestings threads and posts since he joined this community. You're one of the very minute members who contributes to the very fundamental reason why forums exist. The sharing of ideas and the debates/arguments surrounding those ideas. Your posts are a pleasure to read.
Meh, I think of him more as more of a firestarter, he gets the threads burning but then bails on the conversation, apparently doesn't enjoy the controversy they stir up.
I bail on the conversation because i was banned so many times on this forums. I just can not risk getting into debate. Also I think that the point was made and the number of posts in this topics do resonate with general feeling of the community
Fair enough I guess, though I don't find it particularly difficult to present my points without suffering the wrath of the ban hammer, try to keep the emotion out of it seems to work best for me anyways.
If you read the thread from end to end, (something I've actually done), you'll see a pretty strong split between those looking for virtual worlds vs those who want a more in and out experience.
While I'd love to see the two sides peacefully co-exist it will never happen, just too polarizing unfortunately.
Who ever said sandbox and themepark exclude each other ???
Even EVE has themepark missions and lot of themepark elements.
Bare in mind that themepark lovers eventually suffer from themepark game , because the content is always bound to come to the end. This is why sandbox is needed and perfectly also dynamically generated "themepark" missions
Missions that are created depending on your actions in the world.
For example if you have been killing lot of goblins, humans in the area decide you are "goblin slayer" and give you mission to kill goblin leader. This spawns goblin leader in goblin fortress and you (or others) can kill him.
Er, who was talking about sandbox vs themepark? I was talking about virtual worlds vs MMO "games" and a theme park game can certainly be a reasonable approximation of a virtual world, DAOC was one such title back in the day. (so much so many people argue it was a sandbox instead)
Reading further, maybe you meant to reply to someone else's post?
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
Er, who was talking about sandbox vs themepark? I was talking about virtual worlds vs MMO "games" and a theme park game can certainly be a reasonable approximation of a virtual world, DAOC was one such title back in the day. (so much so many people argue it was a sandbox instead)
Reading further, maybe you meant to reply to someone else's post?
Themeparks back in the day, sure! They were good, close to a sandbox almost. Today's themeparks........... seriously?
Themeparks back in the day had larger worlds, more features, a meaning, and some freedom (not like a sandbox). They were decent games.
Originally posted by Lobotomist Who ever said sandbox and themepark exclude each other ???Even EVE has themepark missions and lot of themepark elements. Bare in mind that themepark lovers eventually suffer from themepark game , because the content is always bound to come to the end. This is why sandbox is needed and perfectly also dynamically generated "themepark" missionsMissions that are created depending on your actions in the world.For example if you have been killing lot of goblins, humans in the area decide you are "goblin slayer" and give you mission to kill goblin leader. This spawns goblin leader in goblin fortress and you (or others) can kill him.
The theme park vs sandbox thing is because this is MMORPG.com.
That sounds like something that would work really well as a single player mechanic, but wouldn't scale well to many players. There would be player not only killed the goblins, but also the skeletons, ogres, trolls, deer, demons, dragons, ghosts, rabbits, bats, (you get where I'm going here, right?), etc. The system can't keep up with the players killing stuff. Even worse, players figure out how to manipulate the system so you get players helping the goblins over run the continent.
The idea is cool, but getting it to work in a large scale multiplayer setting sounds a bit tricky (to me). Now...small scale games with personal servers...yeah, that would work. But then I think a lot of developers who released their games as MMORPG should have released them as single player/personal server games anyway.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
As long as $$$ made in 'sandbox' is smaller than 'themeparks', sandbox will be a niche.
I always ask topic makers this question; if you like 'sandbox' MMOs do you spend $$$ on sandbox MMOs?
I would be more than happy to if there was one out there that had been made with a decent budget. Eve isn't my thing, as I am not into being the ship. I like having an avatar.
So which decent sized company is going to make a sandbox MMO when the $$$ just isn't there?
It has to start somewhere.
Can we see a company make a huge risky investment? Maybe.
Will that company see a return? Probably not, when your best $$$ sandbox MMO is EVE with 300k-400k subs, it just doesn't make good business sense.
Eve has 300-400k subs because it is a small niche sandbox people dont like being a space ship they need characters they relate to. If a Sandbox was made as well as Eve in a good Fantasy world, the subs would be well beyond that, and by the way 300-400k subs is good money. Just cuz it isnt WoW doesnt make it any less successful and financially in the black. Also. SOE(Decent sized Company) is making EQ Next which is a Sandbox game in fact boasted that it is going to be the largest sandbox game ever made.
Originally posted by Banaghran Originally posted by lizardbonesAnyway, their peak users had to be at least a million. They had a million accounts as of the pre-order period just before launch. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/108017-Rift-Tops-the-One-Million-Account-Mark. They could have had five people playing one month later, but they sold at least a million boxes before they went global.
You can have an account even without paying for the game. This is the same argument back from the rift forums, if rift would EVER have a million live subs, do you think Trion would have kept it a SECRET, just so that a few guys could argue over it on teh internetz?
That was really my only problem with your post, even if i stupidly commented on the box price vs sub number thing.
You may carry on bashing purist sandboxes. I made my point sufficiently clear a few pages back when you argued with yourself
Flame on!
Bah! Duped by verbiage! In any event, pick any two of the following games: Rift, SWToR, GW2, AoC, WarHammer, and you'll get a significantly bigger number of peak players than UO + SWG + Eve. The most popular games, judged by peak players are not sandboxes.
What is your point, exactly?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by Saryhl Originally posted by jpnzOriginally posted by TraugarOriginally posted by jpnzAs long as $$$ made in 'sandbox' is smaller than 'themeparks', sandbox will be a niche.I always ask topic makers this question; if you like 'sandbox' MMOs do you spend $$$ on sandbox MMOs?
I would be more than happy to if there was one out there that had been made with a decent budget. Eve isn't my thing, as I am not into being the ship. I like having an avatar. So which decent sized company is going to make a sandbox MMO when the $$$ just isn't there?It has to start somewhere.Can we see a company make a huge risky investment? Maybe.Will that company see a return? Probably not, when your best $$$ sandbox MMO is EVE with 300k-400k subs, it just doesn't make good business sense.Eve has 300-400k subs because it is a small niche sandbox people dont like being a space ship they need characters they relate to. If a Sandbox was made as well as Eve in a good Fantasy world, the subs would be well beyond that, and by the way 300-400k subs is good money. Just cuz it isnt WoW doesnt make it any less successful and financially in the black. Also. SOE(Decent sized Company) is making EQ Next which is a Sandbox game in fact boasted that it is going to be the largest sandbox game ever made.
There's always an excuse as to why sandboxes aren't more popular than they are right now. It's always, "If only..." with some set of perfect circumstances that would make sandbox games incredibly successful.
In the meantime, theme parks have been half @ssing it since before SWG and raking in the money.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by jpnzAs long as $$$ made in 'sandbox' is smaller than 'themeparks', sandbox will be a niche.I always ask topic makers this question; if you like 'sandbox' MMOs do you spend $$$ on sandbox MMOs?
I would be more than happy to if there was one out there that had been made with a decent budget. Eve isn't my thing, as I am not into being the ship. I like having an avatar.
So which decent sized company is going to make a sandbox MMO when the $$$ just isn't there?It has to start somewhere.Can we see a company make a huge risky investment? Maybe.Will that company see a return? Probably not, when your best $$$ sandbox MMO is EVE with 300k-400k subs, it just doesn't make good business sense.
Eve has 300-400k subs because it is a small niche sandbox people dont like being a space ship they need characters they relate to. If a Sandbox was made as well as Eve in a good Fantasy world, the subs would be well beyond that, and by the way 300-400k subs is good money. Just cuz it isnt WoW doesnt make it any less successful and financially in the black. Also. SOE(Decent sized Company) is making EQ Next which is a Sandbox game in fact boasted that it is going to be the largest sandbox game ever made.
There's always an excuse as to why sandboxes aren't more popular than they are right now. It's always, "If only..." with some set of perfect circumstances that would make sandbox games incredibly successful.
In the meantime, theme parks have been half @ssing it since before SWG and raking in the money.
If not popular then why are 9 of them coming out soon? Some are AAA as well. Fact is themeparks have become worse and had their day. Now things will progress in a different direction. Bet you half of those will do better than the last 50 themeparks, because since Rift......... none have been worthy. So 1 out of 100 themeparks amount to anything, and this is your arguement for why themeparks are better and shouldnt change? Because im confused. I want a real mmo, an epic game with a massive world. Most you guys attacking sandboxes want the opposite.
People think we 'vets' are looking at the past with rose colored glasses. Frankly, I just see history repeating.
The reason MMOs became so huge in the first decade of the 2000's is because traditional action-adventure titles were so bad.
Back in those days, action-adventure games and linear RPs were the capital ships of the software publishing world. In the 90's, they replaced the platformers as the game of choice to represent the pinnacle of computer entertainment as art. But at the dawn of the 21st century, the genre was, quite frankly, tired.
Game studios like Eidos, Crystal Dynamics, Square-Enix and Capcom did little more than push out sequals to overworked IPs, which you'd spend $50 on, finish in a weekend, and have nothing to do but dive into the next overworked sequal. If you don't believe me, dust off a copy of Silent Hill III, or Resident Evil III, or Blood Omen 2, or Metal Gear Solid 2. I still do from time to time, just for the nostalgia. But after I finish, it goes back in the closet to grab three or four more years worth of dust.
Graphics on those games were great. But the gameplay was just too limited. We could fight, pick up skills, and pick up gear, but there was nothing beyond that. No artistic outlet. No avenue for thought.
Ultima Online, Everquest, DAoC and SWG--all those MMOs--gave us something more. They gave us all the usual fare we'd expect, but they'd give us roles to play in the economy. They'd give us avenues to express ourselves. They gave us new things to explore. They gave us reasons to keep playing, rather than just chuck the thing in the corner after we finished it.
Now I can't speak for anyone else, but the reason I dumped the big studios and went to MMOs is that they gave me many games in one game. It was an adventure game, but it was also a player versus player combat game, a roleplaying game, an economic game and a building set. It was like going into a toychest full of fun, rather than just one toy. It wasn't a genre that was tired, like the action-adventure and RP genres at the time. It was doing everything those old dogs did, and a whole lot more, for a whole lot less money.
Today, it's sad to say that the roles are reversed. This genre, the MMO genre, is the one that's tired. It gives you one thing--combat--and hasn't bothered to give you anything else very well. The worlds are dry, the games are small, they are consumed within weeks and are discarded. They are also expensive. They take great pains to extract all kinds of wealth from you in an attempt to "make the game your own."
And the action-adventure genre? The one that was tired in the early 2000s? That gives you more of what MMOs used to give you than MMOs now do. I played the Arkham games, Elder Scrolls, Fallout 3--and a whole lot of others. They have big worlds. Interesting side pursuits. They have pay content, it's true, but you just seem to get more from them. And, best of all, if you like them, they don't go *poof* on you whenever a publisher thinks they aren't making enough (like CoH).
So if you all are wondering excatly where folks like Lobotomist and Beatnik59 and Elikal are coming from, I think you ought to consider that this genre used to be more than just combat and quest consumption and gearing up. Frankly, you don't need an MMO to get served that formula. But MMOs have the capacity to give you many games in one game, for the person who liked many games.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Originally posted by Onomas Originally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by SaryhlOriginally posted by jpnzOriginally posted by TraugarOriginally posted by jpnzAs long as $$$ made in 'sandbox' is smaller than 'themeparks', sandbox will be a niche.I always ask topic makers this question; if you like 'sandbox' MMOs do you spend $$$ on sandbox MMOs?
I would be more than happy to if there was one out there that had been made with a decent budget. Eve isn't my thing, as I am not into being the ship. I like having an avatar. So which decent sized company is going to make a sandbox MMO when the $$$ just isn't there?It has to start somewhere.Can we see a company make a huge risky investment? Maybe.Will that company see a return? Probably not, when your best $$$ sandbox MMO is EVE with 300k-400k subs, it just doesn't make good business sense.Eve has 300-400k subs because it is a small niche sandbox people dont like being a space ship they need characters they relate to. If a Sandbox was made as well as Eve in a good Fantasy world, the subs would be well beyond that, and by the way 300-400k subs is good money. Just cuz it isnt WoW doesnt make it any less successful and financially in the black. Also. SOE(Decent sized Company) is making EQ Next which is a Sandbox game in fact boasted that it is going to be the largest sandbox game ever made. There's always an excuse as to why sandboxes aren't more popular than they are right now. It's always, "If only..." with some set of perfect circumstances that would make sandbox games incredibly successful. In the meantime, theme parks have been half @ssing it since before SWG and raking in the money. If not popular then why are 9 of them coming out soon? Some are AAA as well. Fact is themeparks have become worse and had their day. Now things will progress in a different direction. Bet you half of those will do better than the last 50 themeparks, because since Rift......... none have been worthy. So 1 out of 100 themeparks amount to anything, and this is your arguement for why themeparks are better and shouldnt change? Because im confused. I want a real mmo, an epic game with a massive world. Most you guys attacking sandboxes want the opposite.
Nine sandboxes? I'd like to see that list, if you please. No, really, I'd like to see the list because I don't want to miss what might be a good game.
If there are sandboxes being made, then the publishers believe there's a financial reason to do so. I can think of a few reasons that have nothing to do with past sandbox performance.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Dragons Prophet (sounds like they are going sandbox style) Thats 2 games SOE are making snadboxes Told you a change was coming :P
Age of Wushu (but think this is a hybrid, havent read much into it)
Embers of Caerus
Origins of Malu
Theres 10, need a few more? Some of these look damn good, and some have so called "themepark/hybrid" additions to them. But in general are sandbox games. Because honestly i think its stupid to call a sandbox a hybrid just because its got story, quests, and other stuff that normaly come with sandboxes lol.
Dragons Prophet (sounds like they are going sandbox style) Thats 2 games SOE are making snadboxes Told you a change was coming :P
Age of Wushu (but think this is a hybrid, havent read much into it)
Embers of Caerus
Origins of Malu
Theres 10, need a few more? Some of these look damn good, and some have so called "themepark/hybrid" additions to them. But in general are sandbox games. Because honestly i think its stupid to call a sandbox a hybrid just because its got story, quests, and other stuff that normaly come with sandboxes lol.
Salem
Relics of Annorath
Pathfinder Online
Citadel of Sorcery
Star Citizen
Elite Dangerous
Infinity
Miner Wars
LinkRealms
Project Theralon
World Of Darkness
Earthrise reboot (whenever that happens)
Newer iteration of Xsyon
also the slew of Minecraft inspired voxel games on the horizion, a few of which have MMO aspirations
there's prob like 3-5 others at least that i can't remember the names of. there's definitely a paradigm shift on a thinking/planning level. probably a number of these will never be released, but the fact people are thinking differently now is an important change.
also lets not forget whats happened in the past few years. basically there was ALMOST no games of this type for around 13 years then....
Darkfall
Mortal Online
Perpetuum Online
Love
Vendetta Online? (i THINK this fits, dunno)
Earthrise
Xsyon
Battlestar Galactica Online? (dunno if this fits, dunno much about it)
APB
Wurm Online
Haven & Hearth
...and it seems there's a few others i've forgotten about. so its a change thats already underway.
and for the extremely repetitive obsessive forum spammers that think it's their life duty to "correct" everyone....
....yes i'm well aware that none of these games were a big success, and yes they were forgettable for many reasons, the reasons have been discussed to death already, blah blah blah, cliche cliche cliche...... ITS NOT MY POINT HERE. go start another thread about it elsewhere instead of acting like you are gonna "inform" me about such things.
Comments
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
sandboxers should be able to ignore themparkish aspects they dont like and play a game, if they chose to do so.... but themeparkers cant "make believe" themepark elements in to a game.
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
"It's a sandbox, if you are not willing to create a castle then all you have is sand" - jtcgs
You can have an account even without paying for the game. This is the same argument back from the rift forums, if rift would EVER have a million live subs, do you think Trion would have kept it a SECRET, just so that a few guys could argue over it on teh internetz?
That was really my only problem with your post, even if i stupidly commented on the box price vs sub number thing.
You may carry on bashing purist sandboxes. I made my point sufficiently clear a few pages back when you argued with yourself
Flame on!
Dear World of Darkness,
Please hurry.
Thanks.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
Archeage
Black Desert
The Repopulation
EQNext
Greed Monger (though im starting to lean away from this one)
And few others as well
Never seen so many sandboxes getting ready to explode on the market. We will see changes soon enough.
My main problem with themepark junkies is they want their games easy and linear. Fine, ok. But they can play that way in a sandbox. A sandbox junkie can not play their way in a modern new age themepark. There is no way, because there is no depth or freedom.
And its sad they are satisfied with suck low balling games its not even funny. Better to have and not use, than not to have and want it. MMO's have gone backwards, and many can not see this. Even see some hardcore themepark players in here wanting more now. Even themeparks from 4-6 years ago were three times the game that most new release themeparks are.
Its not a matter of themepark vs sandbox, but a matter of poor game vs a real epic mmo. That is what most of us want. Well minus that one that thinkgs all games should be MOBA and lobby style LOL.
I would like an MMO where you can walk for days and build a house or town in some remote part of the world if I want to. I would like it to be a mixture of UO and SWG, with as much, if not more complexity to all aspects of the game. I'd also like there to be castles, moats and land control, battles with seige eqiupment and 1000's of players on screen without the server or my PC taking a dump. Also aim based combat with no tab targetting.
If you can have that ready for next year that'd be great.
YOU don't want games; YOU want worlds.
I want games. I already live in a perfectly acceptable, functional and rewarding world as it is.
Who ever said sandbox and themepark exclude each other ???
Even EVE has themepark missions and lot of themepark elements.
Bare in mind that themepark lovers eventually suffer from themepark game , because the content is always bound to come to the end. This is why sandbox is needed and perfectly also dynamically generated "themepark" missions
Missions that are created depending on your actions in the world.
For example if you have been killing lot of goblins, humans in the area decide you are "goblin slayer" and give you mission to kill goblin leader. This spawns goblin leader in goblin fortress and you (or others) can kill him.
But then you get people complaining about the goblin killing grind they have to do to get the goblin leader quest and how unfair it is.
"It's a sandbox, if you are not willing to create a castle then all you have is sand" - jtcgs
Who cares? Atleast it is there and they have the chance to do it. Better than not having it at all. Thats the problem with new mmo's they want everything fast and easy. Thats why we are complaining. If you cant take a minute and go kill some goblins when you are leveling to earn a title, you should just be handed a title
UO came out during a different time period. It's subscriptions were decent for the time. A big MMORPG was considered in the hundreds of thousands not millions. We were also on dial up and a lot less people were actually online back then.
WoW was a perfect storm of pulling masses from it's developers popular games, being more polished and more casual. It also had good marketing. Blizzard to a degree is the Apple of game developers. People buy their games because it's Blizzard and they have a loyal fan base. Or did at least.
For me to find MMORPG's was essentially looking for a multiplayer Ultima 7 or multiplayer mod. I found Ultima Online and have been hooked.
I am looking for a world. It seems to me the whole point of MMORPG. WoW was sucessful and we've had two semi failure AAA sandbox games and sandboxes have been dropped almost altogether. Of course it ignores all of the failed WoW clones. It's a waste that nobody is trying to make these games.
These days 99% of MMORPG's are soloable in every aspect outside of PVP/mini raids. The reason being is it seems the easest thing to do is make a single player style game with other players and WoW quest hubs and change the skins and a couple of gimicks. It's made most MMORPG's unsubscribeable and free to play mostly is annoying. It's to the point that even EQ1 is considered sandboxy. EQ1 is a sandbox. The world was very static, but it was a pure MMORPG.
I want player housing, player shops, crafting areas. A world designed to feel like a world not a leveling step stone. Give me interdependance where other players need each other. Bah it's all been said before. Just want something different that's not total crap. I'd support a sandbox that's done well but they are few and far between.
Suffer? Suffer?! What bullshit is this? No one suffers! Everything ends. It doesn't make it bad or worse.
Also, generated quests kill the story element. You can't make them or mask them well enough to not feel like generated. I can't feel attached or interested in something like that. It is bound to feel like a grind after a short while once you figure how things work.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Arent you one of the themepark junkies? Most all themepark quests are generated lol. Everytime you restart or make a new character, its the exact same quest = boring.
Er, who was talking about sandbox vs themepark? I was talking about virtual worlds vs MMO "games" and a theme park game can certainly be a reasonable approximation of a virtual world, DAOC was one such title back in the day. (so much so many people argue it was a sandbox instead)
Reading further, maybe you meant to reply to someone else's post?
"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
Themeparks back in the day, sure! They were good, close to a sandbox almost. Today's themeparks........... seriously?
Themeparks back in the day had larger worlds, more features, a meaning, and some freedom (not like a sandbox). They were decent games.
Today? No, not even close.
The theme park vs sandbox thing is because this is MMORPG.com.
That sounds like something that would work really well as a single player mechanic, but wouldn't scale well to many players. There would be player not only killed the goblins, but also the skeletons, ogres, trolls, deer, demons, dragons, ghosts, rabbits, bats, (you get where I'm going here, right?), etc. The system can't keep up with the players killing stuff. Even worse, players figure out how to manipulate the system so you get players helping the goblins over run the continent.
The idea is cool, but getting it to work in a large scale multiplayer setting sounds a bit tricky (to me). Now...small scale games with personal servers...yeah, that would work. But then I think a lot of developers who released their games as MMORPG should have released them as single player/personal server games anyway.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Eve has 300-400k subs because it is a small niche sandbox people dont like being a space ship they need characters they relate to. If a Sandbox was made as well as Eve in a good Fantasy world, the subs would be well beyond that, and by the way 300-400k subs is good money. Just cuz it isnt WoW doesnt make it any less successful and financially in the black. Also. SOE(Decent sized Company) is making EQ Next which is a Sandbox game in fact boasted that it is going to be the largest sandbox game ever made.
That was really my only problem with your post, even if i stupidly commented on the box price vs sub number thing.
You may carry on bashing purist sandboxes. I made my point sufficiently clear a few pages back when you argued with yourself
Flame on!
Bah! Duped by verbiage! In any event, pick any two of the following games: Rift, SWToR, GW2, AoC, WarHammer, and you'll get a significantly bigger number of peak players than UO + SWG + Eve. The most popular games, judged by peak players are not sandboxes.
What is your point, exactly?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
So which decent sized company is going to make a sandbox MMO when the $$$ just isn't there? It has to start somewhere. Can we see a company make a huge risky investment? Maybe. Will that company see a return? Probably not, when your best $$$ sandbox MMO is EVE with 300k-400k subs, it just doesn't make good business sense.
Eve has 300-400k subs because it is a small niche sandbox people dont like being a space ship they need characters they relate to. If a Sandbox was made as well as Eve in a good Fantasy world, the subs would be well beyond that, and by the way 300-400k subs is good money. Just cuz it isnt WoW doesnt make it any less successful and financially in the black. Also. SOE(Decent sized Company) is making EQ Next which is a Sandbox game in fact boasted that it is going to be the largest sandbox game ever made.
There's always an excuse as to why sandboxes aren't more popular than they are right now. It's always, "If only..." with some set of perfect circumstances that would make sandbox games incredibly successful.
In the meantime, theme parks have been half @ssing it since before SWG and raking in the money.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
If not popular then why are 9 of them coming out soon? Some are AAA as well. Fact is themeparks have become worse and had their day. Now things will progress in a different direction. Bet you half of those will do better than the last 50 themeparks, because since Rift......... none have been worthy. So 1 out of 100 themeparks amount to anything, and this is your arguement for why themeparks are better and shouldnt change? Because im confused. I want a real mmo, an epic game with a massive world. Most you guys attacking sandboxes want the opposite.
People think we 'vets' are looking at the past with rose colored glasses. Frankly, I just see history repeating.
The reason MMOs became so huge in the first decade of the 2000's is because traditional action-adventure titles were so bad.
Back in those days, action-adventure games and linear RPs were the capital ships of the software publishing world. In the 90's, they replaced the platformers as the game of choice to represent the pinnacle of computer entertainment as art. But at the dawn of the 21st century, the genre was, quite frankly, tired.
Game studios like Eidos, Crystal Dynamics, Square-Enix and Capcom did little more than push out sequals to overworked IPs, which you'd spend $50 on, finish in a weekend, and have nothing to do but dive into the next overworked sequal. If you don't believe me, dust off a copy of Silent Hill III, or Resident Evil III, or Blood Omen 2, or Metal Gear Solid 2. I still do from time to time, just for the nostalgia. But after I finish, it goes back in the closet to grab three or four more years worth of dust.
Graphics on those games were great. But the gameplay was just too limited. We could fight, pick up skills, and pick up gear, but there was nothing beyond that. No artistic outlet. No avenue for thought.
Ultima Online, Everquest, DAoC and SWG--all those MMOs--gave us something more. They gave us all the usual fare we'd expect, but they'd give us roles to play in the economy. They'd give us avenues to express ourselves. They gave us new things to explore. They gave us reasons to keep playing, rather than just chuck the thing in the corner after we finished it.
Now I can't speak for anyone else, but the reason I dumped the big studios and went to MMOs is that they gave me many games in one game. It was an adventure game, but it was also a player versus player combat game, a roleplaying game, an economic game and a building set. It was like going into a toychest full of fun, rather than just one toy. It wasn't a genre that was tired, like the action-adventure and RP genres at the time. It was doing everything those old dogs did, and a whole lot more, for a whole lot less money.
Today, it's sad to say that the roles are reversed. This genre, the MMO genre, is the one that's tired. It gives you one thing--combat--and hasn't bothered to give you anything else very well. The worlds are dry, the games are small, they are consumed within weeks and are discarded. They are also expensive. They take great pains to extract all kinds of wealth from you in an attempt to "make the game your own."
And the action-adventure genre? The one that was tired in the early 2000s? That gives you more of what MMOs used to give you than MMOs now do. I played the Arkham games, Elder Scrolls, Fallout 3--and a whole lot of others. They have big worlds. Interesting side pursuits. They have pay content, it's true, but you just seem to get more from them. And, best of all, if you like them, they don't go *poof* on you whenever a publisher thinks they aren't making enough (like CoH).
So if you all are wondering excatly where folks like Lobotomist and Beatnik59 and Elikal are coming from, I think you ought to consider that this genre used to be more than just combat and quest consumption and gearing up. Frankly, you don't need an MMO to get served that formula. But MMOs have the capacity to give you many games in one game, for the person who liked many games.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
So which decent sized company is going to make a sandbox MMO when the $$$ just isn't there? It has to start somewhere. Can we see a company make a huge risky investment? Maybe. Will that company see a return? Probably not, when your best $$$ sandbox MMO is EVE with 300k-400k subs, it just doesn't make good business sense.
Eve has 300-400k subs because it is a small niche sandbox people dont like being a space ship they need characters they relate to. If a Sandbox was made as well as Eve in a good Fantasy world, the subs would be well beyond that, and by the way 300-400k subs is good money. Just cuz it isnt WoW doesnt make it any less successful and financially in the black. Also. SOE(Decent sized Company) is making EQ Next which is a Sandbox game in fact boasted that it is going to be the largest sandbox game ever made.
There's always an excuse as to why sandboxes aren't more popular than they are right now. It's always, "If only..." with some set of perfect circumstances that would make sandbox games incredibly successful. In the meantime, theme parks have been half @ssing it since before SWG and raking in the money.
If not popular then why are 9 of them coming out soon? Some are AAA as well. Fact is themeparks have become worse and had their day. Now things will progress in a different direction. Bet you half of those will do better than the last 50 themeparks, because since Rift......... none have been worthy. So 1 out of 100 themeparks amount to anything, and this is your arguement for why themeparks are better and shouldnt change? Because im confused. I want a real mmo, an epic game with a massive world. Most you guys attacking sandboxes want the opposite.
Nine sandboxes? I'd like to see that list, if you please. No, really, I'd like to see the list because I don't want to miss what might be a good game.
If there are sandboxes being made, then the publishers believe there's a financial reason to do so. I can think of a few reasons that have nothing to do with past sandbox performance.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
EQNext
The repopulation
Archeage
Greed Monger
The Black Desert
Dark Fall 2/UW
Dragons Prophet (sounds like they are going sandbox style) Thats 2 games SOE are making snadboxes
Told you a change was coming :P
Age of Wushu (but think this is a hybrid, havent read much into it)
Embers of Caerus
Origins of Malu
Theres 10, need a few more? Some of these look damn good, and some have so called "themepark/hybrid" additions to them. But in general are sandbox games. Because honestly i think its stupid to call a sandbox a hybrid just because its got story, quests, and other stuff that normaly come with sandboxes lol.
Salem
Relics of Annorath
Pathfinder Online
Citadel of Sorcery
Star Citizen
Elite Dangerous
Infinity
Miner Wars
LinkRealms
Project Theralon
World Of Darkness
Earthrise reboot (whenever that happens)
Newer iteration of Xsyon
also the slew of Minecraft inspired voxel games on the horizion, a few of which have MMO aspirations
there's prob like 3-5 others at least that i can't remember the names of. there's definitely a paradigm shift on a thinking/planning level. probably a number of these will never be released, but the fact people are thinking differently now is an important change.
also lets not forget whats happened in the past few years. basically there was ALMOST no games of this type for around 13 years then....
Darkfall
Mortal Online
Perpetuum Online
Love
Vendetta Online? (i THINK this fits, dunno)
Earthrise
Xsyon
Battlestar Galactica Online? (dunno if this fits, dunno much about it)
APB
Wurm Online
Haven & Hearth
...and it seems there's a few others i've forgotten about. so its a change thats already underway.
and for the extremely repetitive obsessive forum spammers that think it's their life duty to "correct" everyone....
....yes i'm well aware that none of these games were a big success, and yes they were forgettable for many reasons, the reasons have been discussed to death already, blah blah blah, cliche cliche cliche...... ITS NOT MY POINT HERE. go start another thread about it elsewhere instead of acting like you are gonna "inform" me about such things.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------