You have a weak understanding of what a themepark is. A themepark offers quests and laid out activities to follow. A sandbox is just a playground where there may be a theme, but you make your own fun.
Just because gamers have pushed for a more solo-centric type of gameplay doesn't mean that Themeparks as a rule are catered to 2-8 players. Especially when you understand what a themepark is (you don't).
With that being said, Themeparks can and have offered huge instances with MMO gameplay. It is as if you never heard of DAOC which was NOT a sandbox yet inspired many people to be social in their world. Darkness Falls was always jam packed and people organized into huge multi-tier raids to conquer it. Then you have the RvR system too. Also, open dungeons where dozens of people would team up and help each other.
To destroy your whole theory, what has contributed mostly to this whole issue you are bringing up is the addition of a group finder in most games along with small instances. Instances are not needed in a themepark and all the original ones didn't have them either.
Hmm seems that you don't know what a themepark is. Themepark is hard coded area by the developers for content with a story and questline. A themepark MMORPG is one comprised almost entirely of themepark content. The first time I remember hearing the term was Ralp Koster for his SWG sandbox that had themeparks on the planets.
EQ and DAoC are not themeparks or sandboxes. They were just open world level grinders. There was no "ride" or could you build. You just decided were to kill stuff and how. Basically a 3D MUD.
You are right not all themeparks MMORPG started out that way. The evolution of this type of MMORPG just lends that way because of the method of content delivery.
There is only so many ways you can rewrap the same quest types over and over across a whole genre. Of course there will be boredom and adding more grind or forced grouping just adds to it. WoW also brought in non MMORPG gamers who just play casually. It all just leads to what we have which is based off metrics. What players actually do.
All of that still doesn't dismiss the fact that a full on themepark MMORPG does not need or gain a lot being a MMORPG. If you are not world building and only play to solo, group, dungeon, faction PvP and raid all of this can be done in a COOP. There is nothing lasting in a persistent world.
It is not about if you like themepark or not. It is about what truly is added and is it worth the development time, difficulties and expense to do it?
I think you are trying to say why I play themepark MMORPG when inidividually I can find better solo RPG, COOP dungeon games, COOP pvp games, MOBA.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
You have a weak understanding of what a themepark is. A themepark offers quests and laid out activities to follow. A sandbox is just a playground where there may be a theme, but you make your own fun.
Just because gamers have pushed for a more solo-centric type of gameplay doesn't mean that Themeparks as a rule are catered to 2-8 players. Especially when you understand what a themepark is (you don't).
With that being said, Themeparks can and have offered huge instances with MMO gameplay. It is as if you never heard of DAOC which was NOT a sandbox yet inspired many people to be social in their world. Darkness Falls was always jam packed and people organized into huge multi-tier raids to conquer it. Then you have the RvR system too. Also, open dungeons where dozens of people would team up and help each other.
To destroy your whole theory, what has contributed mostly to this whole issue you are bringing up is the addition of a group finder in most games along with small instances. Instances are not needed in a themepark and all the original ones didn't have them either.
Hmm seems that you don't know what a themepark is. Themepark is hard coded area by the developers for content with a story and questline. A themepark MMORPG is one comprised almost entirely of themepark content. The first time I remember hearing the term was Ralp Koster for his SWG sandbox that had themeparks on the planets.
EQ and DAoC are not themeparks or sandboxes. They were just open world level grinders. There was no "ride" or could you build. You just decided were to kill stuff and how. Basically a 3D MUD.
You are right not all themeparks MMORPG started out that way. The evolution of this type of MMORPG just lends that way because of the method of content delivery.
There is only so many ways you can rewrap the same quest types over and over across a whole genre. Of course there will be boredom and adding more grind or forced grouping just adds to it. WoW also brought in non MMORPG gamers who just play casually. It all just leads to what we have which is based off metrics. What players actually do.
All of that still doesn't dismiss the fact that a full on themepark MMORPG does not need or gain a lot being a MMORPG. If you are not world building and only play to solo, group, dungeon, faction PvP and raid all of this can be done in a COOP. There is nothing lasting in a persistent world.
It is not about if you like themepark or not. It is about what truly is added and is it worth the development time, difficulties and expense to do it?
I think you are trying to say why I play themepark MMORPG when inidividually I can find better solo RPG, COOP dungeon games, COOP pvp games, MOBA.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
I am not even whining. I just came to the conclusions that a pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG. It's that simple. Like saying a Boys and Girls club soccer game doesn't need to be in a professional stadium. There is almost nothing that can't be done in a coop RPG.
Is there such a thing as a pure tteme park MMORPG?
I consider a themepark an unchangeable area of developer content based on a story/questhub (instanced or not). Some have a few instances tacked on but even most of that can be replicated coop.
You have a weak understanding of what a themepark is. A themepark offers quests and laid out activities to follow. A sandbox is just a playground where there may be a theme, but you make your own fun.
Just because gamers have pushed for a more solo-centric type of gameplay doesn't mean that Themeparks as a rule are catered to 2-8 players. Especially when you understand what a themepark is (you don't).
With that being said, Themeparks can and have offered huge instances with MMO gameplay. It is as if you never heard of DAOC which was NOT a sandbox yet inspired many people to be social in their world. Darkness Falls was always jam packed and people organized into huge multi-tier raids to conquer it. Then you have the RvR system too. Also, open dungeons where dozens of people would team up and help each other.
To destroy your whole theory, what has contributed mostly to this whole issue you are bringing up is the addition of a group finder in most games along with small instances. Instances are not needed in a themepark and all the original ones didn't have them either.
Hmm seems that you don't know what a themepark is. Themepark is hard coded area by the developers for content with a story and questline. A themepark MMORPG is one comprised almost entirely of themepark content. The first time I remember hearing the term was Ralp Koster for his SWG sandbox that had themeparks on the planets.
EQ and DAoC are not themeparks or sandboxes. They were just open world level grinders. There was no "ride" or could you build. You just decided were to kill stuff and how. Basically a 3D MUD.
You are right not all themeparks MMORPG started out that way. The evolution of this type of MMORPG just lends that way because of the method of content delivery.
There is only so many ways you can rewrap the same quest types over and over across a whole genre. Of course there will be boredom and adding more grind or forced grouping just adds to it. WoW also brought in non MMORPG gamers who just play casually. It all just leads to what we have which is based off metrics. What players actually do.
All of that still doesn't dismiss the fact that a full on themepark MMORPG does not need or gain a lot being a MMORPG. If you are not world building and only play to solo, group, dungeon, faction PvP and raid all of this can be done in a COOP. There is nothing lasting in a persistent world.
It is not about if you like themepark or not. It is about what truly is added and is it worth the development time, difficulties and expense to do it?
I think you are trying to say why I play themepark MMORPG when inidividually I can find better solo RPG, COOP dungeon games, COOP pvp games, MOBA.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
I am not even whining. I just came to the conclusions that a pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG. It's that simple. Like saying a Boys and Girls club soccer game doesn't need to be in a professional stadium. There is almost nothing that can't be done in a coop RPG.
I don't even know what that statement mean. "Pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG".
I actually don't know what coop RPG too. Some coop RPG actaully have quite interesting world.
I don't even know what you are trying to say. Remove the shallow world from Wow and ESO and put in a even more shallow world?
You have a weak understanding of what a themepark is. A themepark offers quests and laid out activities to follow. A sandbox is just a playground where there may be a theme, but you make your own fun.
Just because gamers have pushed for a more solo-centric type of gameplay doesn't mean that Themeparks as a rule are catered to 2-8 players. Especially when you understand what a themepark is (you don't).
With that being said, Themeparks can and have offered huge instances with MMO gameplay. It is as if you never heard of DAOC which was NOT a sandbox yet inspired many people to be social in their world. Darkness Falls was always jam packed and people organized into huge multi-tier raids to conquer it. Then you have the RvR system too. Also, open dungeons where dozens of people would team up and help each other.
To destroy your whole theory, what has contributed mostly to this whole issue you are bringing up is the addition of a group finder in most games along with small instances. Instances are not needed in a themepark and all the original ones didn't have them either.
Hmm seems that you don't know what a themepark is. Themepark is hard coded area by the developers for content with a story and questline. A themepark MMORPG is one comprised almost entirely of themepark content. The first time I remember hearing the term was Ralp Koster for his SWG sandbox that had themeparks on the planets.
EQ and DAoC are not themeparks or sandboxes. They were just open world level grinders. There was no "ride" or could you build. You just decided were to kill stuff and how. Basically a 3D MUD.
You are right not all themeparks MMORPG started out that way. The evolution of this type of MMORPG just lends that way because of the method of content delivery.
There is only so many ways you can rewrap the same quest types over and over across a whole genre. Of course there will be boredom and adding more grind or forced grouping just adds to it. WoW also brought in non MMORPG gamers who just play casually. It all just leads to what we have which is based off metrics. What players actually do.
All of that still doesn't dismiss the fact that a full on themepark MMORPG does not need or gain a lot being a MMORPG. If you are not world building and only play to solo, group, dungeon, faction PvP and raid all of this can be done in a COOP. There is nothing lasting in a persistent world.
It is not about if you like themepark or not. It is about what truly is added and is it worth the development time, difficulties and expense to do it?
I think you are trying to say why I play themepark MMORPG when inidividually I can find better solo RPG, COOP dungeon games, COOP pvp games, MOBA.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
I am not even whining. I just came to the conclusions that a pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG. It's that simple. Like saying a Boys and Girls club soccer game doesn't need to be in a professional stadium. There is almost nothing that can't be done in a coop RPG.
I don't even know what that statement mean. "Pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG".
I actually don't know what coop RPG too. Some coop RPG actaully have quite interesting world.
I don't even know what you are trying to say. Remove the shallow world from Wow and ESO and put in a even more shallow world?
Technically a themepark is unchangeable area. It is a developer story area or questhub. WoW is pretty much a pure themepark compared to say Archeage which has areas of sandbox and themepark in one game.
A coop RPG... just think Diablo but true RPG. Not isometric part but just how you can multiplayer. You could also have guilds plus group, raids, dungeon and PvP match finders to make it MMO like.
Yes, if you lack a means for player's to make a permanent change to the game world is there really any reason for a permanent online world? As my point you can get nearly the same result for easier and cheaper development.
How much would the average themepark MMORPG change if it was single player with options to invite friends to play with match maker for random group, raids and dungeons?
You have a weak understanding of what a themepark is. A themepark offers quests and laid out activities to follow. A sandbox is just a playground where there may be a theme, but you make your own fun.
Just because gamers have pushed for a more solo-centric type of gameplay doesn't mean that Themeparks as a rule are catered to 2-8 players. Especially when you understand what a themepark is (you don't).
With that being said, Themeparks can and have offered huge instances with MMO gameplay. It is as if you never heard of DAOC which was NOT a sandbox yet inspired many people to be social in their world. Darkness Falls was always jam packed and people organized into huge multi-tier raids to conquer it. Then you have the RvR system too. Also, open dungeons where dozens of people would team up and help each other.
To destroy your whole theory, what has contributed mostly to this whole issue you are bringing up is the addition of a group finder in most games along with small instances. Instances are not needed in a themepark and all the original ones didn't have them either.
Hmm seems that you don't know what a themepark is. Themepark is hard coded area by the developers for content with a story and questline. A themepark MMORPG is one comprised almost entirely of themepark content. The first time I remember hearing the term was Ralp Koster for his SWG sandbox that had themeparks on the planets.
EQ and DAoC are not themeparks or sandboxes. They were just open world level grinders. There was no "ride" or could you build. You just decided were to kill stuff and how. Basically a 3D MUD.
You are right not all themeparks MMORPG started out that way. The evolution of this type of MMORPG just lends that way because of the method of content delivery.
There is only so many ways you can rewrap the same quest types over and over across a whole genre. Of course there will be boredom and adding more grind or forced grouping just adds to it. WoW also brought in non MMORPG gamers who just play casually. It all just leads to what we have which is based off metrics. What players actually do.
All of that still doesn't dismiss the fact that a full on themepark MMORPG does not need or gain a lot being a MMORPG. If you are not world building and only play to solo, group, dungeon, faction PvP and raid all of this can be done in a COOP. There is nothing lasting in a persistent world.
It is not about if you like themepark or not. It is about what truly is added and is it worth the development time, difficulties and expense to do it?
I think you are trying to say why I play themepark MMORPG when inidividually I can find better solo RPG, COOP dungeon games, COOP pvp games, MOBA.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
I am not even whining. I just came to the conclusions that a pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG. It's that simple. Like saying a Boys and Girls club soccer game doesn't need to be in a professional stadium. There is almost nothing that can't be done in a coop RPG.
I don't even know what that statement mean. "Pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG".
I actually don't know what coop RPG too. Some coop RPG actaully have quite interesting world.
I don't even know what you are trying to say. Remove the shallow world from Wow and ESO and put in a even more shallow world?
Technically a themepark is unchangeable area. It is a developer story area or questhub. WoW is pretty much a pure themepark compared to say Archeage which has areas of sandbox and themepark in one game.
A coop RPG... just think Diablo but true RPG. Not isometric part but just how you can multiplayer. You could also have guilds plus group, raids, dungeon and PvP match finders to make it MMO like.
Yes, if you lack a means for player's to make a permanent change to the game world is there really any reason for a permanent online world? As my point you can get nearly the same result for easier and cheaper development.
How much would the average themepark MMORPG change if it was single player with options to invite friends to play with match maker for random group, raids and dungeons?
Isn't GW1 exactly what you are describing, ANET even gave it a new moniker, CORPG.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I've always wondered why can't a game be both? If it is an open world, I see no reason to not have elements of both to cater to a variety of playstyles. While WoW doesn't have sandbox elements, if you want to play it like a lobby, play it that way. If you want to play it as a min/max hardcore raider, have at it. If you have 2 hours of playtime a week and like to solo go for it. I kinda felt that EQ had a balance of sandbox and themepark. Sometimes I wished the rides were better, sometimes I wish there was more sand in the box. However, I never thought it couldn't be done right. Or beyond that - the controversy never made sense to me. If it is a good sandbox, I enjoy the game. If it is a good themepark, I enjoy the ride. To me it is the quality of the game over the genre or gamestyle. I like variety. So often, especially on this site, I see people judging the game on it's structure rather than its value. "SWTOR sucks because it isn't a sandbox". "WoW sucks because it is a themepark". "What WARHAMMER should have been is...." Let's be honest. SWOTOR sucks because its rides suck, not because it isn't SWG.....and so on.
What valid reason is there for games? Whats a valid reason for having fun? I don't understand the question in the title but my answer is I like it and I'm willing to pay money for it.
The question OP needs answered is what a theme park is, why it's called that and what a sandbox is and why its' called that.
Neither term relates to how many players are available to it. It's kinda bugged out that someone who claims to be making a game totally misses this.
I also don't see a relationship between the content design and number of players. If I were to answer the OP's question directly; themeparks don't need to be an MMORPG. I will also add, neither does a sandbox.
At the end of the day, I don't believe the concepts of themepark or sandbox are mutually exclusive, and to this day I feel that I have not played a game that stands alone as one or the other.
You have a weak understanding of what a themepark is. A themepark offers quests and laid out activities to follow. A sandbox is just a playground where there may be a theme, but you make your own fun.
Just because gamers have pushed for a more solo-centric type of gameplay doesn't mean that Themeparks as a rule are catered to 2-8 players. Especially when you understand what a themepark is (you don't).
With that being said, Themeparks can and have offered huge instances with MMO gameplay. It is as if you never heard of DAOC which was NOT a sandbox yet inspired many people to be social in their world. Darkness Falls was always jam packed and people organized into huge multi-tier raids to conquer it. Then you have the RvR system too. Also, open dungeons where dozens of people would team up and help each other.
To destroy your whole theory, what has contributed mostly to this whole issue you are bringing up is the addition of a group finder in most games along with small instances. Instances are not needed in a themepark and all the original ones didn't have them either.
Hmm seems that you don't know what a themepark is. Themepark is hard coded area by the developers for content with a story and questline. A themepark MMORPG is one comprised almost entirely of themepark content. The first time I remember hearing the term was Ralp Koster for his SWG sandbox that had themeparks on the planets.
EQ and DAoC are not themeparks or sandboxes. They were just open world level grinders. There was no "ride" or could you build. You just decided were to kill stuff and how. Basically a 3D MUD.
You are right not all themeparks MMORPG started out that way. The evolution of this type of MMORPG just lends that way because of the method of content delivery.
There is only so many ways you can rewrap the same quest types over and over across a whole genre. Of course there will be boredom and adding more grind or forced grouping just adds to it. WoW also brought in non MMORPG gamers who just play casually. It all just leads to what we have which is based off metrics. What players actually do.
All of that still doesn't dismiss the fact that a full on themepark MMORPG does not need or gain a lot being a MMORPG. If you are not world building and only play to solo, group, dungeon, faction PvP and raid all of this can be done in a COOP. There is nothing lasting in a persistent world.
It is not about if you like themepark or not. It is about what truly is added and is it worth the development time, difficulties and expense to do it?
I think you are trying to say why I play themepark MMORPG when inidividually I can find better solo RPG, COOP dungeon games, COOP pvp games, MOBA.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
I am not even whining. I just came to the conclusions that a pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG. It's that simple. Like saying a Boys and Girls club soccer game doesn't need to be in a professional stadium. There is almost nothing that can't be done in a coop RPG.
I don't even know what that statement mean. "Pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG".
I actually don't know what coop RPG too. Some coop RPG actaully have quite interesting world.
I don't even know what you are trying to say. Remove the shallow world from Wow and ESO and put in a even more shallow world?
Technically a themepark is unchangeable area. It is a developer story area or questhub. WoW is pretty much a pure themepark compared to say Archeage which has areas of sandbox and themepark in one game.
A coop RPG... just think Diablo but true RPG. Not isometric part but just how you can multiplayer. You could also have guilds plus group, raids, dungeon and PvP match finders to make it MMO like.
Yes, if you lack a means for player's to make a permanent change to the game world is there really any reason for a permanent online world? As my point you can get nearly the same result for easier and cheaper development.
How much would the average themepark MMORPG change if it was single player with options to invite friends to play with match maker for random group, raids and dungeons?
Isn't GW1 exactly what you are describing, ANET even gave it a new moniker, CORPG.
I've always wondered why can't a game be both? If it is an open world, I see no reason to not have elements of both to cater to a variety of playstyles. While WoW doesn't have sandbox elements, if you want to play it like a lobby, play it that way. If you want to play it as a min/max hardcore raider, have at it. If you have 2 hours of playtime a week and like to solo go for it. I kinda felt that EQ had a balance of sandbox and themepark. Sometimes I wished the rides were better, sometimes I wish there was more sand in the box. However, I never thought it couldn't be done right. Or beyond that - the controversy never made sense to me. If it is a good sandbox, I enjoy the game. If it is a good themepark, I enjoy the ride. To me it is the quality of the game over the genre or gamestyle. I like variety. So often, especially on this site, I see people judging the game on it's structure rather than its value. "SWTOR sucks because it isn't a sandbox". "WoW sucks because it is a themepark". "What WARHAMMER should have been is...." Let's be honest. SWOTOR sucks because its rides suck, not because it isn't SWG.....and so on.
TL;DR: Why is it either/or?
Not really what I am talking about. I am not asking if themepark sucks or not. Just does a pure themepark need to be or gain anything from being a MMORPG considering the extra cost and time inccured in creation.
More people like guided tours, or as I like to call it... content. If we were all satisfied with coming up with our own content from our imagination, we'd never bother with CRPGs. Sandboxes are still limited by the the creators imagination and the tools they give us... and so far, every sandbox has been severely limited in both departments.
Lol, just read title before posting... anyways, I'm totally fine for the most part, playing limited multiplayer games where I can still meet a lot of other people like Destiny.
You have a weak understanding of what a themepark is. A themepark offers quests and laid out activities to follow. A sandbox is just a playground where there may be a theme, but you make your own fun.
Just because gamers have pushed for a more solo-centric type of gameplay doesn't mean that Themeparks as a rule are catered to 2-8 players. Especially when you understand what a themepark is (you don't).
With that being said, Themeparks can and have offered huge instances with MMO gameplay. It is as if you never heard of DAOC which was NOT a sandbox yet inspired many people to be social in their world. Darkness Falls was always jam packed and people organized into huge multi-tier raids to conquer it. Then you have the RvR system too. Also, open dungeons where dozens of people would team up and help each other.
To destroy your whole theory, what has contributed mostly to this whole issue you are bringing up is the addition of a group finder in most games along with small instances. Instances are not needed in a themepark and all the original ones didn't have them either.
Hmm seems that you don't know what a themepark is. Themepark is hard coded area by the developers for content with a story and questline. A themepark MMORPG is one comprised almost entirely of themepark content. The first time I remember hearing the term was Ralp Koster for his SWG sandbox that had themeparks on the planets.
EQ and DAoC are not themeparks or sandboxes. They were just open world level grinders. There was no "ride" or could you build. You just decided were to kill stuff and how. Basically a 3D MUD.
You are right not all themeparks MMORPG started out that way. The evolution of this type of MMORPG just lends that way because of the method of content delivery.
There is only so many ways you can rewrap the same quest types over and over across a whole genre. Of course there will be boredom and adding more grind or forced grouping just adds to it. WoW also brought in non MMORPG gamers who just play casually. It all just leads to what we have which is based off metrics. What players actually do.
All of that still doesn't dismiss the fact that a full on themepark MMORPG does not need or gain a lot being a MMORPG. If you are not world building and only play to solo, group, dungeon, faction PvP and raid all of this can be done in a COOP. There is nothing lasting in a persistent world.
It is not about if you like themepark or not. It is about what truly is added and is it worth the development time, difficulties and expense to do it?
I think you are trying to say why I play themepark MMORPG when inidividually I can find better solo RPG, COOP dungeon games, COOP pvp games, MOBA.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
I am not even whining. I just came to the conclusions that a pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG. It's that simple. Like saying a Boys and Girls club soccer game doesn't need to be in a professional stadium. There is almost nothing that can't be done in a coop RPG.
I don't even know what that statement mean. "Pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG".
I actually don't know what coop RPG too. Some coop RPG actaully have quite interesting world.
I don't even know what you are trying to say. Remove the shallow world from Wow and ESO and put in a even more shallow world?
Technically a themepark is unchangeable area. It is a developer story area or questhub. WoW is pretty much a pure themepark compared to say Archeage which has areas of sandbox and themepark in one game.
A coop RPG... just think Diablo but true RPG. Not isometric part but just how you can multiplayer. You could also have guilds plus group, raids, dungeon and PvP match finders to make it MMO like.
Yes, if you lack a means for player's to make a permanent change to the game world is there really any reason for a permanent online world? As my point you can get nearly the same result for easier and cheaper development.
How much would the average themepark MMORPG change if it was single player with options to invite friends to play with match maker for random group, raids and dungeons?
Isn't GW1 exactly what you are describing, ANET even gave it a new moniker, CORPG.
Don't think I ever played GW1.
Unfortunate. I only played the first release, but players basically gathered in various lobby's throughout the game world and could interact with each other.
When it came time to complete some quests and move further through the land players went out into private instances with up to 5 or 6 (?) members per party.
They could even fill out their group with npcs of various classes, and often did I take a pocket healer.
Some maps were very challenging and normally required a full group of real players to get through. Enterprising players would offer to guide parties through these more challenging zones for a fee.
PVP was entirely instanced, and ranked so you generally fought players near your guilds skill level. They even had out of the box max level (20) characters you could just grab and go PVP with and still be very competitive.
It seemed to be a pretty successful design with players, but ANET originally launched it as totally B2P and it never was the big money maker they had hoped for, which is why GW2 actually isn't much like its predecessor IMO.
They just did a major graphics update earlier this year so you might want to give it a try.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
You have a weak understanding of what a themepark is. A themepark offers quests and laid out activities to follow. A sandbox is just a playground where there may be a theme, but you make your own fun.
Just because gamers have pushed for a more solo-centric type of gameplay doesn't mean that Themeparks as a rule are catered to 2-8 players. Especially when you understand what a themepark is (you don't).
With that being said, Themeparks can and have offered huge instances with MMO gameplay. It is as if you never heard of DAOC which was NOT a sandbox yet inspired many people to be social in their world. Darkness Falls was always jam packed and people organized into huge multi-tier raids to conquer it. Then you have the RvR system too. Also, open dungeons where dozens of people would team up and help each other.
To destroy your whole theory, what has contributed mostly to this whole issue you are bringing up is the addition of a group finder in most games along with small instances. Instances are not needed in a themepark and all the original ones didn't have them either.
Hmm seems that you don't know what a themepark is. Themepark is hard coded area by the developers for content with a story and questline. A themepark MMORPG is one comprised almost entirely of themepark content. The first time I remember hearing the term was Ralp Koster for his SWG sandbox that had themeparks on the planets.
EQ and DAoC are not themeparks or sandboxes. They were just open world level grinders. There was no "ride" or could you build. You just decided were to kill stuff and how. Basically a 3D MUD.
You are right not all themeparks MMORPG started out that way. The evolution of this type of MMORPG just lends that way because of the method of content delivery.
There is only so many ways you can rewrap the same quest types over and over across a whole genre. Of course there will be boredom and adding more grind or forced grouping just adds to it. WoW also brought in non MMORPG gamers who just play casually. It all just leads to what we have which is based off metrics. What players actually do.
All of that still doesn't dismiss the fact that a full on themepark MMORPG does not need or gain a lot being a MMORPG. If you are not world building and only play to solo, group, dungeon, faction PvP and raid all of this can be done in a COOP. There is nothing lasting in a persistent world.
It is not about if you like themepark or not. It is about what truly is added and is it worth the development time, difficulties and expense to do it?
I think you are trying to say why I play themepark MMORPG when inidividually I can find better solo RPG, COOP dungeon games, COOP pvp games, MOBA.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
I am not even whining. I just came to the conclusions that a pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG. It's that simple. Like saying a Boys and Girls club soccer game doesn't need to be in a professional stadium. There is almost nothing that can't be done in a coop RPG.
I don't even know what that statement mean. "Pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG".
I actually don't know what coop RPG too. Some coop RPG actaully have quite interesting world.
I don't even know what you are trying to say. Remove the shallow world from Wow and ESO and put in a even more shallow world?
Technically a themepark is unchangeable area. It is a developer story area or questhub. WoW is pretty much a pure themepark compared to say Archeage which has areas of sandbox and themepark in one game.
A coop RPG... just think Diablo but true RPG. Not isometric part but just how you can multiplayer. You could also have guilds plus group, raids, dungeon and PvP match finders to make it MMO like.
Yes, if you lack a means for player's to make a permanent change to the game world is there really any reason for a permanent online world? As my point you can get nearly the same result for easier and cheaper development.
How much would the average themepark MMORPG change if it was single player with options to invite friends to play with match maker for random group, raids and dungeons?
It would be much easier if you can give an example of COOP RPG.
I presume you mean something like GW1. I heard people calling it COOP RPG. But I never personally played it.
I think Wow just set the themepark standard so high, people'll expect a decent world to explore if it is a themepark mmorpg. Those themepark are in competition with each other too. If you have less than expected people won't play it.
And most themepark mmorpg have such a tiny world I doubt they really spend that much time build it. I actually think themepark mmorpg have simply too many elements that is why it is so expensive to build.
you have confounded everything, themepark vs sandbox, MMO vs co-op... jeez....
They are all connected. I am trying to leave sandbox out of it and evaluate pure themeparks on it's own merit.
they are, but you are comparing apples and oranges here; themepark is a game style, while co-op/MMO is a game genre...
Yes and no. The question is if a MMORPG is 100% themepark (meaning the world is just questhubs/storylines) is it worth being MMORPG? What advantages does it bring to making it a MMORPG? Is it worth the extra development and money when you could make a multiplayer or coop RPG that is very similar?
I think you're asking a bunch of consumers a question that should be aimed purely at investors. Someone earlier in the thread gave the perfect answer from a consumer standpoint: "All I know is I enjoy it and am willing to pay for it." Even if many of the gameplay activities in today's MMORPGs only require a single player or small group, being on a server with hundreds or thousands of players provides the ability to converse or interact in some way with others as much as or as little as the player chooses, all within the illusion of a persistent world that keeps on going when you log off, which is something standard co-op RPGs don't provide.
Whether or not an investor is willing to chase the niche demographic that cares enough about the possibility of social interaction to spend their time in a WoW as opposed to a Monster Hunter World is another story, and of course it often doesn't work out in their favor if they make the wrong choice.
You have a weak understanding of what a themepark is. A themepark offers quests and laid out activities to follow. A sandbox is just a playground where there may be a theme, but you make your own fun.
Just because gamers have pushed for a more solo-centric type of gameplay doesn't mean that Themeparks as a rule are catered to 2-8 players. Especially when you understand what a themepark is (you don't).
With that being said, Themeparks can and have offered huge instances with MMO gameplay. It is as if you never heard of DAOC which was NOT a sandbox yet inspired many people to be social in their world. Darkness Falls was always jam packed and people organized into huge multi-tier raids to conquer it. Then you have the RvR system too. Also, open dungeons where dozens of people would team up and help each other.
To destroy your whole theory, what has contributed mostly to this whole issue you are bringing up is the addition of a group finder in most games along with small instances. Instances are not needed in a themepark and all the original ones didn't have them either.
Hmm seems that you don't know what a themepark is. Themepark is hard coded area by the developers for content with a story and questline. A themepark MMORPG is one comprised almost entirely of themepark content. The first time I remember hearing the term was Ralp Koster for his SWG sandbox that had themeparks on the planets.
EQ and DAoC are not themeparks or sandboxes. They were just open world level grinders. There was no "ride" or could you build. You just decided were to kill stuff and how. Basically a 3D MUD.
You are right not all themeparks MMORPG started out that way. The evolution of this type of MMORPG just lends that way because of the method of content delivery.
There is only so many ways you can rewrap the same quest types over and over across a whole genre. Of course there will be boredom and adding more grind or forced grouping just adds to it. WoW also brought in non MMORPG gamers who just play casually. It all just leads to what we have which is based off metrics. What players actually do.
All of that still doesn't dismiss the fact that a full on themepark MMORPG does not need or gain a lot being a MMORPG. If you are not world building and only play to solo, group, dungeon, faction PvP and raid all of this can be done in a COOP. There is nothing lasting in a persistent world.
It is not about if you like themepark or not. It is about what truly is added and is it worth the development time, difficulties and expense to do it?
I think you are trying to say why I play themepark MMORPG when inidividually I can find better solo RPG, COOP dungeon games, COOP pvp games, MOBA.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
I am not even whining. I just came to the conclusions that a pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG. It's that simple. Like saying a Boys and Girls club soccer game doesn't need to be in a professional stadium. There is almost nothing that can't be done in a coop RPG.
I don't even know what that statement mean. "Pure themepark doesn't need to be an MMORPG".
I actually don't know what coop RPG too. Some coop RPG actaully have quite interesting world.
I don't even know what you are trying to say. Remove the shallow world from Wow and ESO and put in a even more shallow world?
Technically a themepark is unchangeable area. It is a developer story area or questhub. WoW is pretty much a pure themepark compared to say Archeage which has areas of sandbox and themepark in one game.
A coop RPG... just think Diablo but true RPG. Not isometric part but just how you can multiplayer. You could also have guilds plus group, raids, dungeon and PvP match finders to make it MMO like.
Yes, if you lack a means for player's to make a permanent change to the game world is there really any reason for a permanent online world? As my point you can get nearly the same result for easier and cheaper development.
How much would the average themepark MMORPG change if it was single player with options to invite friends to play with match maker for random group, raids and dungeons?
It would be much easier if you can give an example of COOP RPG.
I presume you mean something like GW1. I heard people calling it COOP RPG. But I never personally played it.
I think Wow just set the themepark standard so high, people'll expect a decent world to explore if it is a themepark mmorpg. Those themepark are in competition with each other too. If you have less than expected people won't play it.
And most themepark mmorpg have such a tiny world I doubt they really spend that much time build it. I actually think themepark mmorpg have simply too many elements that is why it is so expensive to build.
COOP RPG is just that an RPG that is COOP but not a MMO. There are not a lot of them sadly but I guess you could use Neverwinter Nights. It is single player but you can have friends play. Most games in that style are sadly shooters like Division, Anthem and Destiny.
That type of RPG could be designed to play like your typical themepark. Kingdoms of Alamur is a perfect example of an offline game that plays and looks like a MMO.
I think the expectation is that it opens you to the possibility of seeing a lot of people in the towns and in the adventuring areas. Players seem to want that and are less happy with a coop game when they see only their group members once they leave the hub.
This could be why themeparks are more successful as an MMORPG. It does not need to be but it definitely sells more copies as an MMORPG. Take SWTOR for instance that is a game that would have done well as an COOP rather than MMORPG
This is like the String Theory of gaming debates: The same talking points brought up over and over for the past 14 years with no new nuance, analytics, or evidence. Some day instead of "what came first, the chicken or the egg?" people will ask "what's better, a sandbox or a themepark." A thousand years from now it'll be codified in an ancient koan alongside "what is the sound of one hand clapping?".
I'm only kidding of course, but I do wish that 14 years from now we have some actual insight into this.
Comments
The name don't matter. Beside COOP RPG is popular too, look diablo.
It is because I like all of that and if 1 game can offer everything why not?
Is it worth the developing time to make themepark mmorpg? Probably not, developer find it better to just target a very specific crowd. And it is proven making a good COOP games, MOBA, or dungeon crawler is more profitable.
I suppose you are just one of those whiners on developers only making themepark games. Don't worry, WOW isn't the future of mmrogp. There is no future in mmorpg, developers just shift their focus on making games like Anthem.
I actually don't know what coop RPG too. Some coop RPG actaully have quite interesting world.
I don't even know what you are trying to say. Remove the shallow world from Wow and ESO and put in a even more shallow world?
Neither term relates to how many players are available to it. It's kinda bugged out that someone who claims to be making a game totally misses this.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
A coop RPG... just think Diablo but true RPG. Not isometric part but just how you can multiplayer. You could also have guilds plus group, raids, dungeon and PvP match finders to make it MMO like.
Yes, if you lack a means for player's to make a permanent change to the game world is there really any reason for a permanent online world? As my point you can get nearly the same result for easier and cheaper development.
How much would the average themepark MMORPG change if it was single player with options to invite friends to play with match maker for random group, raids and dungeons?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
TL;DR: Why is it either/or?
At the end of the day, I don't believe the concepts of themepark or sandbox are mutually exclusive, and to this day I feel that I have not played a game that stands alone as one or the other.
When it came time to complete some quests and move further through the land players went out into private instances with up to 5 or 6 (?) members per party.
They could even fill out their group with npcs of various classes, and often did I take a pocket healer.
Some maps were very challenging and normally required a full group of real players to get through. Enterprising players would offer to guide parties through these more challenging zones for a fee.
PVP was entirely instanced, and ranked so you generally fought players near your guilds skill level. They even had out of the box max level (20) characters you could just grab and go PVP with and still be very competitive.
It seemed to be a pretty successful design with players, but ANET originally launched it as totally B2P and it never was the big money maker they had hoped for, which is why GW2 actually isn't much like its predecessor IMO.
They just did a major graphics update earlier this year so you might want to give it a try.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I presume you mean something like GW1. I heard people calling it COOP RPG. But I never personally played it.
I think Wow just set the themepark standard so high, people'll expect a decent world to explore if it is a themepark mmorpg. Those themepark are in competition with each other too. If you have less than expected people won't play it.
And most themepark mmorpg have such a tiny world I doubt they really spend that much time build it. I actually think themepark mmorpg have simply too many elements that is why it is so expensive to build.
I feel like people are taking this as an attack.
Whether or not an investor is willing to chase the niche demographic that cares enough about the possibility of social interaction to spend their time in a WoW as opposed to a Monster Hunter World is another story, and of course it often doesn't work out in their favor if they make the wrong choice.
That type of RPG could be designed to play like your typical themepark. Kingdoms of Alamur is a perfect example of an offline game that plays and looks like a MMO.
This could be why themeparks are more successful as an MMORPG. It does not need to be but it definitely sells more copies as an MMORPG. Take SWTOR for instance that is a game that would have done well as an COOP rather than MMORPG
I'm only kidding of course, but I do wish that 14 years from now we have some actual insight into this.