Theme Park or Old School or something inbetween

delete5230

Just by using the words Theme Park or Old School makes everyone insistently fight over it's definitions.

What I'm asking is a clear cut vote on what you would choose if you only had one choice.

Theme Park- Scripted by developers, with its story telling as you play. This style is normally short games with guidance from the makers.  It often is without flexibility in game play.  Moving from one zone to the next in order.

Examples would be FF14, Rift, ESO, Wildstar or BDO.

Old School - Open World, do as you like and picking up short mini stories as you play.  This style is often meant to be played for years and can be slow and tedious at times, infact more often than not. However the bulk of any excitement is player generated and the content is meant for groups.  Old School mmos are not made anymore, and the ones that are still around seem to have been revamped into something different from the original intent.......In choosing this option, please try and keep a modern approach in your mind if one were to be developed.

Examples would be EverQuest, DAOC, or FF11

Something in between - A combination of both, somewhat scripted in content but not nearly on rails. You can do what ever you feel with in reason.  You have multiple zones to choose from.  MMO's in this category are still meant for years of playability and have a combination of solo and group content.  Something in between games are not made anymore, however many are still alive.

Examples would be World of Warcraft, Everquest 2 and GuildWars 2 

SavageHorizon

EQ2 is far from open world.

I think the best example of in between would we Age Of Wulin basically the European version.

cameltosis

Old school doesn't necessarily equate to sandbox, there were plenty of themeparks around 10+ years ago too. 

But, to answer your question, hybrid is the future. 

Themepark is the best way forwards for telling stories as developers need to control everything in order to get the best storytelling experience. 

Sandbox is the best way forwards for providing player freedom and longevity as it relies much less on developers producing content. 


So, take the best of both worlds and make a hybrid. 

Axehilt

Why bother asking the question?  There isn't much interest in games with clunky outdated mechanics whose worlds were little more than a sprinkle of respawning mobs to endlessly grind against.  

If you're going to poll players about this, why stop here at this forum of oldschool MMORPG refugees?  Why not track down a DAOC or EQ1 forum and ask it there?  You could tilt your results much further that way (which is the point, after all.)

Either way you won't get realistic results for the actual level of player interest.

Velifax

Were I a decade younger I'd stick with old school but I've no time to group so I must settle for a mix. This fits the aims of Pantheon rather closely, I'd say.

waynejr2

cameltosis said:

Old school doesn't necessarily equate to sandbox, there were plenty of themeparks around 10+ years ago too. 

But, to answer your question, hybrid is the future. 

Themepark is the best way forwards for telling stories as developers need to control everything in order to get the best storytelling experience. 

Sandbox is the best way forwards for providing player freedom and longevity as it relies much less on developers producing content. 


So, take the best of both worlds and make a hybrid. 

Sandboxers want make claims to own a lot of different things. haha.

blackgoat

i dont have a single preference coz i have enjoyed games that walked beetween all those lines....

sandbox i had a blast on ultima online

themepark i had blast on everquest 1 everquest 2 vanguard and WOW

Mardukk

SavageHorizon said:

EQ2 is far from open world.

I think the best example of in between would we Age Of Wulin basically the European version.

I agree that GW2 is in between as it does offer some freedom.  Considerably more freedom than EQ2.  

I don't hate all themeparks I just despise linear quest hubs and forced questing.  Stories, not made by the player, should not be a focus in a virtual world.

waynejr2

Axehilt said:

Why bother asking the question?  There isn't much interest in games with clunky outdated mechanics whose worlds were little more than a sprinkle of respawning mobs to endlessly grind against.  

If you're going to poll players about this, why stop here at this forum of oldschool MMORPG refugees?  Why not track down a DAOC or EQ1 forum and ask it there?  You could tilt your results much further that way (which is the point, after all.)

Either way you won't get realistic results for the actual level of player interest.

I agree with you. We want old school games!

Distopia

Just want to chime in to say I feel ESO is just as "do what you want" as GW2 is. Their content isn't all that dissimilar really, Both also have a central storyline that is more single-player focused. IMHO...

sunandshadow

I am mainly interested in sandparks, but I don't think the sim mechanics I'm interested in hybridizing with themepark mechanics come from oldschool games.  So I voted themepark because I want something in-between themeparks and stuff not included in the poll.

waynejr2

There is a reason why the terms are still debated.  No consensus.

Vermillion_Raventhal

I would prefer a modernized SWG like game in a different setting  Better interface, combat, optimization and city building controls. 

H0urg1ass

I believe that at this point in MMO development it's a bit ridiculous for a game developer to pick one or the other and stay hardline with it.

Give players the raid content that they want for different size groups of players.  Give them 6, 12 and 24 player raids to suit different styles.

Then give them a rich dynamic world ready to exploit and ensure that there is a feedback loop between raiders, crafter and PVP'ers so that all three need each other in the ecosystem to survive.

Koboli

Where's the sandbox option, again? Because when I think 'old school,' my mind turns as much towards EQ as it does UO. I'm not participating in a nonsense poll that doesn't give me the option to vote for the subtype that represents the past and future of the entire genre. 

TyranusPrime

My predominant focus is old-school open-world.. At least as far as designing my game goes.. Naturally I have to keep far more modern techniques floating around in the design than older games did.. Regardless, as far as playing goes, I prefer old-school but usually end up in one of the glut of current theme parks..

Jill52

I don't like this question. It creates division between two generations of MMORPG players. Your younger crowd of players doesn't enjoy older games with their clunky interfaces/UI's, long grinds/timesinks, outdated graphics, and glitchy old game engines. The older generation of MMO players doesn't like the focus on fast-paced action, instant gratification, over simplification, and overall lack of lore and content that many new games have.

The problem really isn't themepark vs. sandbox. Both have their advantages and disadvantages.There are good and bad examples of games for both. A good mix of the two would be best imo. However, depending on how it is made, one group will hate it while the other will like it.

As for me, I've been playing MMOs for over 15 years. There are things I like and dislike about both old games and new ones.
What I miss from the old games was the control over building your character you got from the complex systems they had. In Anarchy Online, for example, we had full control over where our stat points went each level, gear was stat-based not level-based, and there were very few class locked items. That almost ensured that there would be very few players of the same class and level that had the exact same stats and gear (diversity ftw!). Newer games offer more appearance options (which I like) but the systems for the growth/advancement of your character throughout the game are largely automated and/or overly simplified.

Something I don't miss is long grinds. Being an adult now with a job, a life and responsibilities leaves very little time for such timesinks. Not having time for the required grinding is the main thing keeping me from going back to playing many of the older games.
Newer games are not as grindy but they are also not challenging. You don't get that sense of accomplishment when all you have to do is kill 10 easy monsters and bring their tails back to a NPC for an instant reward of a "rare" item. On the other hand, nobody has time to camp a boss that has only a small % chance to spawn every 2 hours or so for weeks or even months until it finally drops a rare item or kill literally thousands of a particular monster that is rumored to drop a good item until you finally get it. What they need is a way to make it harder without using time as the way of doing so. Coming up with ideas for how to do that could be a discussion of its own.

Another thing I enjoyed from older games was the fear of death. You didn't want to die and lose a ton of xp, possibly lose items/gold, etc. Dying in new games is really just a minor annoyance and not something to be feared and avoided at all costs. That is disappointing. They have even nerfed death penalties in most older games (like in AO where they removed item loss and took out the reclaim booths). I agree that permadeath is maybe too harsh but there needs to be some kind of death penalty to make players afraid to die so death spamming doesn't replace careful planning and strategy.

The other thing that bothers me about new games is the lack of deep lore and content. While I do enjoy seeing the modern voice acted cutscenes I'm finding that they are not enough to replace all the little details we had in the old days. Back then lore was everywhere. The town's blacksmith had a good backstory (like Fergus from Mabinogi lol), item's flavor texts had little bits of lore hidden in them.. lore was literally everywhere. It made the world feel more complete. I don't know about everyone else but I still care about who is selling me weapons and why they are there.

Sorry straying a little from the topic. Both new and old games have their ups and downs. We should be trying to share ideas so we can demand something that is the best of both worlds instead of fighting over who's games are better.

delete5230

Jill52 said:

I don't like this question. It creates division between two generations of MMORPG players. Your younger crowd of players doesn't enjoy older games with their clunky interfaces/UI's, long grinds/timesinks, outdated graphics, and glitchy old game engines. The older generation of MMO players doesn't like the focus on fast-paced action, instant gratification, over simplification, and overall lack of lore and content that many new games have.

The problem really isn't themepark vs. sandbox. Both have their advantages and disadvantages.There are good and bad examples of games for both. A good mix of the two would be best imo. However, depending on how it is made, one group will hate it while the other will like it.

As for me, I've been playing MMOs for over 15 years. There are things I like and dislike about both old games and new ones.
What I miss from the old games was the control over building your character you got from the complex systems they had. In Anarchy Online, for example, we had full control over where our stat points went each level, gear was stat-based not level-based, and there were very few class locked items. That almost ensured that there would be very few players of the same class and level that had the exact same stats and gear (diversity ftw!). Newer games offer more appearance options (which I like) but the systems for the growth/advancement of your character throughout the game are largely automated and/or overly simplified.

Something I don't miss is long grinds. Being an adult now with a job, a life and responsibilities leaves very little time for such timesinks. Not having time for the required grinding is the main thing keeping me from going back to playing many of the older games.
Newer games are not as grindy but they are also not challenging. You don't get that sense of accomplishment when all you have to do is kill 10 easy monsters and bring their tails back to a NPC for an instant reward of a "rare" item. On the other hand, nobody has time to camp a boss that has only a small % chance to spawn every 2 hours or so for weeks or even months until it finally drops a rare item or kill literally thousands of a particular monster that is rumored to drop a good item until you finally get it. What they need is a way to make it harder without using time as the way of doing so. Coming up with ideas for how to do that could be a discussion of its own.

Another thing I enjoyed from older games was the fear of death. You didn't want to die and lose a ton of xp, possibly lose items/gold, etc. Dying in new games is really just a minor annoyance and not something to be feared and avoided at all costs. That is disappointing. They have even nerfed death penalties in most older games (like in AO where they removed item loss and took out the reclaim booths). I agree that permadeath is maybe too harsh but there needs to be some kind of death penalty to make players afraid to die so death spamming doesn't replace careful planning and strategy.

The other thing that bothers me about new games is the lack of deep lore and content. While I do enjoy seeing the modern voice acted cutscenes I'm finding that they are not enough to replace all the little details we had in the old days. Back then lore was everywhere. The town's blacksmith had a good backstory (like Fergus from Mabinogi lol), item's flavor texts had little bits of lore hidden in them.. lore was literally everywhere. It made the world feel more complete. I don't know about everyone else but I still care about who is selling me weapons and why they are there.

Sorry straying a little from the topic. Both new and old games have their ups and downs. We should be trying to share ideas so we can demand something that is the best of both worlds instead of fighting over who's games are better.

I guess you missed the part where I asked, " Please keep a modern approach ".

Old School, shouldn't mean Old Game.....This is 2016, not 1999 !

LumiLumi

I quite like the ol' theme park MMO but I'm open to both.

While theme park does take you through place to place, I feel it's a better learning experience than shoving you into nothing and hoping for the best. But then sandbox maybe retain more dedicated players other themepark.

cameltosis

LumiLumi said:

I quite like the ol' theme park MMO but I'm open to both.

While theme park does take you through place to place, I feel it's a better learning experience than shoving you into nothing and hoping for the best. But then sandbox maybe retain more dedicated players other themepark.

Whilst sandboxes are generally not very accessible (dumping in game and hoping for the best), they could easily be made to be. If what I read was correct, ArcheAge attempted to make itself accessible by being kinda themeparky for the first 10-20 levels so that players could learn the systems and get used to the game, then it would open up later on to be full sandbox. 

LumiLumi

cameltosis said:

LumiLumi said:

I quite like the ol' theme park MMO but I'm open to both.

While theme park does take you through place to place, I feel it's a better learning experience than shoving you into nothing and hoping for the best. But then sandbox maybe retain more dedicated players other themepark.

Whilst sandboxes are generally not very accessible (dumping in game and hoping for the best), they could easily be made to be. If what I read was correct, ArcheAge attempted to make itself accessible by being kinda themeparky for the first 10-20 levels so that players could learn the systems and get used to the game, then it would open up later on to be full sandbox. 

Sure but what happened is it caused some huge confusion after level 20. Some of the biggest things in that game are loosely explained as you follow quest lines to unlock new "dungeons" and areas. 

Luckily I had a group of friends with me, but if I went in solo, I would have gotten very confused. We joined a large guild and found many players asking all the same questions out of confusion. 

Plus sandbox sometimes doesn't give a great vision of improvement or progression while themepark is more clear cut. This gear level, this content cleared etc. 

I like both but I get 100% why themepark MMOs experience longer life or popularity. Archage is a huge sandbox MMO that lost a large % of its userbase due to poor planning, dominating of land because of its sandbox nature and some people just gave up. 

Beyond_Eternia

I played just about every MMO. I prefer theme park based. I shuffle around around a lot on what I play. Sandbox games I feel I easily get lost in the fold. Theme parks I can progress and almost always come back where I left off. 

nariusseldon

delete5230 said:

What I'm asking is a clear cut vote on what you would choose if you only had one choice.

First, in today's world, there is no point to choose only one. In fact, most people don't play a single MMO (http://www.alistdaily.com/digital/superdata-mmo-moba-game-market-to-reach-20-billion/)

Second, there is also no need to restrict oneself to the old ideas (themepark & sandbox). You can easily play a shooter MMO hybrid like the Division or Destiny. 

GeezerGamer

I'd bet a game using the early theme park format would work.
Early to mid 2000s designs like early EQ and WoW 1.x - 2.x. All the fail-clones tried to emulate WoW 3.x and beyond.

SEANMCAD

cameltosis said:

Old school doesn't necessarily equate to sandbox, there were plenty of themeparks around 10+ years ago too. 

But, to answer your question, hybrid is the future. 

Themepark is the best way forwards for telling stories as developers need to control everything in order to get the best storytelling experience. 

Sandbox is the best way forwards for providing player freedom and longevity as it relies much less on developers producing content. 


So, take the best of both worlds and make a hybrid. 

he is not asking which is the future.

he is asking which one would you play

Grunty

I mostly play computer based role playing games along with many other types of games.  I don't pay attention to or care whether others try to label the games I play in a positive or negative light.  Whether they think that the terms 'theme park', 'old school' or any other label they choose are positive or negative is their opinion. 

I play games because I enjoy them. I don't play games that I don't enjoy.  That is what matters. Not the labels.