It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Caliburn101 ... that the focus came so hard onto making a recreation of DAoC PvP and in the process lost track of a central strength of the IP is just bad design.
Bad design, or not your ideal design? Bad design would implicate that the design goes against the game-play that they are trying to create.
We all know there are three home realms, we all know they are divided by allegiance. Those realms play as home turf to each respective side, they will be off limits to everyone else. Many people who begrudge this design have it in their head that means exploration is lost. Fair enough, it's a fair gripe, but not exactly the truth of the matter, as to say there is no possibility for exploration within the game.
Quite to the contrary at least regarding official game marketing. They call their quest system exploration based, you have to explore to find these quests, well supposedly. What does that say exactly..Or. at least hint at? To me it would require expansive world design. How else would you fit a significant amount of "exploration" quests into an area?
I don't think it's a secret that a major facet of this design is to solidify a peaceful PVE leveling area. Many will begrudge this idea as well, and that's their choice to make if they prefer FFA PVP, or having all areas open. That does not mean that this gives them governance over what is bad or good game design. Simply put it's this type of attitude that creates many of these divides we see around here.
If the goal is to create safe, carefree adventuring to no peril but the Ai's, this is an ideal design to offer that type of experience.
You could argue that their design favors one franchise over another, yet, I really do not feel that's a fair assesment based on all info out there.
It's the meat of the experience that is most important to this logic. Will a majority play as they do a typical PVE experience or will they find themselves in PVP for most of their time? We do not really know this at present. What will the overall game-play experience feel like? ANother thing we do not know.
Based on marketing we know they will have closer combat to TES than DAOC, we know the lore will be based around TES, we know they want to capture a TES feel to the environments allocated. We do not know the size or design of these individual lands.. We do not know how they will incorporate TES lore into the experience, Books? WHat about dungeon design? Closer to TES or DAOC?
There's a lot to consider on the subject of capturing a TES feel.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
That title will never work. A TRUE SANDBOX mmo everything is created by the players. They run the market they gather the supplies there are no Npc's the players have to get everything. The reason this game could never exist is because all the players would be farmers and miners. Not to mention that It can't have a learning guide of any sort because that interferes with how the players learn and control the game.
Now personally as far as sandbox like mmorpgs that are being released Arche Age will probably be the most successful. Which is why I am waiting for it.
The Arcade Corner
The Daily Exposition
Originally posted by PyrateLV Originally posted by Rthuth434 ...OR... because for the millionth time a shot caller who use to be at Mythic did what Mythic does best, rehash their old work.
As they say in the courtroom, Res Ipsa loquitur.
Everyone likes to act like their is some grand reason behind why the devs do what they do, the truth is fairly simple, sandbox isa risk, could fall flat on its face, something they have done before but deviates slightly from the beaten path is safe, and could make a quick cash grab in sales.
Quotations Those Who make peaceful resolutions impossible, make violent resolutions inevitable. John F. Kennedy
Life... is the shit that happens while you wait for moments that never come - Lester Freeman
Lie to no one. If there 's somebody close to you, you'll ruin it with a lie. If they're a stranger, who the fuck are they you gotta lie to them? - Willy Nelson
Originally posted by Rthuth434 ...OR... because for the millionth time a shot caller who use to be at Mythic did what Mythic does best, rehash their old work.
Sandbox games are actually really terrible for the vast majority of gamers who want something more fun, more filling, and more user-friendly. Its hella lot more fun to actually play a good game rather then get bogged down in hideous development principles that do nothing more other then to slow the game down keeping you playing.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by azzamasin Originally posted by Rthuth434 ...OR... because for the millionth time a shot caller who use to be at Mythic did what Mythic does best, rehash their old work.
Oh yes, because a linear joke of an mmo, with extremely limited player and world interaction, no control over economy & politics, on-rails gaming experience, cookie-cutter classes and roles, worthless crafting and 100% combat centric is the paramount of a fun and filling experience. Some fanbois are taking their defence of the themepark scheme to unreal levels.
I wonder: why, oh why didn't you stay in your console, arcade or instant gratification type of games? Why did you have to come to the RPG genre and ask to dumb it down and linearize it and erase systems from it and ruin the whole bloody genre and devaluate the rpg concept for the rest of us?
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Originally posted by Jetrpg Originally posted by sapphen Originally posted by Jetrpg Originally posted by Rthuth434 ...OR... because for the millionth time a shot caller who use to be at Mythic did what Mythic does best, rehash their old work.
I have and its less similar to daoc than war or gw2 was....
mythic track record as follows:
1. release text based online game called Darkness Falls
2. on the wave of EQ fame and 3D MMO being ushered in make a full 3D rehash of Darkness Falls and call it Dark Age of Camelot
3. Be absorbed by EA at some point, some people split.
4.(cumulative rehashings of ideas by the various guys who were at mythic and who still are) Rehash DaoC in the warhammer IP/rehash DAoC in a new IP called dominus that never sees daylight/rehash a part of DAoC in the GW IP/rehash DAoC in the elder scrolls IP
5. kickstart a new game which is a rehash of on part of DAoC
maybe not exact clones, but they're all rehashes and DAoC was a rehash of their text based game Darkness Falls.
Originally posted by Zaskar70
it was no longer a true sandbox for there was no player vs. player allowed, you could live in absolute security and thus the great experiment ended and the first true sandbox game had failed.
There are people who would argue that this point does not make a sandbox game.
Originally posted by Gravarg I've said it many times, you can't have a full loot pvp sandbox these days. It seems the overwhelming majority of players these days play without honor. You'll never see a big police guild that will help people get thier body and gear back anymore. You'll have capped players killing lower levels to steal thier stuff. The lower level players will quit. Then the higher level players will quit because there's noone to kill. It's the fundamental flaw of full loot pvp.
When did being a Sandbox game automatically equate with Full Loot PvP?
They arent mutually inclusive.
Its entirely possible to create a Sandbox game with segregated PvP areas.
Bringer of Eternal Darkness and Despair, but also a Nutritious way to start your Morning.
Games Played: Too Many
I'd say that the vast majority of players that, by mysterious reasons, decided to join the mmoRPG genre don't have any RPG background or basic know-how (most of them don't even have a precise idea of whatr RPG is; they think something is RPG because some numbers appear by their gear and character sheet, heh...). In any case, due to this "iliteracy" many of them behave as if they were playing Call of Duty or something of the style (the kind games they should have stayed playing, by the way).
However, I remember UO: after a while the in-game society had organized in - let's put it this way - "villains" and "do-gooders". I remember the fun we had headhunting famous gankers and thieves in my "white-knights" guild. In other words, the community, spontaneously, had organized itself into a balanced ecosystem. Unfortunately, we had these minority of rpg-tourists that couldn't wait for the natural balance to come and had to cry on the forums like there's not tomorrow (because these guys just cannot wait or have a bit of patience for anything), and the decaffenaited version of UO came: Trammiel, the first castration of mmoRPG history (the first of the many to come...).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the UO system were perfect. But one thing is to reinforce and optimize the crime and ganking consequence system (the guards at UO were a shy attempt of a consequence system) and another thing is to completely erase the only real metagame we can have in MMOs: that is, player vs player interaction (and I'm not talking of combat only).
That's certainly an interesting perspective, but I'm curious as to what it is that actually makes themepark design "more fun" or "more filling". If anything, I could describe my experiences in quest hub, linear MMO's as the most empty, or the most dull, because I always knew exactly what to expect, the worlds are often static, there are rarely any build or design features, character or class customization comes down to "pick one of three skill trees", and there's hardly any sense of danger, because there's rarely any risk or reward built into the design documents. What's exciting or fulfilling about playing a game that's so safe and homoginized? Maybe you can tell me.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Originally posted by miagisan mmorpg players have no idea what they want. Period.
The vast majority of themepark players know what they want, WoW.
The vast majority of sandbox players know what they want, EVE.
Originally posted by Lawlmonster Originally posted by azzamasin Originally posted by Rthuth434 ...OR... because for the millionth time a shot caller who use to be at Mythic did what Mythic does best, rehash their old work.
I think alot of players find Sandbox games not very fun because they have to actually think and apply effort to succeed in the game. Nothing is handed to them and they arent lead through the game by the nosering. They actually have to make their own way and decide for themselves what to do and where to go.
Sandbox games are more of a DIY Project as opposed to Plug-n-Play Themeparks.
Some people just dont have the capability to "do it yourself" and when you cant do something or its too hard it become no fun.
Originally posted by CthulhuPuffs Originally posted by Lawlmonster Originally posted by azzamasin
Exactly, and instead of finding a plug-and-play ultracasual game that fits their mindset and agenda priorities, they have to come to the rpg genre and cry and demand it to be dumbed down.
"I have a limp and lack proper coordination; also, I'm deaf on my right ear, don't have any patience and I'm a bit dumb. In spite of this, I deserve to be the golden medal recipient for the Artistic Dance World Competition, so I demand the rules and essence of Artistic Dance to be changed to meet my expectations and my idea of what is fun in Artistic Dance"
I'm sounding a bit pricky and jackass here, don't you think? So, that's what the mmorpg industry and mainstream public has become.
Every, every mmoRPG should have a sandbox root, as there's the -RPG- in the mmoRPG acronym. The rest are multiplayer/cooperative arcade-hack'n'slash-consoley-casual games.
Originally posted by Akerbeltz Originally posted by CthulhuPuffs Originally posted by Lawlmonster Originally posted by azzamasin
Casual friendly and casual only are 2 diff things.....there are as many hardcore players in WoW as there are in EVE...
Originally posted by doodphace Originally posted by Akerbeltz Originally posted by CthulhuPuffs Originally posted by Lawlmonster Originally posted by azzamasin
Agreed. I meant casual in the sense of "lame", "linear" and "easy", ala a PS average game.
Talking on broad terms: If we refer to amount of time invested, it doesn't matter whether you play a proper RPG game (sandbox) or a linear arcade (themepark), depends on the kind of experience you look for. But please, don't call crab a lobster...
Originally posted by Akerbeltz Originally posted by doodphace Originally posted by Akerbeltz Originally posted by CthulhuPuffs Originally posted by Lawlmonster Originally posted by azzamasin
My apoligies, I thought you ment that there are sandboxes, and then there is "everything else".
I wasa gonna say, if it was implied that a game like wow doesn't have hardcore content, heroic Sha of Fear or Ra-den want to have a word with you.
On a side note, Is there currently a sandbox out that has group PVE content or tier'd raid content like old EQ/WoW?
Originally posted by doodphace Originally posted by Akerbeltz Originally posted by doodphace Originally posted by Akerbeltz Originally posted by CthulhuPuffs Originally posted by Lawlmonster Originally posted by azzamasin
Just to expand on my previosu answer:
By "sandbox" we usually refer to a game model that tries to recreate a world in a virtual fashion, with systems that provide a high degree of ways of interaction among players and of the players with the world (player run economy and politics, complex crafting), high degree of freedom for character construction and development (i.e: combat is not mandatory in order to develop your character), strong consequence systems, player generated content a/o players acting as Dungeon Masters.
In essence, sandbox is the pen&paper, tabletop rpg essence ported to a videogame format. In my view, there's not other way to capture the rpg spirit than in a sandbox based mmoRPG. In my opinion, themeparks are not rpg, they are arcades with some bland rpg features.
Answering your question: you can have "tough content" in a sandbox, although with regards to the "currently" part, we have not seen a good sandbox since SWG, with the exception of EVE (DF and MO were a buggy, disjointed mess; well, even SWG was buggy and the combat was crap, although it was brilliant in the "virtual world" part). Btw, EVE doesn't have the kind of PVE "tough content" you look.
Anyway, you may want to check ArcheAge, looks like it's looking for a compromise between a sandbox essence and popular themepark features. Will see how that works...
I don't like full sandbox, I like some sandbox elements. But if you want a BIG game population, you gotta let people CHOOSE whether to PVE or PVP/RVR.
I'm not saying a huge game population is optimal, but they do seem to be trying to offer everything in this game (vs camelot unchained just focusing on a few things).
MMO history - EVE GW2 SWTOR RIFT WAR COH/V EQ2 WOW DAOCTuktz - http://www.heretic.shivtr.com/
Originally posted by Zaskar70 If there is one thing that I’m certain of in the MMORPG genre it’s that true sandbox games don’t work For the vast majority of the players that are out there. I began my MMORPG journey in 1998 in what I still consider the ultimate sandbox game, Ultima Online. Back in 1998 only 2 mainstream MMO’s existed, Ultima Online and Lineage and as far as anyone in the West was concerned Lineage didn’t exist because we didn’t hear about it, so for most western gamers it was Ultima Online or nothing. Ultima Online was the great experiment, a free roaming, do anything, skill based world to explore. There were no quests to do, no guides, no tutorials, nothing to nudge you in any one direction. You chose your starting city and you were thrown into the world. Ultima Online was a dangerous place to be, far more dangerous than any other MMORPG I have ever played since. Seeing another player while out exploring the world was a very tense moment, you could almost feel the tension between the two of you, it was this way because Ultima Online was a true sandbox in that anything could happen, you could lose everything you had on you, you could make a new friend, or you could choose to avoid one another. There were no true safe areas in Ultima Online. The city’s were a lot safer than the wilds though you could still be robbed by a thief without ever knowing it or even killed outright before the guards could respond. A common macro in that game when going to a bank in town was “Bank, Guards!, Thief!” since the thieves would hang out at the banks to relieve you of your adventuring loot before you could deposit it. Playing the game could be incredibly frustrating, for example on several occasions after jumping in my boat and sailing to a resource rich mining area on one of the coasts I would mine for hours only to have a couple guys sail into view, block me in with their boat before I could react and subsequently murder me. I would have to stand there on my boat which was now their boat as a ghost and watch as they looted my lifeless body, transferred all the ore it took me hours to mine to their boat, use my boat key which was now their boat key to deconstruct my boat to sell later. If they were nice they would rez me and gate me to some town, or more often than not just ignore my poor ghost until they sailed to a port and I could get off their boat and go to a healer to get rez’d. People couldn’t really handle a true sandbox game back then, the crying and loss of subscriptions became so great that Ultima Online had to change to survive so they split the game in two and created Trammel, an exact mirror of the old world Felucca but with one twist, it was no longer a true sandbox for there was no player vs. player allowed, you could live in absolute security and thus the great experiment ended and the first true sandbox game had failed. In my opinion if any AAA dev studio put out a true open world sandbox game today the tears would be endless and the screams of rage deafening. Anyone who posts that they want a true sandbox game but wasn’t around to play Ultima Online before Trammel doesn’t really understand what they are asking for in my opinion.
So really all you want is a free for all full loot PvP game...
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
...because skyrim isnt a true sandbox rpg?
I do believe FFA pvp is needed for a true sandbox... but full loot not so much. I dont mind full loot but i know many others do, so just like 1 item and some gold would be enough i think.
Also why i feel the need for PVP to make a sandbox ,is if i cant just attack anyone freely then it not a true sandbox.
FREEDOM=sandbox without freedom to do what you want it's just not a true sandbox.
This is all my opinion of course not fact.
Anyways ESO isnt a sandbox because the last elder scroll game that was a actual sandbox was Morrowind.
"Negaholics are people who become addicted to negativity and self-doubt, they find fault in most things and never seem to be satisfied."^MMORPG.com
First tell us the consensus definition of sandbox? I don't recall a precise definition that we have agree upon.
Second after you have that definition, then tell us what "true sandbox" means.
Originally posted by Zaskar70 If there is one thing that I’m certain of in the MMORPG genre it’s that true sandbox games don’t work For the vast majority of the players that are out there. I began my MMORPG journey in 1998 in what I still consider the ultimate sandbox game, Ultima Online.
Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies both had far more players than the 3 faction closed lands themepark that was DaoC. Your entire post has no basis in reality and is instead based on a lack of actual real world information because once you throw in Lineage 1&2 and Eve into the conversation you have no ground to stand on.
Sandbox games do work and there are far more themepark failures to prove it...same cant be said for sandboxes.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
Originally posted by waynejr2 First tell us the consensus definition of sandbox? I don't recall a precise definition that we have agree upon. Second after you have that definition, then tell us what "true sandbox" means.
In my Opinion True sandbox is freedom to do whatever you want thats it. Nothin more to it if you feel that having restrictions to do things doesnt take the sandbox feel away...