Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Landmark??? really???

24

Comments

  • AwDiddumsAwDiddums Member UncommonPosts: 416
    Originally posted by Thupli
    I like Legos, so I think I have a good chance of liking Landmark.

    Exactly.

    Take a look at the most popular toys and computer games, most have something to do with creating something. Most of us have an urge to create, wether it be music,writing,art or even life, we all have that urge.

    So the OP doesn't enjoy creating things, aren't they playing an RPG? one of the fundamentals of an RPG was the creation of your character, even in Landmark you still get to explore the world, you get to explore other players worlds and you would be doing yourself a huge disservice if you didn't get a little excited about that. I only have to take a look on YouTube to see the amazing things other players have created for me to enjoy.

    It's a shame you can't appreciate the value of  creating something unique for yourself, for many of us it's just as exciting as playing any other normal MMO.

     

     

     

  • AwDiddumsAwDiddums Member UncommonPosts: 416
    Originally posted by cura
    Originally posted by Zeke-M
    This whole idea of creation seems to be  a waste of time to both my wife and I.  What a brilliant scheme to get gamers to fork over even more of their money, however,  from the gamers perspective what a waste and rip off.  We are interested to know who is really excited about the idea of spending hours in a game making a keep or cabin just for the sake of building it.  We have seen the movies they have released and still see no reason to sign up for landmark.  Thoughts, arguments, agreement?  

    Landmark is not my cup of tea. I dont like to build structures and i dont like that players can build whatever crap they want and it will be there. Waiting for EQN but dont have high hopes for it.

    Players who play Landmark can create for Landmark, so if your playing Landmark you've already accepted the fact what your enjoying has probably been created by another player.

    However EQ Next will only have Landmark player created content IF SOE accepts it, it will have to pass Quality control, may eve have to receive community votes to even make it onto a short list, but not just any old crap will make it into EQ Next, it's already been covered by the EQ N panels.

    Also lets not forget that just because a player does not work as an SoE employee does not mean they do not have the needed skills and focus to create something amazing, take a very good look at the amateur mod community.

    As you say though Landmark is not your cup of tea, just wanted to clarify your misconception though.

     

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,139
    This whole playing games seems like a waste of time and money. So is feeding trolls, but they are hungry too.
  • MindTriggerMindTrigger Member Posts: 2,596
    Originally posted by Zeke-M
    This whole idea of creation seems to be  a waste of time to both my wife and I.  What a brilliant scheme to get gamers to fork over even more of their money, however,  from the gamers perspective what a waste and rip off.  We are interested to know who is really excited about the idea of spending hours in a game making a keep or cabin just for the sake of building it.  We have seen the movies they have released and still see no reason to sign up for landmark.  Thoughts, arguments, agreement?  

    Tell it to the millions of Minecraft and spin-off fans out there who build all kinds of things.  Also this game will have actual MMO elements to it as well, such as PvE (maybe PvP), exploration, group content, etc.  The best thing about Landmark is that it has the potential to be player driven, as far as how it develops and where it goes.  SOE has stated that they want to see where the players take the game, and are interested in letting or feedback take it beyond release.

    No one really knows what it's all going to add up to, but it honestly sounds much better than EQ Next does, in my opinion, since that game will ultimately be yet another theme park.

     

    A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.

  • udonudon Member UncommonPosts: 1,803
    Originally posted by Zeke-M
    This whole idea of creation seems to be  a waste of time to both my wife and I.  What a brilliant scheme to get gamers to fork over even more of their money, however,  from the gamers perspective what a waste and rip off.  We are interested to know who is really excited about the idea of spending hours in a game making a keep or cabin just for the sake of building it.  We have seen the movies they have released and still see no reason to sign up for landmark.  Thoughts, arguments, agreement?  

    There is no doubt in my mind that Landmark is a stepping stone towards EQN and that this is a way for SOE to both test the waters to see how this kind of game goes over while at the same time offsetting some of the development costs towards EQN.  Having said that I also doubt very much that anyone would take the chance on spending the money to create a game like what EQN has been described with all it's complex dynamic systems otherwise.  If Landmark is what it's going to take for a company to develop a true living breathing world that constantly changes based on player interaction with the NPC's and world around them than so be it.

    Even as such Landmark has some appealing features as a stand alone game on it's own to make it worth looking forward to trying.  If you decide to Pre-Order or not is really a personal decision based on how much you like building/exploring games like Minecraft.

  • VincerKadenVincerKaden Member UncommonPosts: 457
    Originally posted by Zeke-M
    This whole idea of creation seems to be  a waste of time to both my wife and I.  What a brilliant scheme to get gamers to fork over even more of their money, however,  from the gamers perspective what a waste and rip off.  We are interested to know who is really excited about the idea of spending hours in a game making a keep or cabin just for the sake of building it.  We have seen the movies they have released and still see no reason to sign up for landmark.  Thoughts, arguments, agreement?  
    Seems like this is going to be a fair and balanced acquisition of data using the poll feature.

    image

  • GravargGravarg Member UncommonPosts: 3,424

    Option 4, skip it all together.  SOE isn't allowed on my hard drive.

     

    I like the idea of player content.  Some of the best games have come from it.  I liked Dota in WC3, Tower Defense in WC3 as well, Foundry in Neverwinter (the only thing I play anymore from this game).  Player created content can be good, but most of it isn't so great.  Trying to create entire areas and what not just sound like a recipe for disaster.  Nothing like walking through Kunark and you find a Star Destroyer or Homer Simpson's head (minecraft lol).  I'm sure they are going to have some limits on what you can make, and I'm sure they aren't going to let you add a Star Destroyer to EQN, but it's still funny to me.

  • fantasyfreak112fantasyfreak112 Member Posts: 499
    This is one of the few times where the "If you don't like it don't play it" argument actually applies. I'm not into building stuff but some people are, deal with it.
  • azzamasinazzamasin Member UncommonPosts: 3,105
    Originally posted by tom_gore
    Well EQNext will not be launched for a good year or two. I for one will indulge myself in Landmark while I wait. I love minecraft, so Landmark should be thoroughly enjoyable for me.

    Agreed.

    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!!!

    image

  • RocknissRockniss Member Posts: 1,034
    I just built a shed in my backyard, I just built a new pc for gaming, I might as well build in game some too. I will admit though as cool as it is to build, I will be spending more time fighting in pvp and slaying dragons in pve.
  • JaedorJaedor Member UncommonPosts: 1,173

    OP, you didn't include "Neither" on your poll...

  • DewmDewm Member UncommonPosts: 1,337
    Originally posted by ROFLcopter13
    Originally posted by Thupli
    I like Legos, so I think I have a good chance of liking Landmark.

    ...but you can play Minecraft for free, but hey if you like throwing away your money, well its your money so dont let me or anyone else stop you.

    First off.. do a little research, like 15 seconds worth of research

     

    Minecraft is not free, alpha was 11.00, beta was 20.00 and I think its $30.00 right now (not sure on that)

     

    Second, EQ:L is going to be 100% free, UNLESSS you want to get in on it a month or two early, but if you do...thats your choice.

     

     

    And yes MC and EQ:L are both builder games...but IMO you can't compair them, just from a graphical point of view.

    Please check out my channel. I do gaming reviews, gaming related reviews & lets plays. Thanks!
    https://www.youtube.com/user/BettyofDewm/videos

  • noncleynoncley Member UncommonPosts: 718
    Originally posted by Mr.Kujo
    Originally posted by Zeke-M
    This whole idea of creation seems to be  a waste of time to both my wife and I.  What a brilliant scheme to get gamers to fork over even more of their money, however,  from the gamers perspective what a waste and rip off.  We are interested to know who is really excited about the idea of spending hours in a game making a keep or cabin just for the sake of building it.

     

    That's a pretty shallow way of thinking. You might as well say entire art is bullsh*t. Sculpting or painting just to watch it later. You have full right to say that people who sculpt or paint are just wasting their time, but it makes you look kinda stupid.

    That's not what he said at all, "kinda stupid".

     

     

  • tom_goretom_gore Member UncommonPosts: 2,001
    Originally posted by Warjin
    Originally posted by jw2252
    Considering Minecraft is such a huge success, I'd imagine the idea of being able to build whatever you want is something many gamers are interested in.  That being said, I don't see you're point on how they're ripping off gamers.  You chose to pay to get into the beta, so that's on you.  If you didn't research the landmark before putting your money down, that's also on you.  This is something that people want. 

    Minecraft is a huge success because you can run it on a first gen Iphone, same with WoW, this is simple math, the more people you see the more money you make, however in EQN Landmark this will not be the case because not everyone can run the game, or at least the average mom an pop computer like you could with WoW and Minecraft.

    Many game Dev make this fatal mistake making games that demand high end computers to play the game, most people just have computers for Facebook, Youtube ,Netflix you know, your standard internet surfing stuff, playing games is just a added bonus to them, only us geeks upgrade our computers every year with new video cards, ram ect to play the next gen games, but because of this the numbers are low for high end games on computers, MMO are even worse and because of this they lack funding in turn lack content and polish and die over time, only WoW and Minecraft stood the test of time and that's due to the games running a toaster plugged into a monitor.

    To make it big like Warcraft / Minecraft big a game Dev needs to understand this concept, if not well then you see the result.

    First of all, Minecraft was already huge before it ever came out on mobile devices. It also requires quite a bit of computer power to run big builds and/or a lot of mods.

    Second, SOE didn't pick cartoony graphics for EQN Landmark just because they age better. They also tend to run better on older systems.

    Now we don't have system requirements for EQN Landmark yet, but I would wager they will be surprisingly low for an MMO. Perhaps not WoW-low, but computers are also much more powerful on average today than they were in 2004 when WoW launched.

     

  • HeraseHerase Member RarePosts: 993
    Originally posted by Covet78
    Originally posted by Myria
    Originally posted by ste2000

    Do you know about a little game called Minecraft?

    Go and check it............. there is clearly a market for this kind of games.

    The same logic applies to WoW-clones, no :)?

     

    That aside, while it's clear that there are those who play Mincraft obsessively and have made hugely complex creations, I'm not convinced that's very common. For most of those I've known who were "into" Minecraft it was a very brief thing, if indeed they ever really played it at all past the wandering around a little stage.

     

    Your experiences do not necessary translate to others. Just because most of the people you know were only briefly into minecraft, it's by far evidence that most people in general were briefly into it. My son and his group of friends have been playing Minecraft off and on for 2 years now.  Best $10 (was $10 during beta) I spent.

    So most of the people you know barely play it, while most of the people my son knows play it a lot. 

    I think there is some truth in what Myria says. I do think people will be surprised, even though a lot of gamers played minecraft some won't play landmark. I say this because minecraft, while it can be complex and creative, it is quite simplistic and straight forward. What i mean by this is, the building blocks are already there, all you have to do is put them together to build what you want, like lego. With landmark now, while similar in the idea of building it takes it to a bit more advance level, think kenex. While kenex was popular it wasn't on the same level as lego, because it took, fun and straight forward building to making more intricate shapes and structures.

     

    This IMO is why I find it weird when people say "well, minecraft did well and people liked it, so it will be the same with landmark". Don't take this the wrong way, I think the game will do well and I'm definitely going to be playing it. I just think people should put more thought into what they say when comparing the two. While the core idea of building is the same, the way they go about it is on completely different levels . Think lego and kenex.

  • KanethKaneth Member RarePosts: 2,286
    Originally posted by Gravarg

    Option 4, skip it all together.  SOE isn't allowed on my hard drive.

     

    I like the idea of player content.  Some of the best games have come from it.  I liked Dota in WC3, Tower Defense in WC3 as well, Foundry in Neverwinter (the only thing I play anymore from this game).  Player created content can be good, but most of it isn't so great.  Trying to create entire areas and what not just sound like a recipe for disaster.  Nothing like walking through Kunark and you find a Star Destroyer or Homer Simpson's head (minecraft lol).  I'm sure they are going to have some limits on what you can make, and I'm sure they aren't going to let you add a Star Destroyer to EQN, but it's still funny to me.

    Actually, Landmark isn't genre locked (aside from being a builder/explorer game), so there's an excellent chance you'll see plenty of Sci-Fi next to steampunk, next to fantasy, etc. The livestream that showed off the tools talked about this. They also said you'll be able to move your plot if you don't like your neighbors. There's a decent chance that areas will become unofficially themed as builders group together.

    What I see the censoring is blatantly offensive stuff, and potentially copyrighted stuff. You might be able to make a Star Destroyer, but you probably won't be able to sell it.

  • cesmode8cesmode8 Member UncommonPosts: 431

    OP, I kind of agree.  I kind of wish SOE would re-allocate the resources spent on landmark to EQN to make it even better and get it out to us faster.  Landmark could easily have been released after Next, and if the devs liked sometihng we build they could add it in then.  Id say people that are following all of this are more interested in Next than Landmark.

    I agree it almost feels like a waste of time.  Nothing in landmark will transfer over to Next (nothing...XP, ingame currency/gold, items accumulated, nothing).  So Landmark is almost its own seperate game to pass the time which is fine.  I just feel that those resources could have been better spent elsewhere.

    And I do think we are looking at at least between 1-2 years before we see Next...sucks :(

    But we have TESO to try out in four months, Wildstar shortly after that(I think late Q3 or early Q4,), D3 expansion...some good titles being released in the mean time.  Enough to hold me over.

     

  • KanethKaneth Member RarePosts: 2,286
    Originally posted by Jafotron
    Originally posted by Covet78
    Originally posted by Myria
    Originally posted by ste2000

    Do you know about a little game called Minecraft?

    Go and check it............. there is clearly a market for this kind of games.

    The same logic applies to WoW-clones, no :)?

     

    That aside, while it's clear that there are those who play Mincraft obsessively and have made hugely complex creations, I'm not convinced that's very common. For most of those I've known who were "into" Minecraft it was a very brief thing, if indeed they ever really played it at all past the wandering around a little stage.

     

    Your experiences do not necessary translate to others. Just because most of the people you know were only briefly into minecraft, it's by far evidence that most people in general were briefly into it. My son and his group of friends have been playing Minecraft off and on for 2 years now.  Best $10 (was $10 during beta) I spent.

    So most of the people you know barely play it, while most of the people my son knows play it a lot. 

    I think there is some truth in what Myria says. I do think people will be surprised, even though a lot of gamers played minecraft some won't play landmark. I say this because minecraft, while it can be complex and creative, it is quite simplistic and straight forward. What i mean by this is, the building blocks are already there, all you have to do is put them together to build what you want, like lego. With landmark now, while similar in the idea of building it takes it to a bit more advance level, think kenex. While kenex was popular it wasn't on the same level as lego, because it took, fun and straight forward building to making more intricate shapes and structures.

     

    This IMO is why I find it weird when people say "well, minecraft did well and people liked it, so it will be the same with landmark". Don't take this the wrong way, I think the game will do well and I'm definitely going to be playing it. I just think people should put more thought into what they say when comparing the two. While the core idea of building is the same, the way they go about it is on completely different levels . Think lego and kenex.

    I completely agree. It's a similar comparison to MineCraft and Wurm Online. Each have their loyal fans, with some crossover no doubt, but MC is clearly the more popular of the two (even though Wurm offers some deeper systems).

    A ton of MineCraft's strength is that it's single player and limited multiplayer (individual player run servers). People can play with whatever mods they want to in single player, or what the server has accepted for a server. There's a whole league for Hunger Games, and servers that people need to be invited to (like the MindCrack server). You have people who showcase builds in creative mode (Madness64 makes some amazing stuff). The point is that MC offers a ton of freedom.

    With Landmark you will be bound by whatever rules SoE comes up with. There doesn't seem to be an offline mode, or the ability to run private games with friends. 

    So, Landmark will be another sandbox builder/explorer, but with potentially more limits than MC and perhaps not as many systems as something like Wurm. Each will have their fans, with some crossover, but I already imagine there will be pointless arguments between the fanboys of each game.

    This is a great time to be a gamer if you enjoyed legos, tinker toys, kinex, etc as a kid.

  • tom_goretom_gore Member UncommonPosts: 2,001
    Originally posted by cesmode8

    OP, I kind of agree.  I kind of wish SOE would re-allocate the resources spent on landmark to EQN to make it even better and get it out to us faster.  Landmark could easily have been released after Next, and if the devs liked sometihng we build they could add it in then.  Id say people that are following all of this are more interested in Next than Landmark.

    I agree it almost feels like a waste of time.  Nothing in landmark will transfer over to Next (nothing...XP, ingame currency/gold, items accumulated, nothing).  So Landmark is almost its own seperate game to pass the time which is fine.  I just feel that those resources could have been better spent elsewhere.

    And I do think we are looking at at least between 1-2 years before we see Next...sucks :(

    But we have TESO to try out in four months, Wildstar shortly after that(I think late Q3 or early Q4,), D3 expansion...some good titles being released in the mean time.  Enough to hold me over.

     

    Landmark features the same tools they will use to create EQN, so the publishing order could not really have been done the other way around. As they develop the tools and content for EQN, they will drop (some of) those tools into EQNL for the players to toy with.

    You should think of EQNL as a big testing/alpha playground for EQN, giving the devs a lot of feedback and information when they build EQN. And even some assets, as some of the player creations in EQNL might be featured in EQN!

    Personally, I couldn't care less about TESO or WildStar. On the other hand, I've purchased the trailblazer pack for EQNL and am excited to get into the alpha sometime in January (maybe).

     

  • KanethKaneth Member RarePosts: 2,286
    Originally posted by cesmode8

    OP, I kind of agree.  I kind of wish SOE would re-allocate the resources spent on landmark to EQN to make it even better and get it out to us faster.  Landmark could easily have been released after Next, and if the devs liked sometihng we build they could add it in then.  Id say people that are following all of this are more interested in Next than Landmark.

    I agree it almost feels like a waste of time.  Nothing in landmark will transfer over to Next (nothing...XP, ingame currency/gold, items accumulated, nothing).  So Landmark is almost its own seperate game to pass the time which is fine.  I just feel that those resources could have been better spent elsewhere.

    And I do think we are looking at at least between 1-2 years before we see Next...sucks :(

    But we have TESO to try out in four months, Wildstar shortly after that(I think late Q3 or early Q4,), D3 expansion...some good titles being released in the mean time.  Enough to hold me over.

     

    Landmark is it's own game, not almost. It completely is. Additionally, SoE most likely has separate teams working on elements for Landmark vs. Elements on Next with some crossover (like art, engine, server). Landmark probably isn't delaying Next, more likely is that Next wasn't nearly as complete as we might have thought and SoE wanted to get something out there to help keep their name relevant through the next year. Considering Landmark is a builder game, it can release with minimal systems and can build without too much backlash from the community. They can use landmark to test engine, server structure, various game systems. During all of that they can work on building the world, lore, raids, etc for Next.

  • CoatedCoated Member UncommonPosts: 507

    I have no interest in EQ:Next. It wasn't until I saw Landmark videos that I gained any interest in EQ anything.

    I don't get your issue. What isn't there to get excited about a game with unlimited potential in the creation process. This is one of my biggest gripes about MMO's these days. There is virtually no creation or imagination. Everyone looks exactly the same, you have crap options to distinguish your character from others. It's like a wheres waldo book with every character being Waldo. Granted, EQ:Landmark isn't going into much depth with your character's image, but I certainly can let out some of my creative steam with the building tool.

    Everquest: Landmark has everything to be excited for.

  • BigdavoBigdavo Member UncommonPosts: 1,863

    So a game is pointless if people want to create things/use their imagination? Am I going crazy or is this what the OP just stated?

    Wow...

    O_o o_O

  • sodade21sodade21 Member UncommonPosts: 349
    in landmark can i have a character (the like of everquest next) so i can play around at the land and buildings i have previously builded???? or is just building and do nothing in the buildings etc?
  • cesmode8cesmode8 Member UncommonPosts: 431
    Originally posted by Coated

    I have no interest in EQ:Next. It wasn't until I saw Landmark videos that I gained any interest in EQ anything.

    I don't get your issue. What isn't there to get excited about a game with unlimited potential in the creation process. This is one of my biggest gripes about MMO's these days. There is virtually no creation or imagination. Everyone looks exactly the same, you have crap options to distinguish your character from others. It's like a wheres waldo book with every character being Waldo. Granted, EQ:Landmark isn't going into much depth with your character's image, but I certainly can let out some of my creative steam with the building tool.

    Everquest: Landmark has everything to be excited for.

    I know this forum is filled with loathing and hatred for GW2, but there is probably never another character that you will come across that will look like you.  Ive been playing since Closed beta, I have 5 max level characters.  Not once has someone looked like any of my characters.  The character customization is pretty good, but what really stands you apart is the mixing and matching of armor, transmuting, dyes, etc.. 

    Just a friendly fyi :D

    Edit: It is one of the standalone features of GW2 that I continue to find...noone looks like.  Everyone looks different and people express their creativity through use of mixing and matching amor sets and dyes. 

  • loulakiloulaki Member UncommonPosts: 944
    i thought the results would be the opposite.. thats strange for the members of this forum ...

    image

Sign In or Register to comment.