So you don't think that sandboxes (and sandbox systems) are dead for SOE? Will you ever make a new sandbox with SWG's pioneering features?
The answer is... stay tuned on the subject of sandboxes. We're super excited about the future of sandbox gaming. Let me just leave it at that!
This implies that SOE will be making a sandbox game... will it be EQ3??? Perhaps SOE is realizing its not a good idea to directly compete with WoW.
I am keeping my fingers crossed
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
There is another element that escaped all those kamikaze developers who kept producing WoW clones, which is that sandboxes games generally keep players hooked for longer (longer subscriptions)
I hope finally SoE understood that you can make more money with less players but who stay subscribed for longer than having 1 million players who just buy the box and play only for the first (free) month
SoE does things only if it is convenient to them and a sandbox game should be very profitable in the long term.
I enjoy sandbox games but I would advise against subscribing to any MMO put out by SOE. MMOs by SOE seem to fall into ruin as the result of greed. This is not to say other companies aren't guilty of the same but SOE almost has it down to an art.
Yeah, all these companies that have the gall to try and make money...what are they thinking?
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
Really? Or is it just a set of gamers that are tired of theme parks? How about all the people who hate logging in and wandering around, thinking "what the heck do I do"?
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Yeah, I've been against those power gaps for a very long time.
Actually, this is different than D+D. D+D was very much level dependent, especially because of the combination of Hit Point increases, Armor Class increases, added on top of the skill increases that came with levels. I'm trying to smooth that out. Remove HP and AC increases but leave the skill increases. Add in Stat importance in skills, this gives the character more of a feel of the character's physical and mental make up. In fact, a big thing to me with Stats is that you can then use them directly (pushing a boulder, breaking down doors, jumping range, tight rope walking, pure skill things like that.)
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
Really? Or is it just a set of gamers that are tired of theme parks? How about all the people who hate logging in and wandering around, thinking "what the heck do I do"?
People don't understand how true that is and how too many choices takes away from their experience.
Back in the 50's/60's car companies offered many more colors for cars. They discovered that couples were about to purchase the car but got hung up on one small detail. The choice of color. They would end of leaving the dealership and thus walked away the sale. Just as in the Matrix, the problem is choice.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
Really? Or is it just a set of gamers that are tired of theme parks? How about all the people who hate logging in and wandering around, thinking "what the heck do I do"?
That's so easy to fix it's pathetic. You can still kill 10 rats if you want to. Or you can gather things to sell, or seek out cults to join, or seek the quests to become a Paladin, or start a small farm, or whatever.
And judging by the numbers buying the new Clone entrants over the last few years, and even more so those who leave them, I'd say people are tired of it.
I'm waiting to see what they come out with, don't care how all their games turn/turned out in the end, mistakes were made, some to the point that there was no turning back(swg). They know this, and they have stated many times they know what they did wrong. I for one would be excited to see another sandbox from the SOE crew just because SWG did so many things right, the crafting, the housing, the community building, the old professions, the hype of jedi towards the beginning, sure they effed up a ton of that, but they know what they did wrong and I have a feeling a 2nd time around with a new sandbox would bode well for them. They failed their playerbase pretty bad with SWG but I've yet to see a game top their housing/crafting system/community, sure it wasn't flawless but that alone kept my wife and I and my close friends playing since release. Sad to see SWG go but here's hoping for greater things, I don't care what company is doing it, but I love me a good sandbox and the ones in recent years have been complete fail imo.
And no, I doubt it's EQ3, why would they turn EQ into a sandbox.
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
Really? Or is it just a set of gamers that are tired of theme parks? How about all the people who hate logging in and wandering around, thinking "what the heck do I do"?
For those players they can choose from the thousands of games made for you regularly.
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
Really? Or is it just a set of gamers that are tired of theme parks? How about all the people who hate logging in and wandering around, thinking "what the heck do I do"?
That's so easy to fix it's pathetic. You can still kill 10 rats if you want to. Or you can gather things to sell, or seek out cults to join, or seek the quests to become a Paladin, or start a small farm, or whatever.
And judging by the numbers buying the new Clone entrants over the last few years, and even more so those who leave them, I'd say people are tired of it.
Well, no they aren't.
Why is this so hard to understand?
People aren't wired the same. End of story.
Not everyone likes being plucked down in a world and figuring out what to do.
Heck, in Lord of the Rings' LORD OF THE RINGS of all games, there was a player who was confused and frustrated because he wasn't being led to the next quest hub.
Stop thinking that you are all wired the same you are not. not. not.
There are people who enjoy figuring it out and there are people who enjoy being plopped down into a game and experiencing what the devs have to offer.
yet for some reaosn you actually think people are all wired the same? really? look at the wide array of entertainment that is out there and tell me that everyone wants and desires the exact same thing?
It's a ridiculous assumption.
and I should know. I "enjoy" some of the most hardcore esoteric type of media out there. I fully know how wild and "out of bounds" stuff can get. and I would never for a moment be so arrogant as to assume that the general populace wanted/desired the same type of media. Nor woudl I think less of them for not listening to babbit, not watching non-linear movies, or enjoying art that is so far removed from what most people consider "art" that they might not even be able to latch on to the "hook" that wouuld draw people in.
People are different and more power to them. Stop trying to assume that everyone is wired the same.
the reason your so called (and I insist it's "so called') clone entrants didn't do well is because they failed on their own merits. Not because they were themepark games.
And in the end what is failing? take wow out of the equations and compare sub numbers and I think we will see that these games are doing decently. But again, for some reaosn., peopel have to use millions of subs/players as a benchmark when in the end thousands will do just fine.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
Really? Or is it just a set of gamers that are tired of theme parks? How about all the people who hate logging in and wandering around, thinking "what the heck do I do"?
That's so easy to fix it's pathetic. You can still kill 10 rats if you want to. Or you can gather things to sell, or seek out cults to join, or seek the quests to become a Paladin, or start a small farm, or whatever.
And judging by the numbers buying the new Clone entrants over the last few years, and even more so those who leave them, I'd say people are tired of it.
How many people actually flocked to rift?
That doesn't show that people are tired of it. Keeping subs? well that's a differnt matter. the problem with these games is that they are attractive in the short term but don't have enough to hold huge amounts of the hardcore players.
No, these games can only be judged by thousands of subs. Not millions. And by that estimation they aren't doing so badly.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
So very true. My problem with sandboxes is that I like to control how I play and why sandboxes should or must have FFA PVP is beyond me. Sorry I do not remember a kid coming in my sandbox and beating me up to play
The thign is they don't have to always have ffa pvp. that is one contingent of players who are very linear in their thinking. It's really funny when you think about it. Here are a group of people who claim to be proponents of "outside the box game play" and they fall right into what has gone before.
There can be differnet sandbox games. Why? because someone envisions it as such. And since i've seen umpteen threads on this site over the years where no one can agree on what a sandbox game is, I highly suspect that is because there is no one definition.
don't ever let anyone tell you differently. There's always someone out there who wants to label something and then keep it to that label. But if soemone comes along and challenges that status quo then they start with the "oh, it can't be done/that's not how it should be".
A sandbox game is about creating your type of game play. I can easily see a sandbox game without ffa pvp. where you build your cities, mine your resources, create your character. It just won't be for those who require ffa pvp. that's all.
Also, for the record, I don't see ffa pvp as a bad thing. not among players who understand what it offers to a game. But in the end I am a "to each his own" type of person.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
The thing is, after reading that, I still don't trust SOE to make a sandbox game that at least we all can agree on. I do think that they have some idea in terms of sandbox functions, but the functions they choose might not be the ones that we the players think should be the main focus in sandbox games.
From all the sandbox threads in the forum, there are many views on what sandbox games should contain, some have more focus on the freedom of combat profession, some wants more freedom in combat (open-pvp/FFA), some focus on the inter-dependencies of class/professions, some focus on the social system that can build sandbox environment, some wants variations in terms of character progression, some wants persistant housing in game world, etc.....
With all that views, I seriously doubt SOE can develop a sandbox game that we can agree upon and willing to play, especially those who experience the CU and NGE in SWG.
Trust is earned, and so far, since SOE lost their trust with CU/NGE, they have not yet earn it back from me to trust them with another sandbox game.
So you don't think that sandboxes (and sandbox systems) are dead for SOE? Will you ever make a new sandbox with SWG's pioneering features?
The answer is... stay tuned on the subject of sandboxes. We're super excited about the future of sandbox gaming. Let me just leave it at that!
This implies that SOE will be making a sandbox game... will it be EQ3??? Perhaps SOE is realizing its not a good idea to directly compete with WoW.
The only reason SWG was as it was was because some major dev team members from teh original UO team were hired to work on SWG, Runsaber being one of them. So it be interesting to see how they do a sandbox MMO with a bunch of dev whom mind set is stuck in theme park design for many years..
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
Really? Or is it just a set of gamers that are tired of theme parks? How about all the people who hate logging in and wandering around, thinking "what the heck do I do"?
That's so easy to fix it's pathetic. You can still kill 10 rats if you want to. Or you can gather things to sell, or seek out cults to join, or seek the quests to become a Paladin, or start a small farm, or whatever.
And judging by the numbers buying the new Clone entrants over the last few years, and even more so those who leave them, I'd say people are tired of it.
Well, no they aren't.
Why is this so hard to understand?
People aren't wired the same. End of story.
Not everyone likes being plucked down in a world and figuring out what to do.
Heck, in Lord of the Rings' LORD OF THE RINGS of all games, there was a player who was confused and frustrated because he wasn't being led to the next quest hub.
Stop thinking that you are all wired the same you are not. not. not.
There are people who enjoy figuring it out and there are people who enjoy being plopped down into a game and experiencing what the devs have to offer.
yet for some reaosn you actually think people are all wired the same? really? look at the wide array of entertainment that is out there and tell me that everyone wants and desires the exact same thing?
It's a ridiculous assumption.
and I should know. I "enjoy" some of the most hardcore esoteric type of media out there. I fully know how wild and "out of bounds" stuff can get. and I would never for a moment be so arrogant as to assume that the general populace wanted/desired the same type of media. Nor woudl I think less of them for not listening to babbit, not watching non-linear movies, or enjoying art that is so far removed from what most people consider "art" that they might not even be able to latch on to the "hook" that wouuld draw people in.
People are different and more power to them. Stop trying to assume that everyone is wired the same.
the reason your so called (and I insist it's "so called') clone entrants didn't do well is because they failed on their own merits. Not because they were themepark games.
And in the end what is failing? take wow out of the equations and compare sub numbers and I think we will see that these games are doing decently. But again, for some reaosn., peopel have to use millions of subs/players as a benchmark when in the end thousands will do just fine.
I didn't say "all players, every last one of them". I said "people", as in "generally speaking".
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
Really? Or is it just a set of gamers that are tired of theme parks? How about all the people who hate logging in and wandering around, thinking "what the heck do I do"?
That's so easy to fix it's pathetic. You can still kill 10 rats if you want to. Or you can gather things to sell, or seek out cults to join, or seek the quests to become a Paladin, or start a small farm, or whatever.
And judging by the numbers buying the new Clone entrants over the last few years, and even more so those who leave them, I'd say people are tired of it.
Well, no they aren't.
Why is this so hard to understand?
People aren't wired the same. End of story.
Not everyone likes being plucked down in a world and figuring out what to do.
Heck, in Lord of the Rings' LORD OF THE RINGS of all games, there was a player who was confused and frustrated because he wasn't being led to the next quest hub.
Stop thinking that you are all wired the same you are not. not. not.
There are people who enjoy figuring it out and there are people who enjoy being plopped down into a game and experiencing what the devs have to offer.
yet for some reaosn you actually think people are all wired the same? really? look at the wide array of entertainment that is out there and tell me that everyone wants and desires the exact same thing?
It's a ridiculous assumption.
and I should know. I "enjoy" some of the most hardcore esoteric type of media out there. I fully know how wild and "out of bounds" stuff can get. and I would never for a moment be so arrogant as to assume that the general populace wanted/desired the same type of media. Nor woudl I think less of them for not listening to babbit, not watching non-linear movies, or enjoying art that is so far removed from what most people consider "art" that they might not even be able to latch on to the "hook" that wouuld draw people in.
People are different and more power to them. Stop trying to assume that everyone is wired the same.
the reason your so called (and I insist it's "so called') clone entrants didn't do well is because they failed on their own merits. Not because they were themepark games.
And in the end what is failing? take wow out of the equations and compare sub numbers and I think we will see that these games are doing decently. But again, for some reaosn., peopel have to use millions of subs/players as a benchmark when in the end thousands will do just fine.
So very true. My problem with sandboxes is that I like to control how I play and why sandboxes should or must have FFA PVP is beyond me. Sorry I do not remember a kid coming in my sandbox and beating me up to play with the sand,
That is the root issue with sandboxes. They are still restrictive based on the fact you are at the mercy of others. In SWG it worked because of the flagging system or participating in the GCW and it was a good system.
A lot of people who want a sandbox only want it because it is much easier to harass and grief other players (see XYson).
The pro-sandbox crowd is a loud and vocal minority of MMO's players as a whole. 8-10 years ago it wa sa huge crowd but now it it a much smaller percentage of the whole. It reminds me of people asking for a FFA PVP server in DAOC. It was consistently the lowest populated server in the game and while it had a loyal following, it never grew and stayed small. The time and energy spent on that one server for a couple hundred people could have been beter spent elsewhere.
I would love a good sandbox done well. Just because a game is a sandbox will not guarantee success in the MMO market of today. I would argue it would be harder for a sandbox to succeed in the market and it would take a well-made and well-designed game to do so. I have very, very little faith SOE will be the company the provides that game to us.
Most Sandbox desiring players don't want FFA PvP. Heck, even most PvPers recognize these days that there has to be some law and order through some sort of justice system. But like all other things, there's a wide range of perspectives on where to draw the line there.
But overall, there seems to be a majority of Sandbox seekers who want nothing to do with FFA PvP.
But overall, there seems to be a majority of Sandbox seekers who want nothing to do with FFA PvP.
I am one that will not play a ffa PvP game. There are some games that I would love to try, but I know I would just uninstall them after the first ganker killed me. I am a casual player, and I don't want stressers in a game when I play them to forget about the stressers of the day.
So you don't think that sandboxes (and sandbox systems) are dead for SOE? Will you ever make a new sandbox with SWG's pioneering features?
The answer is... stay tuned on the subject of sandboxes. We're super excited about the future of sandbox gaming. Let me just leave it at that!
This implies that SOE will be making a sandbox game... will it be EQ3??? Perhaps SOE is realizing its not a good idea to directly compete with WoW.
With EVE becomming a cash shop, I lost faith in the possibility any company can maintain a sandbox game withouth screwing with the fundamentals. CCP did it right for around 8 years, still they manage to fuck it up, I still can't understand it. It was not even like SWG, where the playerbase was slowly declining ( because SoE couldn't get the bugs fixed ). In EVE the playerbase was growing ...
And since SoE already showed how hard they can screw over a playerbase, I will be very reluctant to ever try something from them again.
About the SWG being sandbox vs themepark, I guess you can say it had themepark elements in it even pre CU-NGE, still it had alot of freedom of choice in almost any area of the game ( sometimes too much freedom, for example the way building was handled ).
On the other hand one must realize that once you go full sandbox, you get something like Second Life, which can hardly be called a game anymore.
It is a balance, this balance must be cared for throughout the life of the MMORPG, and should never be changed years after release, that is committing suicide from a company perspective and it destroys the community, as has been shown.
So to conclude, I hope SoE won't bring out a serious sandbox, because it would be another example of how it can fail.
If you are interested in subscription or PCU numbers for MMORPG's, check out my site : http://mmodata.blogspot.be/ Favorite MMORPG's : DAoC pre ToA-NF, SWG Pre CU-NGE, EVE Online
I didn't say "all players, every last one of them". I said "people", as in "generally speaking".
Ok, fair enough, apologies.
I just think that indicating that "people are getting tired of x" especially in the context of what has been said in the themepark/sandbox debate, tends to lock into this idea that the whole theme park thing is a limited mistake and as soon as players wake up they will see the light again.
Too often I see a sandbox proponent (and in the interest of full disclosure, my tastes seem to lean more toward sandbox than themepakr) asking how players can (and this is paraphrasing) be so dense as to be able to play a theme park game, how unimaginitive they are and how on earth could it be fun to be on rails going back and forth back and forth to quest givers only to then put themselves on a raiding train.
That might be one way players essentially abuse themselves in relation to playing these games but it doesn't have to be that way.
Having played a game where you grind or intereact with players I have to say that the first time I tried WoW at launch (didn't think much of it in Beta) I felt it was a breath of fresh air. Instead of me doing my daily "go t this field and grind" there was a small story and reason for me to be killing these things. Heck, I even remember stating on the game's forums that we should have more quests and better quests so that we weren't grinding all the time.
It's true that there are people who are getting tired of themepark games but I propose that replacing them with sandbox games will only work in some cases.
I think what they are getting tired of is how they are implemented. A person who is not wired to be plopped down and told "go have fun!", and that's it, is not going to last very long.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
You are all saying the same thing, that the games are Sandbox, and that my stance on "level grind" is overstated.
Don't get me wrong, I hate the "level grind" too, the way it playes out in general. I also see your point that a leveling system is a "themepark" element. For me, whether it is a TP or SB element comes down to how it is implemented, and I feel that the way it was implemented in pre-NGE SWG-while not perfect-was an excellent step in the "right" (i.e. sandbox) direction.
I understand your point, but I still disagree. I think when you get into "levels" in advancement, there's a line where it goes too far and removes important aspects of "Sandbox". You guys obviously put that line higher up the bar than I do.
Yeah, it comes down to a matter of degrees for me. It just seems that the discussion (in general) runs too much to the "all or nothing" mentality. "Classes are themepark-get rid of them!!" Instead, I would like to see an approach that says "the linear class system (EQ-WoW) is too restrictive, how can we implement this structure to give players better freedom and choice in the game". In this I agree with a lot of the above where you were talking about the power gap between max and min levels. I'm not really sure how much "compression" is needed to find that "sweet spot", but I can definitely live with a significant amount of it.
But here's where I come from on this. When skills lead to better swords, or guns, or metal ores (beyond soft, hard, rust resistant, malleable, whatever different properites as in RL), then you get into level advanced things that are only better because the game makes them better because of levels. This screws up "Sandbox". And it starts causing things like "zones for levels", ways to separate players by their level capability. It devalues things only because of this artificial level system added.
If it is a restriction that exists in the real world, it doesn't bother me to see it in MMO's. If the game won't allow me to put on chain mail armor because of level/class, I consider that to be an "artificial restriction" or "invisible wall" and really shouldn't be implemented if your trying to create a sandbox style game. If I can use any armor/weapons in the game, but just won't be as effective with certain types of them because of training level (i.e. skill level or class level), that is fine, and for me that difference is a part of where that line is as far as defining sandbox or not.
You probably don't see this, or agree with it. But I think that's because you see the "game feature" in it. But for a really true "Sandbox", I think we need to change game play from that thinking. It needs to be about the game world instead of levels. It needs to be about what happens in that world instead of levelling up to the next tier.
Hell yes.
And I think that makes for a much more exciting experience than level grind. And you have level grind as a core in both SWG and Darkfall. As proof, ask yourselves this. What was your first thing to do in these games? Level up? Any other answer gets a buzzer.
Can't really argue against this either.
That's my opinion, anyways.
Back to the OP - while I don't have the hate for SOE that alot of you seem to, I can see the point about whether or not they can create a good sandbox AAA title. 1) Their two most successful titles were outright themeparks, and 2) while they did have two? (I'm counting Planetside, although I never played, so I'm not really sure) sandboxes, one more or less flopped, and the other was completely redesigned as a themepark (SWG), and is now shutting down. I would counter this with the fact that they DID develop a very good sandbox title (for its time - and of course IMO). They also have a team that has proven its ability to create an excellent game (EQ), whatever its classification, and if they did it once, they can do it again. Also, unlike companies like Aventurine, they don't have to rely on one game for their income, so they have more ability to take chances. They also still have an excellent IP to use, which will bring in (I believe) enough players to make the development worthwhile. If any corporate developer can do it, I believe SOE can. I have more faith in them than in EA or Activision anyway.
Perhaps SOE have put 2 and 2 together and come up with 5 ?
Combine a sandbox game with a cash shop and you have a winner ! Provide heaps of player "tools" and cosmetic props (all for sale at really reasonable prices !), weave it all into a good base design, and the fans will be throwing money at you faster than you can catch it...
Is THIS perhaps what has inspired SOE's newfound faith in sandbox games ?
Perhaps SOE have put 2 and 2 together and come up with 5 ?
Combine a sandbox game with a cash shop and you have a winner ! Provide heaps of player "tools" and cosmetic props (all for sale at really reasonable prices !), weave it all into a good base design, and the fans will be throwing money at you faster than you can catch it...
Is THIS perhaps what has inspired SOE's newfound faith in sandbox games ?
LOL, Spotty, well done. I wonder how many heads that will fly over though. I had to read it a second time, to unboggle my mind, myself. heh
You are all saying the same thing, that the games are Sandbox, and that my stance on "level grind" is overstated.
Don't get me wrong, I hate the "level grind" too, the way it playes out in general. I also see your point that a leveling system is a "themepark" element. For me, whether it is a TP or SB element comes down to how it is implemented, and I feel that the way it was implemented in pre-NGE SWG-while not perfect-was an excellent step in the "right" (i.e. sandbox) direction.
I understand your point, but I still disagree. I think when you get into "levels" in advancement, there's a line where it goes too far and removes important aspects of "Sandbox". You guys obviously put that line higher up the bar than I do.
Yeah, it comes down to a matter of degrees for me. It just seems that the discussion (in general) runs too much to the "all or nothing" mentality. "Classes are themepark-get rid of them!!" Instead, I would like to see an approach that says "the linear class system (EQ-WoW) is too restrictive, how can we implement this structure to give players better freedom and choice in the game". In this I agree with a lot of the above where you were talking about the power gap between max and min levels. I'm not really sure how much "compression" is needed to find that "sweet spot", but I can definitely live with a significant amount of it.
But here's where I come from on this. When skills lead to better swords, or guns, or metal ores (beyond soft, hard, rust resistant, malleable, whatever different properites as in RL), then you get into level advanced things that are only better because the game makes them better because of levels. This screws up "Sandbox". And it starts causing things like "zones for levels", ways to separate players by their level capability. It devalues things only because of this artificial level system added.
If it is a restriction that exists in the real world, it doesn't bother me to see it in MMO's. If the game won't allow me to put on chain mail armor because of level/class, I consider that to be an "artificial restriction" or "invisible wall" and really shouldn't be implemented if your trying to create a sandbox style game. If I can use any armor/weapons in the game, but just won't be as effective with certain types of them because of training level (i.e. skill level or class level), that is fine, and for me that difference is a part of where that line is as far as defining sandbox or not.
You probably don't see this, or agree with it. But I think that's because you see the "game feature" in it. But for a really true "Sandbox", I think we need to change game play from that thinking. It needs to be about the game world instead of levels. It needs to be about what happens in that world instead of levelling up to the next tier.
Hell yes.
And I think that makes for a much more exciting experience than level grind. And you have level grind as a core in both SWG and Darkfall. As proof, ask yourselves this. What was your first thing to do in these games? Level up? Any other answer gets a buzzer.
Can't really argue against this either.
That's my opinion, anyways.
Back to the OP - while I don't have the hate for SOE that alot of you seem to, I can see the point about whether or not they can create a good sandbox AAA title. 1) Their two most successful titles were outright themeparks, and 2) while they did have two? (I'm counting Planetside, although I never played, so I'm not really sure) sandboxes, one more or less flopped, and the other was completely redesigned as a themepark (SWG), and is now shutting down. I would counter this with the fact that they DID develop a very good sandbox title (for its time - and of course IMO). They also have a team that has proven its ability to create an excellent game (EQ), whatever its classification, and if they did it once, they can do it again. Also, unlike companies like Aventurine, they don't have to rely on one game for their income, so they have more ability to take chances. They also still have an excellent IP to use, which will bring in (I believe) enough players to make the development worthwhile. If any corporate developer can do it, I believe SOE can. I have more faith in them than in EA or Activision anyway.
Samkon, I think maybe that you and I are in the vast majority of gamers. We have slight differences of specific opinion, but can willingly accept the other. If someone were to make a game that caters to either specific, they will do very, very well in my opinion.
The key is in the game play, more than the specifics. Getting away from level grind and into world happenings, from events to simple daily game play. One day you track down werewolves that have been taking citizens when the moon is full, another day you might be hunting a rare Bluebuck stag for it's colored skin and antler trophy, and another day you might be mining ore for your smithy shop, and yet another day you might be going off to war against a great Dragon that's made a lair in a local mountain range. There is no end game, the world continues to spin and things continue to happen, on a personal level and on a world wide level.
I can live with a class based system, if there's also three other things involved.
The ability to use any skill based on stats. Everyone should be able to swing a sword, or wear any armor. It's just how good you can develop the skills to go along with it, and perhaps metal armors block spell casting for mages.
A wide range of free-use skills. Everyone should be able to skin an animal, start a campfire, cook a slab of meat, fishing, etc. The skills to do it better I think should be allowed to any character, regardless of whether they are a fighter or a mage.
Craft skills as a separate set to choose from, along with basic mage/warrior skill sets. Every mage/warrior/whatever should be allowed a craft skill. This is pretty common now anyways, but it's important.
But even in a pure skill based system, you can still have specialty classes. Paladins spring instantly to mind. Any warrior with the proper skill set might be able to join a Paladin Order. Similarly, Mage Specialties are pretty common. But also you could have specific Thief Organizations that specialize in 2-Story (Acrobatics) or Pickpocketing or Engineering (Traps and such).
one more MMO from SOE? I promise one thing: I'll not buy it from such a company of track record even if they manage to produce the best one. They'll surely destroy it becouse of some company politics
Exactly this.
OP, while I respect that you are keeping your ear to the cyber ground to pass on some hope for us Sandbox lovers, hearing it came from SOE and in particularly, through the festering mouthpiece that is John, you should immediately dismiss it. They've repeatedly proven not only their level of incompentency, but their disdain for their customers. You know that layoff they had? It shouldn't have fired the studios, it should've fired the entire CEO staff of SOE.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
Too often I see a sandbox proponent (and in the interest of full disclosure, my tastes seem to lean more toward sandbox than themepakr) asking how players can (and this is paraphrasing) be so dense as to be able to play a theme park game, how unimaginitive they are and how on earth could it be fun to be on rails going back and forth back and forth to quest givers only to then put themselves on a raiding train.
That might be one way players essentially abuse themselves in relation to playing these games but it doesn't have to be that way.
Having played a game where you grind or intereact with players I have to say that the first time I tried WoW at launch (didn't think much of it in Beta) I felt it was a breath of fresh air. Instead of me doing my daily "go t this field and grind" there was a small story and reason for me to be killing these things. Heck, I even remember stating on the game's forums that we should have more quests and better quests so that we weren't grinding all the time.
A very good point, and one that is largely ignored by people who missed the EverQuest era. Back in the day, you had next to no context for your combats.
"LFG for Aviaks in S. Karana." "Why?" "Uh, because they're level 24."
"Hey, let's go camp spiders in Lava." "Why?" "Uh, because they're level 35."
"Need 1 more for CT lizards." "Why?" "Uh, because they're level 39."
Rarely did you ever find a quest or even a conversational snippet telling you why certain creatures or certain people ought to be killed. Who's Mayong Mistmoore and why are there hundreds of dark elves hanging out in his castle near the wood elves? Beats me, but it's a good place to level. When you stop to think about it, the "plot" of EQ is that thousands of humans and humanoids burst forth from their cities one day and started killing every single thing they saw, without provocation or motive.
Now, that's not to say that WoW players will pick and choose (and turn down) quests and raids based upon whether they truly sympathize with the questgiver, but at least there's a token attempt to provide you with context for your actions. It's like the plot of an action movie, it doesn't have to be gold but at least it's there. If WoW is Fast Five, EQ was literally just titled ExplosionsGunsBoobsCars: Extended Cut.
Comments
I am keeping my fingers crossed
I really hope that someone finally understands that people are tired of theme parks
There is another element that escaped all those kamikaze developers who kept producing WoW clones, which is that sandboxes games generally keep players hooked for longer (longer subscriptions)
I hope finally SoE understood that you can make more money with less players but who stay subscribed for longer than having 1 million players who just buy the box and play only for the first (free) month
SoE does things only if it is convenient to them and a sandbox game should be very profitable in the long term.
Yeah, all these companies that have the gall to try and make money...what are they thinking?
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
Really? Or is it just a set of gamers that are tired of theme parks? How about all the people who hate logging in and wandering around, thinking "what the heck do I do"?
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Yeah, I've been against those power gaps for a very long time.
Actually, this is different than D+D. D+D was very much level dependent, especially because of the combination of Hit Point increases, Armor Class increases, added on top of the skill increases that came with levels. I'm trying to smooth that out. Remove HP and AC increases but leave the skill increases. Add in Stat importance in skills, this gives the character more of a feel of the character's physical and mental make up. In fact, a big thing to me with Stats is that you can then use them directly (pushing a boulder, breaking down doors, jumping range, tight rope walking, pure skill things like that.)
Once upon a time....
People don't understand how true that is and how too many choices takes away from their experience.
Back in the 50's/60's car companies offered many more colors for cars. They discovered that couples were about to purchase the car but got hung up on one small detail. The choice of color. They would end of leaving the dealership and thus walked away the sale. Just as in the Matrix, the problem is choice.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
That's so easy to fix it's pathetic. You can still kill 10 rats if you want to. Or you can gather things to sell, or seek out cults to join, or seek the quests to become a Paladin, or start a small farm, or whatever.
And judging by the numbers buying the new Clone entrants over the last few years, and even more so those who leave them, I'd say people are tired of it.
Once upon a time....
They probably figure they've killed enough games, what's one more If it doesn't work out.
I'm waiting to see what they come out with, don't care how all their games turn/turned out in the end, mistakes were made, some to the point that there was no turning back(swg). They know this, and they have stated many times they know what they did wrong. I for one would be excited to see another sandbox from the SOE crew just because SWG did so many things right, the crafting, the housing, the community building, the old professions, the hype of jedi towards the beginning, sure they effed up a ton of that, but they know what they did wrong and I have a feeling a 2nd time around with a new sandbox would bode well for them. They failed their playerbase pretty bad with SWG but I've yet to see a game top their housing/crafting system/community, sure it wasn't flawless but that alone kept my wife and I and my close friends playing since release. Sad to see SWG go but here's hoping for greater things, I don't care what company is doing it, but I love me a good sandbox and the ones in recent years have been complete fail imo.
And no, I doubt it's EQ3, why would they turn EQ into a sandbox.
For those players they can choose from the thousands of games made for you regularly.
Remember Old School Ultima Online
Well, no they aren't.
Why is this so hard to understand?
People aren't wired the same. End of story.
Not everyone likes being plucked down in a world and figuring out what to do.
Heck, in Lord of the Rings' LORD OF THE RINGS of all games, there was a player who was confused and frustrated because he wasn't being led to the next quest hub.
Stop thinking that you are all wired the same you are not. not. not.
There are people who enjoy figuring it out and there are people who enjoy being plopped down into a game and experiencing what the devs have to offer.
yet for some reaosn you actually think people are all wired the same? really? look at the wide array of entertainment that is out there and tell me that everyone wants and desires the exact same thing?
It's a ridiculous assumption.
and I should know. I "enjoy" some of the most hardcore esoteric type of media out there. I fully know how wild and "out of bounds" stuff can get. and I would never for a moment be so arrogant as to assume that the general populace wanted/desired the same type of media. Nor woudl I think less of them for not listening to babbit, not watching non-linear movies, or enjoying art that is so far removed from what most people consider "art" that they might not even be able to latch on to the "hook" that wouuld draw people in.
People are different and more power to them. Stop trying to assume that everyone is wired the same.
the reason your so called (and I insist it's "so called') clone entrants didn't do well is because they failed on their own merits. Not because they were themepark games.
And in the end what is failing? take wow out of the equations and compare sub numbers and I think we will see that these games are doing decently. But again, for some reaosn., peopel have to use millions of subs/players as a benchmark when in the end thousands will do just fine.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
How many people actually flocked to rift?
That doesn't show that people are tired of it. Keeping subs? well that's a differnt matter. the problem with these games is that they are attractive in the short term but don't have enough to hold huge amounts of the hardcore players.
No, these games can only be judged by thousands of subs. Not millions. And by that estimation they aren't doing so badly.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
The thign is they don't have to always have ffa pvp. that is one contingent of players who are very linear in their thinking. It's really funny when you think about it. Here are a group of people who claim to be proponents of "outside the box game play" and they fall right into what has gone before.
There can be differnet sandbox games. Why? because someone envisions it as such. And since i've seen umpteen threads on this site over the years where no one can agree on what a sandbox game is, I highly suspect that is because there is no one definition.
don't ever let anyone tell you differently. There's always someone out there who wants to label something and then keep it to that label. But if soemone comes along and challenges that status quo then they start with the "oh, it can't be done/that's not how it should be".
A sandbox game is about creating your type of game play. I can easily see a sandbox game without ffa pvp. where you build your cities, mine your resources, create your character. It just won't be for those who require ffa pvp. that's all.
Also, for the record, I don't see ffa pvp as a bad thing. not among players who understand what it offers to a game. But in the end I am a "to each his own" type of person.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
The thing is, after reading that, I still don't trust SOE to make a sandbox game that at least we all can agree on. I do think that they have some idea in terms of sandbox functions, but the functions they choose might not be the ones that we the players think should be the main focus in sandbox games.
From all the sandbox threads in the forum, there are many views on what sandbox games should contain, some have more focus on the freedom of combat profession, some wants more freedom in combat (open-pvp/FFA), some focus on the inter-dependencies of class/professions, some focus on the social system that can build sandbox environment, some wants variations in terms of character progression, some wants persistant housing in game world, etc.....
With all that views, I seriously doubt SOE can develop a sandbox game that we can agree upon and willing to play, especially those who experience the CU and NGE in SWG.
Trust is earned, and so far, since SOE lost their trust with CU/NGE, they have not yet earn it back from me to trust them with another sandbox game.
Current MMO: FFXIV:ARR
Past MMO: Way too many (P2P and F2P)
The only reason SWG was as it was was because some major dev team members from teh original UO team were hired to work on SWG, Runsaber being one of them. So it be interesting to see how they do a sandbox MMO with a bunch of dev whom mind set is stuck in theme park design for many years..
I didn't say "all players, every last one of them". I said "people", as in "generally speaking".
Once upon a time....
Most Sandbox desiring players don't want FFA PvP. Heck, even most PvPers recognize these days that there has to be some law and order through some sort of justice system. But like all other things, there's a wide range of perspectives on where to draw the line there.
But overall, there seems to be a majority of Sandbox seekers who want nothing to do with FFA PvP.
Once upon a time....
I am one that will not play a ffa PvP game. There are some games that I would love to try, but I know I would just uninstall them after the first ganker killed me. I am a casual player, and I don't want stressers in a game when I play them to forget about the stressers of the day.
With EVE becomming a cash shop, I lost faith in the possibility any company can maintain a sandbox game withouth screwing with the fundamentals. CCP did it right for around 8 years, still they manage to fuck it up, I still can't understand it. It was not even like SWG, where the playerbase was slowly declining ( because SoE couldn't get the bugs fixed ). In EVE the playerbase was growing ...
And since SoE already showed how hard they can screw over a playerbase, I will be very reluctant to ever try something from them again.
About the SWG being sandbox vs themepark, I guess you can say it had themepark elements in it even pre CU-NGE, still it had alot of freedom of choice in almost any area of the game ( sometimes too much freedom, for example the way building was handled ).
On the other hand one must realize that once you go full sandbox, you get something like Second Life, which can hardly be called a game anymore.
It is a balance, this balance must be cared for throughout the life of the MMORPG, and should never be changed years after release, that is committing suicide from a company perspective and it destroys the community, as has been shown.
So to conclude, I hope SoE won't bring out a serious sandbox, because it would be another example of how it can fail.
If you are interested in subscription or PCU numbers for MMORPG's, check out my site :
http://mmodata.blogspot.be/
Favorite MMORPG's : DAoC pre ToA-NF, SWG Pre CU-NGE, EVE Online
Ok, fair enough, apologies.
I just think that indicating that "people are getting tired of x" especially in the context of what has been said in the themepark/sandbox debate, tends to lock into this idea that the whole theme park thing is a limited mistake and as soon as players wake up they will see the light again.
Too often I see a sandbox proponent (and in the interest of full disclosure, my tastes seem to lean more toward sandbox than themepakr) asking how players can (and this is paraphrasing) be so dense as to be able to play a theme park game, how unimaginitive they are and how on earth could it be fun to be on rails going back and forth back and forth to quest givers only to then put themselves on a raiding train.
That might be one way players essentially abuse themselves in relation to playing these games but it doesn't have to be that way.
Having played a game where you grind or intereact with players I have to say that the first time I tried WoW at launch (didn't think much of it in Beta) I felt it was a breath of fresh air. Instead of me doing my daily "go t this field and grind" there was a small story and reason for me to be killing these things. Heck, I even remember stating on the game's forums that we should have more quests and better quests so that we weren't grinding all the time.
It's true that there are people who are getting tired of themepark games but I propose that replacing them with sandbox games will only work in some cases.
I think what they are getting tired of is how they are implemented. A person who is not wired to be plopped down and told "go have fun!", and that's it, is not going to last very long.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Back to the OP - while I don't have the hate for SOE that alot of you seem to, I can see the point about whether or not they can create a good sandbox AAA title. 1) Their two most successful titles were outright themeparks, and 2) while they did have two? (I'm counting Planetside, although I never played, so I'm not really sure) sandboxes, one more or less flopped, and the other was completely redesigned as a themepark (SWG), and is now shutting down. I would counter this with the fact that they DID develop a very good sandbox title (for its time - and of course IMO). They also have a team that has proven its ability to create an excellent game (EQ), whatever its classification, and if they did it once, they can do it again. Also, unlike companies like Aventurine, they don't have to rely on one game for their income, so they have more ability to take chances. They also still have an excellent IP to use, which will bring in (I believe) enough players to make the development worthwhile. If any corporate developer can do it, I believe SOE can. I have more faith in them than in EA or Activision anyway.
Perhaps SOE have put 2 and 2 together and come up with 5 ?
Combine a sandbox game with a cash shop and you have a winner ! Provide heaps of player "tools" and cosmetic props (all for sale at really reasonable prices !), weave it all into a good base design, and the fans will be throwing money at you faster than you can catch it...
Is THIS perhaps what has inspired SOE's newfound faith in sandbox games ?
LOL, Spotty, well done. I wonder how many heads that will fly over though. I had to read it a second time, to unboggle my mind, myself. heh
Once upon a time....
Samkon, I think maybe that you and I are in the vast majority of gamers. We have slight differences of specific opinion, but can willingly accept the other. If someone were to make a game that caters to either specific, they will do very, very well in my opinion.
The key is in the game play, more than the specifics. Getting away from level grind and into world happenings, from events to simple daily game play. One day you track down werewolves that have been taking citizens when the moon is full, another day you might be hunting a rare Bluebuck stag for it's colored skin and antler trophy, and another day you might be mining ore for your smithy shop, and yet another day you might be going off to war against a great Dragon that's made a lair in a local mountain range. There is no end game, the world continues to spin and things continue to happen, on a personal level and on a world wide level.
I can live with a class based system, if there's also three other things involved.
The ability to use any skill based on stats. Everyone should be able to swing a sword, or wear any armor. It's just how good you can develop the skills to go along with it, and perhaps metal armors block spell casting for mages.
A wide range of free-use skills. Everyone should be able to skin an animal, start a campfire, cook a slab of meat, fishing, etc. The skills to do it better I think should be allowed to any character, regardless of whether they are a fighter or a mage.
Craft skills as a separate set to choose from, along with basic mage/warrior skill sets. Every mage/warrior/whatever should be allowed a craft skill. This is pretty common now anyways, but it's important.
But even in a pure skill based system, you can still have specialty classes. Paladins spring instantly to mind. Any warrior with the proper skill set might be able to join a Paladin Order. Similarly, Mage Specialties are pretty common. But also you could have specific Thief Organizations that specialize in 2-Story (Acrobatics) or Pickpocketing or Engineering (Traps and such).
Once upon a time....
Exactly this.
OP, while I respect that you are keeping your ear to the cyber ground to pass on some hope for us Sandbox lovers, hearing it came from SOE and in particularly, through the festering mouthpiece that is John, you should immediately dismiss it. They've repeatedly proven not only their level of incompentency, but their disdain for their customers. You know that layoff they had? It shouldn't have fired the studios, it should've fired the entire CEO staff of SOE.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
A very good point, and one that is largely ignored by people who missed the EverQuest era. Back in the day, you had next to no context for your combats.
"LFG for Aviaks in S. Karana." "Why?" "Uh, because they're level 24."
"Hey, let's go camp spiders in Lava." "Why?" "Uh, because they're level 35."
"Need 1 more for CT lizards." "Why?" "Uh, because they're level 39."
Rarely did you ever find a quest or even a conversational snippet telling you why certain creatures or certain people ought to be killed. Who's Mayong Mistmoore and why are there hundreds of dark elves hanging out in his castle near the wood elves? Beats me, but it's a good place to level. When you stop to think about it, the "plot" of EQ is that thousands of humans and humanoids burst forth from their cities one day and started killing every single thing they saw, without provocation or motive.
Now, that's not to say that WoW players will pick and choose (and turn down) quests and raids based upon whether they truly sympathize with the questgiver, but at least there's a token attempt to provide you with context for your actions. It's like the plot of an action movie, it doesn't have to be gold but at least it's there. If WoW is Fast Five, EQ was literally just titled ExplosionsGunsBoobsCars: Extended Cut.