Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Big Empty World Syndrome
Amathe
Member LegendaryPosts: 7,630
I love to explore. 
In every game I have played, some of my greatest excitement has been looking into every nook and cranny the game world had to offer, preferably when that involves going places too dangerous for me. I like running and sneaking about, expecting to die every second of the way, tasting (if only by viewing) every forbidden fruit.
But exploration, if it is to be fun, presumes there is much worth seeing and finding. Some games have failed to deliver that experience. One of my criticisms/concerns about Vanguard is that in an effort to be able to market/say their world is larger than most others, they have put themselves in a position where they can't fill it. That means exploration is a matter of seeing more or less the same grass/sand/snow or whatever for miles and miles, with little but wandering mobs to break up the monotony. Even that can be ok to a true explorer the first or second go round, but then it becomes horribly dull and an absurb downtime imposed between adventures. Books have been written about Lewis and Clark's first trip through America. Nobody writes books about their 100th trip.
Sigil has occasionally listed its dungeon encounters in response to such allegations, and all I can say is omfg. If you compare that list to the size of their world, it jumps screaming off the page at you how few meaningful dungeon type encounters there are in proportion to the world (which, btw, you have to compete for underground encounter space in with everyone else). Oh, they will add to it in the future, they say (and charge you for the privilege). Everything in the future. But even if they add those encounters at more or less the same rate SOE added them in EQ, EQ was a smaller world. It will be many years before this will be anything more than a needle in a haystack with massive downtime in between needles.
I prefer a game world that has a purpose. If something is in the game, there should be a reason. It should be something I can interact with, quest with, potentially benefit from, and understand the lore behind it. If there is a big hill, there should be an alter or a ruin or a spooky gnarled tree on it for me to go look at. Some mob should spawn there every now and then. There should be a quest associated with it. And there should be a story about that hill with its alter or gnarled tree or whatever. In other words, it should be a fantsay world (and a game) and not just empty space. There should be a point.
Young Brad McQuaid understood this when he helped make EQ. EQ 2 and WoW also deliver a world where most everything in it has a purpose. But a lot of people see Brad as a unchanging, static individual and have not yet noticed his Kosterization. Under the sway of his mentor Raph Koster, Brad has produced, in the manner of Raph, a big empty world a la SWG. This is not an improvement! While it allows a developer to tout their e-world making peen and boast of its size in comparison to competing games, it comes at a heavy cost to enjoyability of gameplay.
I would like to have seen a larger world experience where gameplay isn't compromised to achieve it. That is an ambitious project, to be sure, but this is supposed to be a third generation mmo and we have a right to expect that kind of innovation. Taking a small world and streeeeeeetching it out, and then touting how fun your mount will be (lmao) while you slog through it trying to find some content day after day after monotonous day is not my idea of innovation.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Comments
I personally prefer moredirected games like Half-life 2 or Dark Messiah of Might and Magic to Oblivion, but other feel the reverse. I think it is a matter of taste and personality.
My roommate is in the beta, and, from what I've seen looking over his shoulder, I agree that Vanguard's world is too big for its small amount of content and quests right now. The large world, plus the fact they are running out of time with their deadline, are probably the two biggest reasons Brad has begun to state that things are going to wait until after launch to be implemented. No inquisitor, no berserker, no alchemy, no mounted or ship combat, very few interestingly thought out quests, soloing consiting of "two-dot mob gridning" instead of any real content being designed for it, hack 'n slash combat, etc.
As for the "3rd-generation" mmorpg claim, Brad has since stated that it does not mean 3rd gen features, but, has to do with time period. I, like everyone else, took it to mean new and improved features, where, it's only a marketing thing to try and get people's attention.
I don't like how WoW or EQ2 does their world population of mobs. It seems too contrived for there to be mobs wandering about everywhere you look. Hundreds of them out there just pacing back and forth on their little race tracks. Nevermind, that you have obvious predator and prey within sight of each other. Nevermind, that you have groups of mobs that may stand in one place for hours on end doing absolutely nothing. Where is the immersiveness in that? If that's considered content - I'll take the empty expanses anyday.
Nope, I'm hoping for something a lot closer to SWG's world. Small pockets of mobs where it would make sense that they would be naturally. Predators hunting down grazing animals, grazing animals scattering when they observe predators. Basically a living world. There shouldn't be hundreds and hundreds of mobs just wandering back and forth with no purpose. They should be eating, drinking, sleeping, hunting, etc. We should expect to see them in numbers that would make sense for the environment.
Granted, it's a fantasy world, so there is some license to what is "natural". But, even in a fantasy world it doesn't make sense for obvious herbivore herds to be mingling with obvious carnivore mobs. There should also be a difference between day-time mobs and night-time mobs. Some mobs should only be out at night, and actively hunting anything (including players).
I do agree that some significant landmarks should have a purpose. I liked the idea about the altar and/or gnarled tree. As long as it's not every single hill or mountain-top. It should be often enough that we'll want to explore every one we come across, but not so often that it's a common occurance. (Yup, that's very subjective; and will obviously take some tweeking to get right!)
Exploring is one of; if not the main thing, I look forward to with Vanguard. Like I said before, I liked how SWG did their world. It seemed like a more immersive and natural world to me, but as others have said I guess that's subjective as well.
makes no freakin sense to me why you waiste your time makin that big awful post of a game you dont care or know anything about about.
dont you have something better to do?
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Well, no. But I do have a degree in Psychology, and am fascinated why someone who doesn't give a damn about a game spends their time trolling and harping on it. I mean, I can form my own opinions of why, but it is nevertheless more interesting to "hear it from the horse's mouth", so to speak.
I mean, there are quite a few games in production that I don't like, but I'm not patrolling their forums looking for any and every opportunity to belittle or defame their company and employees. Even with my hatred for SOE, you won't find me on the SWG forums anywhere complaining.
So what's the verdict? What drives you to hate so much and be vocal about? Inquiring minds and all that.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
To the OP:
I understand where you are coming from and I hope that the world of Vanguard will be populated with many of your exploring type. However, there's one thing you must take into consideration and that is player structures. Much of the world will be allocated to player houses and guild structures, so it won't fill so empty once we start building
. Furthermore, once our glorious cities are in place you can also explore them and talk to the inhabitants.
Thinking on it a bit... I prefer my game worlds to be more on the realisitic side...so look around this Earth... lots of empty nothing out there to navigate before you find something to discover.....
I don't mind if you are actually asked to seek out the gems of content from a sea of mundane....like mentioned before, finding relevant content at every step really makes the game seem contrived and the universe very artifical.....
"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
Meh. The whole Console War has turned the word "Generation" into a buzz term...like "Brand New" instead of simply "New"...So when someone says "3rd Generation MMO" there is an attached "zomg leaps and bounds".
On many message boards, I've tried to stress this fact. All "Generation" is refering to is the time period in which the game was developed, so you can place it in the chronology of what has come before it and see what pool of knowledge it is drawing from.
Planetside is a First Generation MMOFPS. Any MMOFPS that comes out after now is a Second Generation MMOFPS, simply because the developers have had time to see what Planetside did wrong and draw upon that wealth of knowledge. It does not qualify any new MMOFPS's to "rock your world"....but it doesn't exclude it either.
Is Vanguard a 3rd Gen MMO, yes...in every sense of the word. Does it have 3rd Generation Mechanics? We assume so...we'll be seeing a fresh take on Crafting, a fresh take on Reputation, possibly a fresh take on Combat. All of which has been in previous MMOs, but Sigil has been able to (hopefully) advance those mechanics in a forward direction....
I don't owe you an answer, and I might ask the same questions of you. If your time is so valuable, why waste it arguing with me? If you disagree with something I say, why not address the issue instead of the poster?
But I don't mind answering your question.
Games for me are a hobby. My discussion of them is no different than any other person talking about his or her hobby. The internet is full of message boards for enthusiasts or persons interested in everything from fishing to sports teams to basketweaving. I think if you visit some of those forums you will discover that not everybody on those message boards agrees about everything. Go to any sports site and see if there aren't people who want to see the coach fired or not fired, or someone start as quarterback or some other guy start. I am sorry you are so insecure that being disagreed with is hurtful to you, but maybe your psychology degree will help you sort that out.
So far as why I comment more frequently on this game than others (this is by no means the only game I comment about), there are several reasons.
One is that I have not entirely given up on this game, and at one time was very excited about playing it. I have given up on it as it is, but I believe it will change over the first two years and has the potential to become something much better than it is. Already there have been leaks of information where significant changes have been made to the game - ones that Brad was adamant that he would never do. Yet when I made those same recommendations more than a year ago on the Sigil message board, I was denounced and called a troll lol. So while you may not agree with me, which is fine, the fact is that the overall public perception of this game, of which I am a tiny part, is having an effect on the design, and if enough changes are made I might actually play and enjoy this game.
A second reason is that no matter whether I play this game or not, this is an important game in terms of the effect it will have on future games we will all play or not play. Love it or hate it, this game will have an impact on the industry for years to come. So I care about it from the point of view of the ripple effect it will have. This is one of few games on the market that is at least paying homage to some of the old school experiences many of us had. If it fails, or only modestly succeeds, don't expect to see much of that in the future (by big name companies at least as opposed to indies). I don't actually want to see that happen. I would like to see them make the changes that will prevent that from happening.
A third reason is that followers of Vanguard, pro or con, tend to be more analytical of mmo features and their merits/lack of merits, and I enjoy discussing those issues with people like me who care about them, whether we agree or not. I don't think Anacryst or Baphomet have ever agreed with anything I have said, but I like debating with them and try to extend them every courtesy as we disagree. Why don't you give that a try instead of calling me names and making accusations?
A fourth reason is that people like yourself tend to focus on the game overall and expect other people to do the same, dividing people into fans and haters. I don't look at it that way. I am more interested in tallking about certain game features and design decisions, of which this game is simply illustrative. For example, diplomacy. Is it a good thing or a bad thing? Why do I have to love or hate the game to talk about that. Why does my loving or hating the game discredit any opinion I have about that? If you, for example, want to talk about an issue like social security, can you only talk about it with people in your own political party? Or could you hear views from another political party or an independent?
The final reason is it's a free country and I don't have a burden of proof to meet to justify to you or anyone what issues I wish to spend my time talking about. I could have, you will note, responded to this post by belittling you but I have taken the high road (for the most part) instead. If you really are a college educated adult I would urge you to do the same.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
This is a website about video games. Could that be said of all of us? Is anyone here curing cancer or otherwise making the world a better place by their postings? But thanks for your concern.
Well, no. But I do have a degree in Psychology, and am fascinated why someone who doesn't give a damn about a game spends their time trolling and harping on it. I mean, I can form my own opinions of why, but it is nevertheless more interesting to "hear it from the horse's mouth", so to speak.
I mean, there are quite a few games in production that I don't like, but I'm not patrolling their forums looking for any and every opportunity to belittle or defame their company and employees. Even with my hatred for SOE, you won't find me on the SWG forums anywhere complaining.
So what's the verdict? What drives you to hate so much and be vocal about? Inquiring minds and all that.
People need to get over this. Just because someone doesnt like one aspect of a game does not mean they hate it, or, hate the entire game.
The poster has written a good description on why he/she feels this way, and has opened it up for discussion among other people that may be interested in this game ON A DISCUSSION FORUM ABOUT THE GAME IN QUESTION.
Discussing aspects about a game that you do not like does not equate to trolling. In fact, the OP has enough interest in the game its self to even make a post about it. Do you really think if they had no interest in the game at all he/she would be posting anything?
Get over it, get over yourself, Contribute or do not.
A post != Hate. If it did, you must also hate this game, because you posted about and had opinions about it.
Not everything is black and white.
If I dont like elves, it does not mean that I hate the entirety of game.
Only very small minded people think this way.
You are going for a degree in Psychology, yet you think in absolutes, and black and white. I feel sorry for any of your future patents.
That was directed at both "Complaints".
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
I too wonder where this extremism in regards to game allegiance comes from. How does anyone love or hate a computer game? It's a....game, for crying out loud! There is nothing to love or hate about it.
Sure I might enjoy, or perhaps even like playing a game. I may not enjoy, or perhaps even dislike another game. But, love/hate a game? Nope.
I get your point. But in truth if you look close enough there are very few spots on earth with nothing on them. There is always some life on or nearby every ecosystem (and every micro-cosim). Take a walk in the woods in this part of the world and I can't walk 2 feet without finding something alive and interesting. The problem is a subjective one. We are all interested in different things however.
A game world can and never will be even 1/100th the detail of the real world. Comparing the 2 (in my mind) is moot.
That said; I agree with you, I dont mind digging a bit for content in exchange for a large amound of virtual space to wander around in. The parts that are empty my imagination will fill in. They call it intentional suspention of disbeleif, and I think it makes one more thoroughly enjoy gaming.
FINBAR
-------------------------------------------
Don't know why are you attacking OP. He is right. From what I saw in videos so far the world is too empty. Nothing special about it. The towns are just... Walls and buildings. No small details that make it more... Real... Just to show that some "people" actualy live in there.
And there is no way they will fill it up. They are running out of time and SOE will not give it to them. All big gaming companies love to f*ck us players in the a*s by realising unfinished products as soon as possible so they can grab the profit. They are going too far with this 0 day patching. I mean... They throw out patch on a day that game comes out! These days patching is something normal... How about they do there job so they will not need to patch the game in 1st month. It makes me sick.
And sorry to all fanbois. Vanguard is my only hope since (pre-cu) SWG. But I don't really see this game making it. Atleast not by judging on what they showed us so far. If they would have a full detailed city done... I think they would show it to us. Or it will be like "settlets of DnL"... "This betta has nothing to do with real DnL. Everything works in DnL and world is great! Really. We mean it."
I don't owe you an answer, and I might ask the same questions of you. If your time is so valuable, why waste it arguing with me? If you disagree with something I say, why not address the issue instead of the poster?
But I don't mind answering your question.
Games for me are a hobby. My discussion of them is no different than any other person talking about his or her hobby. The internet is full of message boards for enthusiasts or persons interested in everything from fishing to sports teams to basketweaving. I think if you visit some of those forums you will discover that not everybody on those message boards agrees about everything. Go to any sports site and see if there aren't people who want to see the coach fired or not fired, or someone start as quarterback or some other guy start. I am sorry you are so insecure that being disagreed with is hurtful to you, but maybe your psychology degree will help you sort that out.
So far as why I comment more frequently on this game than others (this is by no means the only game I comment about), there are several reasons.
One is that I have not entirely given up on this game, and at one time was very excited about playing it. I have given up on it as it is, but I believe it will change over the first two years and has the potential to become something much better than it is. Already there have been leaks of information where significant changes have been made to the game - ones that Brad was adamant that he would never do. Yet when I made those same recommendations more than a year ago on the Sigil message board, I was denounced and called a troll lol. So while you may not agree with me, which is fine, the fact is that the overall public perception of this game, of which I am a tiny part, is having an effect on the design, and if enough changes are made I might actually play and enjoy this game.
A second reason is that no matter whether I play this game or not, this is an important game in terms of the effect it will have on future games we will all play or not play. Love it or hate it, this game will have an impact on the industry for years to come. So I care about it from the point of view of the ripple effect it will have. This is one of few games on the market that is at least paying homage to some of the old school experiences many of us had. If it fails, or only modestly succeeds, don't expect to see much of that in the future (by big name companies at least as opposed to indies). I don't actually want to see that happen. I would like to see them make the changes that will prevent that from happening.
A third reason is that followers of Vanguard, pro or con, tend to be more analytical of mmo features and their merits/lack of merits, and I enjoy discussing those issues with people like me who care about them, whether we agree or not. I don't think Anacryst or Baphomet have ever agreed with anything I have said, but I like debating with them and try to extend them every courtesy as we disagree. Why don't you give that a try instead of calling me names and making accusations?
A fourth reason is that people like yourself tend to focus on the game overall and expect other people to do the same, dividing people into fans and haters. I don't look at it that way. I am more interested in tallking about certain game features and design decisions, of which this game is simply illustrative. For example, diplomacy. Is it a good thing or a bad thing? Why do I have to love or hate the game to talk about that. Why does my loving or hating the game discredit any opinion I have about that? If you, for example, want to talk about an issue like social security, can you only talk about it with people in your own political party? Or could you hear views from another political party or an independent?
The final reason is it's a free country and I don't have a burden of proof to meet to justify to you or anyone what issues I wish to spend my time talking about. I could have, you will note, responded to this post by belittling you but I have taken the high road (for the most part) instead. If you really are a college educated adult I would urge you to do the same.
@ Mrbloodworth: Not going for, I have one, thanks! And you don't have to worry about me having any "patents". Practicing Psychology really doesn't pay well.
@Amathe: Whoa! Unwad panties! It is unfortunate if you interpreted my post as some sort of personal attack, as it wasn't. Sure, I didn't speak in roses and sweet nothings, but that does not designate my comments as some sort of threat. Should I have intended to insult, believe me I am quite capable. At most I'm guilty of speaking bluntly. Incidentally, if you'd look at the number of "high road/low road opportunities" (since we are counting), I'd say it was about par as your reply is full of remarks that could be perceived as shots (and undoubtedly are, else why write in that way, no?). It is understandable, though, as it is clear that you thought my post some sort of assault.
It's pretty obvious you don't owe me anything, and quite silly to think anyone on message boards owes another anonymous board goer anything. As to why I did not address the issues you mention? Well, quite plainly I don't agree that it will be as bad as you surmise. I think it quite silly to expect every hill in the game to have 2 hours of content on it. That said, I'm pretty confident that these folks, who have successfully shipped MMOGs before that were around for years (how many of us can say that?) understand that there needs to be a suitable dispersal of content. It's also been stated if you can see it, then you can go to it, and thus explore the content there.
Do I expect all of this content to be there now? Heck no! They are still months from release. Content, in my opinion, is like gasoline. They need to make sure the engine they are building works (which doesn't require a full tank), and once they refine the engine (read launch), they can then fill the tank before they put it on the street.
Lastly, not that I owe you an explanation (wink wink), but the reason I asked initially is I read your reply to Brad's post (which is stickied). After reading it, I wondered why you were even still posting as it seemed to me from your reply that there basically isn't anything Brad or anyone from Sigil can say beyond "We are changing everything to exactly how yousay it is supposed to be" that would make you happy. He answered the concerns that were presented, and because he didn't go into some lengthy diatribe, I don't think that discredits or undervalues his reply. Not to the point to where he can be called out on it when noone has seen the product that will be sold at release.
Mental note made that should there be a need to direct any comments your way in the future, I will speak in a more ginger snap tone, keep Mary Poppins on the tongue sprinkle more smilies throughout my post. And while I did not let loose with the smile-a-thon-3000 canon on this reply, you'll just have to believe that no ill will is meant as I doubt my post is as wordy as yours or Brad's.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Posted by Amathe;
A second reason is that no matter whether I play this game or not, this is an important game in terms of the effect it will have on future games we will all play or not play. Love it or hate it, this game will have an impact on the industry for years to come. So I care about it from the point of view of the ripple effect it will have. This is one of few games on the market that is at least paying homage to some of the old school experiences many of us had. If it fails, or only modestly succeeds, don't expect to see much of that in the future (by big name companies at least as opposed to indies). I don't actually want to see that happen. I would like to see them make the changes that will prevent that from happening.
I think this is a really important point, but saying that we must remember that old school experiences were not always perfect. We as players had more patience then, also we created a lot of our own fun. These days our expectations are a lot higher, making it extremely hard for the devs to satisfy every ones needs.
I sincerely hope Vanguard or games like it deliver the "old school experiences," especially to show new players to MMORPGs there is more to life than pk'ing and grinding. Otherwise we could well have WoW type games because they appeal more to the majority.
I love wide-open spaces, provided there's a campfire!
Whooo, you two are way to clever for me so I'll keep it pretty short (comparatively!)
My take is that there should be constant content, you shouldn't have to go wandering for more than ten minutes to find something to do, nor do I expect to trip over a quest that's conveniently located under every rock.
The way I think they should do things is have some really cool stuff dotted about to help the explorer, but focus their efforts in radius' around the starting locations and if they can keep up with the power levelers then the game will feel huge yet well populated.
The thing it seems to me that most people seem to forget about content is that to do "the little details" takes ages, as does quest design, modelling etc etc
So to me to expect everything to have as much character as the real world is ludicrous.
Anyway /rant off
Currently Playing: GW2
Currently Following: Elder Scrolls Online
Games in my wake: Anarchy Online, Archlord (beta), Asherons Call, Asherons Call 2, City of Heroes, Dark Age of Camelot (SI to Catacombs), DDO, EVE Online, EverQuest II (beta), Guild Wars, Horizons, Lineage II,LORTO, Rift, RF Online (beta), RYL, Saga of Ryzon, Shadowbane, Star Wars Galaxies, Vanguard, WAR, WoW
I completely agree with you. I'm not one of the folks who believes that if you put back all of the EQ game mechanics, presto magico we can recapture the original enjoyment and feel of that game. A lot has happened since then and player behaviors, experiences, choices and expectations are different. So no argument there.
What I mean by old school is this. Nowadays content is put into games, whether it be quests, drops, leveling up, you name it, that can be done in one evening or a couple of evenings. Although that's not intrinsically bad, it has an effect. The effect is players log on with an agenda. They want, and expect, to complete [whatever] tonight. They want to do that and only that, meaning if you aren't willing to join them in doing that specific thing they often aren't going to go to any other thing. And tomorrow night they will have a new agenda. This leads to some incredibly selfish play! Tons of people want what they want and they want it right now.
Back in the day, most of what I wanted as a character was going to take me weeks, months, or even a year to do. There was no way I could log on and reasonsbaly expect one of my major quests to get done that night. What that meant was that players were more apt to group together; they were less choosy about what they did; they were more willing to take on a variety of content; and they were more apt to help other people because they needed a circle of mutually supportive friends to accomplish their goals in game. That was the difference - not the presence or absence of mini-maps, death penalties, corpse runs, or any of that stuff. It was the need players had for one another coupled with the realization that the game required patience and cooperation.
So, when I read the things Brad wrote, and I studied up on his Vision (tm), I was excited as hell - a lot more so than anybody else I see posting in these forums, because it (supposedly) emphasized grouping over solo play and raiding. But the more I read and learned, the more I realized that wasn't all Brad was doing. I think we can all agree that the single biggest design motivation for Vanguard is what Sigil believes motivates people to play and keep playing the game? So what is that? Over time I realiezed the answer to that question isn't "because they are having fun." Nope. The answer is that Brad believes that players are motivated to obtain the things they see other players obtaining. If he was an ecomomist, he would subscribe to the trickle down theory - what's good for the rich is good for everyone else derivatively. So long as you have players in the game who are virtual gods (he calls them the "bleeding edge") everyone else supposedly envies/admires/is inspired by them to the point they are willing to slog through unfun content to get to where they are.
And thus, he has made a game where the stratifications between players of the same level are off the chart different. You can be level 40 and another player can be level 40 and you may as well be level 12 if you haven't obtained the same items. You can't even effectively group together (as he has said, gear from soloing, for example, does not adequately equip you for group encounters, and likewise from group to raiding). He has taken an element we see in alll rpgs and magnified it into something grotesque for the glorification of the few. In doing so, he has short sheeted a lot of players and a lot of content for those players, because in his mind as long as there are some big carrots in the end game, Joe Lunchpail player will have stars in their eyes and be content to grind in a perpetual state of weakness and monotony, wishing he were somebody else.
Belatedly, he has realized the folly of that decision, so he is now advertising the game as though solo players and players who don't raid or do a lot of underground encounters will be having fun; time will show that representation for what it is.
But I digress. My OP was about the world. Let me add this footnote to what I said earlier. Have you ever noticed that pitchers in baseball for the most part make lousy batters? You would think it would be the opposite. As experts in delivering the ball, should they not also be experts in making contact with it? The reason they don't hit worth a damn is that they overthink the pitch. That's also what happens when someone goes from being a gamemaker to a worldbuilder. Brad sees himself more as a civil engineer than a toymaker, and it's going to play that way. I wish he would go back to making games.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
lol yeah I hear ya, and both meanings.
If there is a single factor that is attracting me more and more to this game it is the old skool big world and slow travel model.
In UO it was one of the best features of the game, the fact that you had to hike pretty much everywhere worth going and the journey was almost always as colourful as the destination. I dont disagree with most of Brads ideas and this is no exception. I think VSoH has a big market with this attitude. There are LOTS of seasoned gamers who look back fondly to the parts of EQ and UO that some people didnt like and are expecting a similar experience with this game.
Dont weaken Sigil.... focus
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon