where the **** are the games for the hype? Still not a single new decent Sandbox-Release till today. What are the companies doing? Chilling and sleeping?
I cant understant that....
I'm going to go out on a limb and state sand box games due to their open nature, and increase in choice take longer to make and balance then you average theme park on rails MMO, ( which in themselves generally take at least 4-5 years to make, so 3 isn't much .)
As to what the companies making games are doing I'd guess mainly chasing the masses IE Wow Clone and theme parks. Sand boxes for the amount of time and investment involved are general considered nitche. I could go for a good sand box game myself but that doesn't the majority of paying players out there right want one.
Not sure of your idea of sand Box but PG (project Gorgon) looks promising if you don't mind the current dated graphics
Actually themepark games take a LOT more time and money and staff to create because of all of the quest content.
That is a lie. The thing the OP craving for is so hard to make no one can even make it yet.
And the title can be chage to it have been 10 years, why isn't there "any" worth while mmorpg. Everyone complaining on the forum is expecting some mmorpg that only exist in their dream.
Originally posted by Baghool Sandbox was as dumb as the name they gave it at conception, in my opinion. I hope the genre fails, and we get back to the origins of the MMO roots.
MUDs...?
maybe it's the only way to make a great in depth game with low budget.
Originally posted by Baghool Sandbox was as dumb as the name they gave it at conception, in my opinion. I hope the genre fails, and we get back to the origins of the MMO roots.
MUDs...?
Yeah! lol
Every MMO should start there!
"Investment firms do not have that outlook on life. They need to know there is not only a return on their investment but also a solid profit at the end of it." tawess-
Originally posted by Baghool Sandbox was as dumb as the name they gave it at conception, in my opinion. I hope the genre fails, and we get back to the origins of the MMO roots.
where the **** are the games for the hype? Still not a single new decent Sandbox-Release till today. What are the companies doing? Chilling and sleeping?
I cant understant that....
I'm going to go out on a limb and state sand box games due to their open nature, and increase in choice take longer to make and balance then you average theme park on rails MMO, ( which in themselves generally take at least 4-5 years to make, so 3 isn't much .)
As to what the companies making games are doing I'd guess mainly chasing the masses IE Wow Clone and theme parks. Sand boxes for the amount of time and investment involved are general considered nitche. I could go for a good sand box game myself but that doesn't the majority of paying players out there right want one.
Not sure of your idea of sand Box but PG (project Gorgon) looks promising if you don't mind the current dated graphics
Actually themepark games take a LOT more time and money and staff to create because of all of the quest content.
That is a lie. The thing the OP craving for is so hard to make no one can even make it yet.
And the title can be chage to it have been 10 years, why isn't there "any" worth while mmorpg. Everyone complaining on the forum is expecting some mmorpg that only exist in their dream.
The only thing harder about making a Sandbox is understanding HOW to make it.
This is indeed something that's very hard for the current people leading this industry. In fact, I'd say it's virtually impossible. For them.
I have not really been a fan of Sandbox games. I have watched many and tried a few.... but yet to find one that actually grabs me.
I will have to agree that theme park games (unfortunately) are more popular and get more of the funding. And even those are getting stale as all hell.
Star Citizen isnt a sandbox.. never thought it was and still today Dont feel as if it will be.
Sandbox: A sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish.
Minecraft is a beautiful example of a sandbox game.
Originally posted by Bladestrom No customer demand.
I don't think that is the problem, really.
The larger companies like safe bets, the last sandboxes who did good was UO and early SWG.
The real problem is that MMOs are expensive while Hearthstone earn more money than Wow. EA, Activision and similar companies want the maximum profits for the minimum work.
Copying what others already done is far easier than creating something different, that is the reason most MMOs are themeparks. But now the larger publishers seems to think that the investment of a MMO isn't worth it at all.
With sandboxes you could copy UO or SWG but we all know that neither would get enough players for a large publisher. I don't doubt that you could make a very successful sandbox MMO if you do it right, if nothing else then because people like building stuff and solo sandboxes like the Elder scrolls games and Fallout are very popular.
The problem is that a very popular sandbox would need completelly new mechanics and gameplay experiences which is something that takes a lot of work and money. A few companies could actually do that, Rockstar comes to mind but they seems uninterested in MMOs for the moment. A "Red dead " sandbox MMO would really be great though...
I have not really been a fan of Sandbox games. I have watched many and tried a few.... but yet to find one that actually grabs me.
I will have to agree that theme park games (unfortunately) are more popular and get more of the funding. And even those are getting stale as all hell.
Star Citizen isnt a sandbox.. never thought it was and still today Dont feel as if it will be.
Sandbox: A sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish.
Minecraft is a beautiful example of a sandbox game.
That's a pretty good description of "Sandbox". The core principles in my mind are "freedom" and "playing in a world".
Most "Sandbox" games are not really Sandbox, from what I've seen. They have sandbox features but they play like a Themepark (or like nothing in particular at worst) because of the power divisions that divide the content between groupings based on said power ranks. You know, if at any point most of the world is either instant death or useless stuff you've left behind, how can that be a "Sandbox"?
But you're absolutely right that "sandbox" games don't grab you (any of us). If a game is going to remove the quests and grinds (based on advancement) the game has to put something else in there to grab players. If advancement in BIG CHUNKS is removed, there needs to be something else to get players excited. Money is, of course, why most "sandbox" products don't have nearly enough. But also imagination.
There are ways to grab players outside of ~grind to level x~ and the cool things done along the way. Many of those cool things can also be featured in a Sandbox game, when it comes to cool dungeons, visual discoveries, etc.
MOB AI is one thing that can be done. It doesn't have to be some far advanced scientific AI. It just has to offer some direction to NPCs and randomness of actions that fits the moment. This still isn't an easy or cheap thing to do, but I think it most definitely can be done in a way that adds excitement to adventure.
Another thing that can be done is meaningful story lines and plots that evolve. I think a GM staff with proper tools would work wonders here, along with a very deep lore full of mystery. If I were making the game, I'd have layers of intermingled lore, not just one historical lore. Like maybe 10 eras of the past that all are brought into action in the player's world. Not one ultimate evil, but many.
I'd hide discoveries pertaining to knowledge and lost treasures. I'd have many "world wide races to discovery" going on throughout the game. I'd have uniquely powered artifacts, spells, powers, and skill abilities as rewards for being that one player who figured out a mystery. Along with rare items of great value. I love the idea of "rares", but want them meaningful inside the game. There should be things like the Hope Diamond and the Amber Room for players to "win" and have bragging rights to, as well as the value of such things. And I'd have many smaller things of the like to satisfy the masses to some degree.
I'd also have social game play. Politics, territory, resources, city trade, all that. Players will provide the content if they only have the systems to work with.
Originally posted by Archlyte Originally posted by Iselin Originally posted by Lonzo where the **** are the games for the hype? Still not a single new decent Sandbox-Release till today. What are the companies doing? Chilling and sleeping?I cant understant that....
Well that right there should give you a clue about how relevant and plugged-in the daily dissection of MMO faults in this forum is.
If you're a developer and base your new MMO on the many discussions here about why MMOs are dead pieces of shit and how they should all be like UO, EQ, Asheron's Call or Lineage, prepare yourself for at best, a very low population niche game that will still get picked apart for having been done wrong.
Meanwhile the companies are neither chilling nor sleeping. They continue to develop MMOs for those who actually like them and enjoy playing them. They're huge time and money investments. Why pitch them at the tiny chronically disgusted minority?
Because they might not accept your premise that you follow either the permanently disaffected at MMORPG.com or maybe they use the trend that is perceived from surveys, anecdotal interview content, what your boss tells you to make, or what you as a developer decide is right no matter what you hear from others.
How long did the Theme Park hegemony take to get to full speed and dominate the industry? Is that any indicator of the ability to develop for a trend, or is it just the outlier created by WoW flooding the market? Is the sandbox resurgence already over as OP hopes, or is this particular epoch just getting started?
I don't think there are any definitive answers, just a particular irritation you have with people who express negative observations about MMORPGs that have disappointed them.
"...outlier created by WOW"? Over-simplification and delusion at its finest. What next, Coke is the outlier and Fanta is the core cola?
Guess I can say it this way: where is WoW II ?
My opinion on this issue is that Sandboxes are not something that our current level of technology and programming ability can achieve. So enjoy your quest hubs and PvP "content"
MMORPG players are often like Hobbits: They don't like Adventures
Originally posted by Stuka1000 Originally posted by Bladestrom No customer demand.
Plenty demand. No support from the mainstream publishers.
if there truly was a demand then mainstream publishers would be all over it, which is why they aren't.
Because it's hard to make one compare to easy to make quest hub games . Even if the demand is high , if they don't know how to make one , it's to risky to test for right formula .
Testing is job of indie developer , steal the ideas and mass product them is job of mainstream producers .
where the **** are the games for the hype? Still not a single new decent Sandbox-Release till today. What are the companies doing? Chilling and sleeping?
I cant understant that....
It's only three years; you really think a worth while MMORPG should be done in that time, or even anywhere close to done?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
9 Servers in NA, 8 servers in EU makes 17 currently running servers not counting Asian servers. Plus they are releasing two new fresh start servers on Dec 10th with the 2nd expansion.
Regular content updates, still doing free expansions.
Exactly how do you define the term "flop" because from my perspective ArcheAge seems to actually be doing quite well. Is a "flop" anything short of a WoW killer, or just your way of saying you didn't like it?
I do agree with you it's not a sandbox though. It's a "sandpark" at best.
where the **** are the games for the hype? Still not a single new decent Sandbox-Release till today. What are the companies doing? Chilling and sleeping?
I cant understant that....
It's only three years; you really think a worth while MMORPG should be done in that time, or even anywhere close to done?
Given that the original post is dated July 2015, it's now four years. But hey whose counting?
Sandbox games do come out. But because they focus on deathmatch PvP, they die. PvP fans are never happy. A dev for Age of Conan said if they instead focused 100% on PVE, AOC would have done a lot better. But he said no matter what they did, the pvp fans always wanted more and were never happy
I can confirm in another game, in WoW, pvp fans are never happy
EVE Online is the only MMO that actually is good for a sandbox. And despite prefering PVE, its one of my favorite MMOs. In EVE, there is TONS of PVE content and there was a statistic at one point in time that most people didn't even go to nullsec.
However, I found nullsec to be safer than low and high sec, funny enough.
However, what if EVE did what other indie low budget sandbox games do? Just focus on PvP and ignore PVE. It would fail. Imagine no mining, no trading, no missions, no story arch...the game would be dead because there'd be no PvErs, and the PvPers would always be unhappy.
In GW2, PvP players are always unhappy
In nearly every game PvP players are always unhappy. EVE Online is about the only exception.
There is also Saga of Ryzom which is nearly 100% PVE, but that game is dead. The game itself is just bad though. But its a sandbox MMO that focused on PVE, but it failed. Its because they made the game too challenging for most people, and when you can't do anything without a group, that is a HUGE issue when there is no one to group with. Vanguard saga of heroes made the same mistake. No one around to group with, group focused game, no one could play it because they couldn't find a group which meant they couldn't do any content.
SWG (which I guess some PvPer) liked was an awesome PvE sandbox MMO. By far the best PVE sandbox MMO to come out. I never did PVP, but guess that was an option. But for PVE, by far the best experience. And the creature handler, nothing is like it in any game of any genre.
Anarchy Online was also an awesome PVE sandbox MMO, probably tied with SWG for the best one. Its too old now for me to enjoy, but it was amazing. But PvPers seemed to like it, I always just did PVE though.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
I think the sandbox thing is mainly people asking for something different, a lot of us want something different to the standard modern MMO and if it is a sandbox or not is not that important, just that it feels very different from whats been made the last 10 years.
A sandbox will be nowhere near the standard games and a good one would be a relief to a genre with few new ideas. If thew game were more themeparkish and introduced the content in a very different way from what we are used to that would be fine as well (in either case it needs to be fun of course).
Archeage as some have mentioned did have sandbox elements but the general gameplay was still to close to the norm and the rather scammy cashshop didn't help. Some parts of the game were good but it wasn't enough.
MMOs need to stop using the exact same mechanics and try out new ideas, sandbox or not.
where the **** are the games for the hype? Still not a single new decent Sandbox-Release till today. What are the companies doing? Chilling and sleeping?
I cant understant that....
It's only three years; you really think a worth while MMORPG should be done in that time, or even anywhere close to done?
Given that the original post is dated July 2015, it's now four years. But hey whose counting?
Didn't bother reading the date, even then 4 years is still a short time to expect an MMO to go from conceptualizing, funding, development, polish, then on to completion, especially if you're expecting a deep sandbox experience, that isn't as shallow as a puddle or as buggy as the swamps in Florida.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Sandbox games do come out. But because they focus on deathmatch PvP, they die. PvP fans are never happy. A dev for Age of Conan said if they instead focused 100% on PVE, AOC would have done a lot better. But he said no matter what they did, the pvp fans always wanted more and were never happy
I can confirm in another game, in WoW, pvp fans are never happy
EVE Online is the only MMO that actually is good for a sandbox. And despite prefering PVE, its one of my favorite MMOs. In EVE, there is TONS of PVE content and there was a statistic at one point in time that most people didn't even go to nullsec.
However, I found nullsec to be safer than low and high sec, funny enough.
However, what if EVE did what other indie low budget sandbox games do? Just focus on PvP and ignore PVE. It would fail. Imagine no mining, no trading, no missions, no story arch...the game would be dead because there'd be no PvErs, and the PvPers would always be unhappy.
In GW2, PvP players are always unhappy
In nearly every game PvP players are always unhappy. EVE Online is about the only exception.
There is also Saga of Ryzom which is nearly 100% PVE, but that game is dead. The game itself is just bad though. But its a sandbox MMO that focused on PVE, but it failed. Its because they made the game too challenging for most people, and when you can't do anything without a group, that is a HUGE issue when there is no one to group with. Vanguard saga of heroes made the same mistake. No one around to group with, group focused game, no one could play it because they couldn't find a group which meant they couldn't do any content.
SWG (which I guess some PvPer) liked was an awesome PvE sandbox MMO. By far the best PVE sandbox MMO to come out. I never did PVP, but guess that was an option. But for PVE, by far the best experience. And the creature handler, nothing is like it in any game of any genre.
Anarchy Online was also an awesome PVE sandbox MMO, probably tied with SWG for the best one. Its too old now for me to enjoy, but it was amazing. But PvPers seemed to like it, I always just did PVE though.
For me anyway the PVP surpassed even DAOC. As I haven't seen another PVP community like the one we had in SWG, PVP with a lot of mass scale role play, across many guilds (Imp and rebel). Nothing else has come close to that in my gaming life.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
9 Servers in NA, 8 servers in EU makes 17 currently running servers not counting Asian servers. Plus they are releasing two new fresh start servers on Dec 10th with the 2nd expansion.
Regular content updates, still doing free expansions.
Exactly how do you define the term "flop" because from my perspective ArcheAge seems to actually be doing quite well. Is a "flop" anything short of a WoW killer, or just your way of saying you didn't like it?
I do agree with you it's not a sandbox though. It's a "sandpark" at best.
Not a player of Archage myself, but I do agree that gamers have a unrealistic definition of success in MMOs. MMOs are not games which can be judged purely by sales, were they even P2P to begin with? This is treating them like a new car model, how well did it sell?
MMOs are more like starting a new car manufacturer, it is here to stay long term, the question should be how does it do over the long term? Thats the real measure of success, unfortunately for so many players and reviewers, if the box sales are not good enough or it does not go on to challenge WOW it is seen as a failure.
Comments
That is a lie. The thing the OP craving for is so hard to make no one can even make it yet.
And the title can be chage to it have been 10 years, why isn't there "any" worth while mmorpg. Everyone complaining on the forum is expecting some mmorpg that only exist in their dream.
maybe it's the only way to make a great in depth game with low budget.
Yeah! lol
Every MMO should start there!
"Investment firms do not have that outlook on life. They need to know there is not only a return on their investment but also a solid profit at the end of it." tawess-
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
"MUDs" were Sandbox. "DIKU MUDs" were Themepark.
Idea fail?
Once upon a time....
The only thing harder about making a Sandbox is understanding HOW to make it.
This is indeed something that's very hard for the current people leading this industry. In fact, I'd say it's virtually impossible. For them.
Once upon a time....
I have not really been a fan of Sandbox games. I have watched many and tried a few.... but yet to find one that actually grabs me.
I will have to agree that theme park games (unfortunately) are more popular and get more of the funding. And even those are getting stale as all hell.
Star Citizen isnt a sandbox.. never thought it was and still today Dont feel as if it will be.
Sandbox: A sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish.
Minecraft is a beautiful example of a sandbox game.
Played: UO, LotR, WoW, SWG, DDO, AoC, EVE, Warhammer, TF2, EQ2, SWTOR, TSW, CSS, KF, L4D, AoW, WoT
Playing: The Secret World until Citadel of Sorcery goes into Alpha testing.
Tired of: Linear quest games, dailies, and dumbed down games
Anticipating:Citadel of Sorcery
I don't think that is the problem, really.
The larger companies like safe bets, the last sandboxes who did good was UO and early SWG.
The real problem is that MMOs are expensive while Hearthstone earn more money than Wow. EA, Activision and similar companies want the maximum profits for the minimum work.
Copying what others already done is far easier than creating something different, that is the reason most MMOs are themeparks. But now the larger publishers seems to think that the investment of a MMO isn't worth it at all.
With sandboxes you could copy UO or SWG but we all know that neither would get enough players for a large publisher. I don't doubt that you could make a very successful sandbox MMO if you do it right, if nothing else then because people like building stuff and solo sandboxes like the Elder scrolls games and Fallout are very popular.
The problem is that a very popular sandbox would need completelly new mechanics and gameplay experiences which is something that takes a lot of work and money. A few companies could actually do that, Rockstar comes to mind but they seems uninterested in MMOs for the moment. A "Red dead " sandbox MMO would really be great though...
That's a pretty good description of "Sandbox". The core principles in my mind are "freedom" and "playing in a world".
Most "Sandbox" games are not really Sandbox, from what I've seen. They have sandbox features but they play like a Themepark (or like nothing in particular at worst) because of the power divisions that divide the content between groupings based on said power ranks. You know, if at any point most of the world is either instant death or useless stuff you've left behind, how can that be a "Sandbox"?
But you're absolutely right that "sandbox" games don't grab you (any of us). If a game is going to remove the quests and grinds (based on advancement) the game has to put something else in there to grab players. If advancement in BIG CHUNKS is removed, there needs to be something else to get players excited. Money is, of course, why most "sandbox" products don't have nearly enough. But also imagination.
There are ways to grab players outside of ~grind to level x~ and the cool things done along the way. Many of those cool things can also be featured in a Sandbox game, when it comes to cool dungeons, visual discoveries, etc.
MOB AI is one thing that can be done. It doesn't have to be some far advanced scientific AI. It just has to offer some direction to NPCs and randomness of actions that fits the moment. This still isn't an easy or cheap thing to do, but I think it most definitely can be done in a way that adds excitement to adventure.
Another thing that can be done is meaningful story lines and plots that evolve. I think a GM staff with proper tools would work wonders here, along with a very deep lore full of mystery. If I were making the game, I'd have layers of intermingled lore, not just one historical lore. Like maybe 10 eras of the past that all are brought into action in the player's world. Not one ultimate evil, but many.
I'd hide discoveries pertaining to knowledge and lost treasures. I'd have many "world wide races to discovery" going on throughout the game. I'd have uniquely powered artifacts, spells, powers, and skill abilities as rewards for being that one player who figured out a mystery. Along with rare items of great value. I love the idea of "rares", but want them meaningful inside the game. There should be things like the Hope Diamond and the Amber Room for players to "win" and have bragging rights to, as well as the value of such things. And I'd have many smaller things of the like to satisfy the masses to some degree.
I'd also have social game play. Politics, territory, resources, city trade, all that. Players will provide the content if they only have the systems to work with.
Once upon a time....
Even if the demand is high , if they don't know how to make one , it's to risky to test for right formula .
Testing is job of indie developer , steal the ideas and mass product them is job of mainstream producers .
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
9 Servers in NA, 8 servers in EU makes 17 currently running servers not counting Asian servers. Plus they are releasing two new fresh start servers on Dec 10th with the 2nd expansion.
Regular content updates, still doing free expansions.
Exactly how do you define the term "flop" because from my perspective ArcheAge seems to actually be doing quite well. Is a "flop" anything short of a WoW killer, or just your way of saying you didn't like it?
I do agree with you it's not a sandbox though. It's a "sandpark" at best.
I can confirm in another game, in WoW, pvp fans are never happy
EVE Online is the only MMO that actually is good for a sandbox. And despite prefering PVE, its one of my favorite MMOs. In EVE, there is TONS of PVE content and there was a statistic at one point in time that most people didn't even go to nullsec.
However, I found nullsec to be safer than low and high sec, funny enough.
However, what if EVE did what other indie low budget sandbox games do? Just focus on PvP and ignore PVE. It would fail. Imagine no mining, no trading, no missions, no story arch...the game would be dead because there'd be no PvErs, and the PvPers would always be unhappy.
In GW2, PvP players are always unhappy
In nearly every game PvP players are always unhappy. EVE Online is about the only exception.
There is also Saga of Ryzom which is nearly 100% PVE, but that game is dead. The game itself is just bad though. But its a sandbox MMO that focused on PVE, but it failed. Its because they made the game too challenging for most people, and when you can't do anything without a group, that is a HUGE issue when there is no one to group with. Vanguard saga of heroes made the same mistake. No one around to group with, group focused game, no one could play it because they couldn't find a group which meant they couldn't do any content.
SWG (which I guess some PvPer) liked was an awesome PvE sandbox MMO. By far the best PVE sandbox MMO to come out. I never did PVP, but guess that was an option. But for PVE, by far the best experience. And the creature handler, nothing is like it in any game of any genre.
Anarchy Online was also an awesome PVE sandbox MMO, probably tied with SWG for the best one. Its too old now for me to enjoy, but it was amazing. But PvPers seemed to like it, I always just did PVE though.
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
A sandbox will be nowhere near the standard games and a good one would be a relief to a genre with few new ideas. If thew game were more themeparkish and introduced the content in a very different way from what we are used to that would be fine as well (in either case it needs to be fun of course).
Archeage as some have mentioned did have sandbox elements but the general gameplay was still to close to the norm and the rather scammy cashshop didn't help. Some parts of the game were good but it wasn't enough.
MMOs need to stop using the exact same mechanics and try out new ideas, sandbox or not.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Not a player of Archage myself, but I do agree that gamers have a unrealistic definition of success in MMOs. MMOs are not games which can be judged purely by sales, were they even P2P to begin with? This is treating them like a new car model, how well did it sell?
MMOs are more like starting a new car manufacturer, it is here to stay long term, the question should be how does it do over the long term? Thats the real measure of success, unfortunately for so many players and reviewers, if the box sales are not good enough or it does not go on to challenge WOW it is seen as a failure.
just not in the MMO space
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
I cant tell you how many time I have asked posters 'which game is better than X' and the response is a list of games that arent out yet.
lol..Its almost comical
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me