OK so it’s ok to Clone Ultima Online, but it’s not ok to Clone Everquest?
I get this message, because I see a lot of members of this site scream about how the MMORPG industry isn’t innovating, and is copying WoW, yet these same people are perfectly fine with games copying the granddaddy of Sandbox games (Ultima Online). Whats the deal on this? These people complain about Clones of theme park games reducing the innovation in the industry, but wouldn’t UO Sandbox Clones be the same thing Logically?
Didn’t Everquest, The granddaddy of Theme Park MMOs, prove once before, that it is the style of gameplay that people like most, back then when Sandbox games were dominant? So why is this community so angry when newer games try to follow EQ’s path of gameplay? Blizzard did it with WoW, and had major success. So why can’t others?
Is it Everquest, or Theme Park style gameplay’s fault, that newer MMORPG developers are taking too much focus on Graphics, and releasing unfinished products, that ultimately lead to their game’s failure?
No I don’t think so.
So whats so wrong with copying Everquest, that doesn’t apply to games that copy Ultima Online?
As others have said it's not that there is an issue with "cloning" EQ, it's that there has not been an equal or even significant attempt to recreate the gameplay/mechanics and more sim-like features of UO. What some people don't get (because everything has to be either or in their little worlds) is that the vast majority of people on board with this sentiment aren't saying to stop making games like EQ. They are saying we need more games like UO. Just as the Themepark style of games gets a new update every year we'd like to see the other type of game get the same update from equivalent companies.
Too many themepark lovers get their shorts in a knot thinking there is some attack on their favored type game. If they'd come off the defensiveand look at the genre they'd see the imbalance and understand why we want more of the other. We like to have games that we like to play too! And as for any comments about going back and playing those older games, I'd respond okay, how about you go back and play the the older themepark ones. Everyone likes to have an updated version with refined mechanics and new worlds to explore.
HOW IN THE WORLD DOES CLONING== INNOVATING????
Answer that BUDDY!!!!!
All I read on this forum from these EQ clone Haters, is that it is making the genre Less Innovating!
But How would a UO Clone not also do the same thing?
I didn't say that cloning equaled innovation, BUDDY!
I stated that certain folks are want more games to be made in the mold of UO as there is a lack of games made in that method. I also stated that those games would see updates to those systems/mechanics. Updates by nature of the world would prohibit it from being a clone.
And also as I pointed out and you completely ignored, there aren't alot of UO like games out. So even if it was a clone it'd be offering more variety of gameplay than what we're getting at current.
So UO is not open anymore?
So how would a UO clone be innovating if people can already play UO?
OK so it’s ok to Clone Ultima Online, but it’s not ok to Clone Everquest?
I get this message, because I see a lot of members of this site scream about how the MMORPG industry isn’t innovating, and is copying WoW, yet these same people are perfectly fine with games copying the granddaddy of Sandbox games (Ultima Online). Whats the deal on this? These people complain about Clones of theme park games reducing the innovation in the industry, but wouldn’t UO Sandbox Clones be the same thing Logically?
Didn’t Everquest, The granddaddy of Theme Park MMOs, prove once before, that it is the style of gameplay that people like most, back then when Sandbox games were dominant? So why is this community so angry when newer games try to follow EQ’s path of gameplay? Blizzard did it with WoW, and had major success. So why can’t others?
Is it Everquest, or Theme Park style gameplay’s fault, that newer MMORPG developers are taking too much focus on Graphics, and releasing unfinished products, that ultimately lead to their game’s failure?
No I don’t think so.
So whats so wrong with copying Everquest, that doesn’t apply to games that copy Ultima Online?
As others have said it's not that there is an issue with "cloning" EQ, it's that there has not been an equal or even significant attempt to recreate the gameplay/mechanics and more sim-like features of UO. What some people don't get (because everything has to be either or in their little worlds) is that the vast majority of people on board with this sentiment aren't saying to stop making games like EQ. They are saying we need more games like UO. Just as the Themepark style of games gets a new update every year we'd like to see the other type of game get the same update from equivalent companies.
Too many themepark lovers get their shorts in a knot thinking there is some attack on their favored type game. If they'd come off the defensiveand look at the genre they'd see the imbalance and understand why we want more of the other. We like to have games that we like to play too! And as for any comments about going back and playing those older games, I'd respond okay, how about you go back and play the the older themepark ones. Everyone likes to have an updated version with refined mechanics and new worlds to explore.
HOW IN THE WORLD DOES CLONING== INNOVATING????
Answer that BUDDY!!!!!
All I read on this forum from these EQ clone Haters, is that it is making the genre Less Innovating!
But How would a UO Clone not also do the same thing?
I didn't say that cloning equaled innovation, BUDDY!
I stated that certain folks are want more games to be made in the mold of UO as there is a lack of games made in that method. I also stated that those games would see updates to those systems/mechanics. Updates by nature of the world would prohibit it from being a clone.
And also as I pointed out and you completely ignored, there aren't alot of UO like games out. So even if it was a clone it'd be offering more variety of gameplay than what we're getting at current.
So UO is not pen anymore?
So how would a UO clone be innovating if people can already play UO?
I don't understand your first question. Not sure what a writing utensil (pen) has to do with UO.
Again, I never mentioned the word "innovating ". I stated that a game made in the mold of UO with UPDATES TO THE GAME"S SYSTEMS/MECHANICS would bring much needed variety to the current stream of themepark mania games.
Again, updates to those systems/mechanics could contain this innovation you are searching for. As to how they would update those systems/mechanics in an innovative way, I don't know. They don't pay me to come with those ideas. If they did pay me, I could think of more than a few ways and yet preserve the feel of the original UO game.
"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..."
OK so it’s ok to Clone Ultima Online, but it’s not ok to Clone Everquest?
I get this message, because I see a lot of members of this site scream about how the MMORPG industry isn’t innovating, and is copying WoW, yet these same people are perfectly fine with games copying the granddaddy of Sandbox games (Ultima Online). Whats the deal on this? These people complain about Clones of theme park games reducing the innovation in the industry, but wouldn’t UO Sandbox Clones be the same thing Logically?
Didn’t Everquest, The granddaddy of Theme Park MMOs, prove once before, that it is the style of gameplay that people like most, back then when Sandbox games were dominant? So why is this community so angry when newer games try to follow EQ’s path of gameplay? Blizzard did it with WoW, and had major success. So why can’t others?
Is it Everquest, or Theme Park style gameplay’s fault, that newer MMORPG developers are taking too much focus on Graphics, and releasing unfinished products, that ultimately lead to their game’s failure?
No I don’t think so.
So whats so wrong with copying Everquest, that doesn’t apply to games that copy Ultima Online?
As others have said it's not that there is an issue with "cloning" EQ, it's that there has not been an equal or even significant attempt to recreate the gameplay/mechanics and more sim-like features of UO. What some people don't get (because everything has to be either or in their little worlds) is that the vast majority of people on board with this sentiment aren't saying to stop making games like EQ. They are saying we need more games like UO. Just as the Themepark style of games gets a new update every year we'd like to see the other type of game get the same update from equivalent companies.
Too many themepark lovers get their shorts in a knot thinking there is some attack on their favored type game. If they'd come off the defensiveand look at the genre they'd see the imbalance and understand why we want more of the other. We like to have games that we like to play too! And as for any comments about going back and playing those older games, I'd respond okay, how about you go back and play the the older themepark ones. Everyone likes to have an updated version with refined mechanics and new worlds to explore.
HOW IN THE WORLD DOES CLONING== INNOVATING????
Answer that BUDDY!!!!!
All I read on this forum from these EQ clone Haters, is that it is making the genre Less Innovating!
But How would a UO Clone not also do the same thing?
I didn't say that cloning equaled innovation, BUDDY!
I stated that certain folks are want more games to be made in the mold of UO as there is a lack of games made in that method. I also stated that those games would see updates to those systems/mechanics. Updates by nature of the world would prohibit it from being a clone.
And also as I pointed out and you completely ignored, there aren't alot of UO like games out. So even if it was a clone it'd be offering more variety of gameplay than what we're getting at current.
So UO is not pen anymore?
So how would a UO clone be innovating if people can already play UO?
I don't understand your first question. Not sure what a writing utensil (pen) has to do with UO.
Again, I never mentioned the word "innovating ". I stated that a game made in the mold of UO with UPDATES TO THE GAME"S SYSTEMS/MECHANICS would bring much needed variety to the current stream of themepark mania games.
Again, updates to those systems/mechanics could contain this innovation you are searching for. As to how they would update those systems/mechanics in an innovative way, I don't know. They don't pay me to come with those ideas. If they did pay me, I could think of more than a few ways and yet preserve the feel of the original UO game.
The word was Open, the O didnt come threw.
But still my point is that Innovating things can also be done in Everquest Clones, not just in UO clones. (By Updates like you said about UO Clones)
Well the situation ia quite simple. Ppl would like to see a major title with high standards of quality sandbox game delivered.Since wow arrived u have a high standard theme park game in the market. Now ppl want the same in sandbox terms. An improved version of UO with decent 3d grafix and the quality of Uo in gameplay terms even improved if possible in some terms.Now why ppl are getting angry and complain ? Cause every time they see a theme park launching, or a bad sandbox ,they see it as an another failed chance to meet their long-wished opportunity to play the game they are always dreaming to.
As for the Op who s askign why shouldnt we waiting for a EQ 's clones instead? Well market is full of eq 's clones , wow , lotro etc. But tbh i dont if a good EQ clone now would make great sales cause after wow everyone is compairing every new game with it. I dont know if a great crafting system and the ability to own your own house is by itselfs enough motivation to play a game.
OK so it’s ok to Clone Ultima Online, but it’s not ok to Clone Everquest?
I get this message, because I see a lot of members of this site scream about how the MMORPG industry isn’t innovating, and is copying WoW, yet these same people are perfectly fine with games copying the granddaddy of Sandbox games (Ultima Online). Whats the deal on this? These people complain about Clones of theme park games reducing the innovation in the industry, but wouldn’t UO Sandbox Clones be the same thing Logically?
Didn’t Everquest, The granddaddy of Theme Park MMOs, prove once before, that it is the style of gameplay that people like most, back then when Sandbox games were dominant? So why is this community so angry when newer games try to follow EQ’s path of gameplay? Blizzard did it with WoW, and had major success. So why can’t others?
Is it Everquest, or Theme Park style gameplay’s fault, that newer MMORPG developers are taking too much focus on Graphics, and releasing unfinished products, that ultimately lead to their game’s failure?
No I don’t think so.
So whats so wrong with copying Everquest, that doesn’t apply to games that copy Ultima Online?
As others have said it's not that there is an issue with "cloning" EQ, it's that there has not been an equal or even significant attempt to recreate the gameplay/mechanics and more sim-like features of UO. What some people don't get (because everything has to be either or in their little worlds) is that the vast majority of people on board with this sentiment aren't saying to stop making games like EQ. They are saying we need more games like UO. Just as the Themepark style of games gets a new update every year we'd like to see the other type of game get the same update from equivalent companies.
Too many themepark lovers get their shorts in a knot thinking there is some attack on their favored type game. If they'd come off the defensiveand look at the genre they'd see the imbalance and understand why we want more of the other. We like to have games that we like to play too! And as for any comments about going back and playing those older games, I'd respond okay, how about you go back and play the the older themepark ones. Everyone likes to have an updated version with refined mechanics and new worlds to explore.
HOW IN THE WORLD DOES CLONING== INNOVATING????
Answer that BUDDY!!!!!
All I read on this forum from these EQ clone Haters, is that it is making the genre Less Innovating!
But How would a UO Clone not also do the same thing?
I didn't say that cloning equaled innovation, BUDDY!
I stated that certain folks are want more games to be made in the mold of UO as there is a lack of games made in that method. I also stated that those games would see updates to those systems/mechanics. Updates by nature of the world would prohibit it from being a clone.
And also as I pointed out and you completely ignored, there aren't alot of UO like games out. So even if it was a clone it'd be offering more variety of gameplay than what we're getting at current.
So UO is not pen anymore?
So how would a UO clone be innovating if people can already play UO?
I don't understand your first question. Not sure what a writing utensil (pen) has to do with UO.
Again, I never mentioned the word "innovating ". I stated that a game made in the mold of UO with UPDATES TO THE GAME"S SYSTEMS/MECHANICS would bring much needed variety to the current stream of themepark mania games.
Again, updates to those systems/mechanics could contain this innovation you are searching for. As to how they would update those systems/mechanics in an innovative way, I don't know. They don't pay me to come with those ideas. If they did pay me, I could think of more than a few ways and yet preserve the feel of the original UO game.
The word was Open, the O didnt come threw.
But still my point is that Innovating things can also be done in Everquest Clones, not just in UO clones. (By Updates like you said about UO Clones)
And I never said that innovation couldn't be done in EQ clones. I am saying that there are plenty of EQ clones being made (by that I mean games patterned after EQ) and that there are not the same amount being patterned after UO. Many MMO gamers would like to see more games patterened after UO to add diversity and choice to the types of MMOs they can play.
I think many of the people you were addressing your initial post at aren't saying that "innovation" can't be done in an EQ clone. I think they are just tired of playing EQ clones in general, whether they innovate or not. They want the gameplay/mechanic that would be found in an UO clone. If that UO clone has some innovations that keep within the lines of the style of gameplay that that type of MMO offered, then good.
"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..."
Well the situation ia quite simple. Ppl would like to see a major title with high standards of quality sandbox game delivered.Since wow arrived u have a high standard theme park game in the market. Now ppl want the same in sandbox terms. An improved version of UO with decent 3d grafix and the quality of Uo in gameplay terms even improved if possible in some terms.Now why ppl are getting angry and complain ? Cause every time they see a theme park launching, or a bad sandbox ,they see it as an another failed chance to meet their long-wished opportunity to play the game they are always dreaming to. As for the Op who s askign why shouldnt we waiting for a EQ 's clones instead? Well market is full of eq 's clones , wow , lotro etc. But tbh i dont if a good EQ clone now would make great sales cause after wow everyone is compairing every new game with it. I dont know if a great crafting system and the ability to own your own house is by itselfs enough motivation to play a game.
If it was a crafting system as in depth as the original SWG's and a housing system like UOs or Original SWG's, and the player crafting system was the only way to get finished items, and it was a PvP game set up like EvE's sector space (1.0 to 0.0) with respect to law and nPC guards....
I'd lifetime sub.
"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..."
Well the situation ia quite simple. Ppl would like to see a major title with high standards of quality sandbox game delivered.Since wow arrived u have a high standard theme park game in the market. Now ppl want the same in sandbox terms. An improved version of UO with decent 3d grafix and the quality of Uo in gameplay terms even improved if possible in some terms.Now why ppl are getting angry and complain ? Cause every time they see a theme park launching, or a bad sandbox ,they see it as an another failed chance to meet their long-wished opportunity to play the game they are always dreaming to. As for the Op who s askign why shouldnt we waiting for a EQ 's clones instead? Well market is full of eq 's clones , wow , lotro etc. But tbh i dont if a good EQ clone now would make great sales cause after wow everyone is compairing every new game with it. I dont know if a great crafting system and the ability to own your own house is by itselfs enough motivation to play a game.
Well you EQ Clone haters
STOP USING INNOVATION AS AN EXCUSE TO HATE!!!
Ask for UO Clones, but stop trying to use the same prased excuse that EQ Clones has killed the Innovation.
Because it is not Innovation that you want. It is the UO clones that you want.
Well these older gamers Moved on to Everquest, so that alone proves that MMORPG players mostly want less freedom as that.
UO to EverQuest to WoW, <--------this movement shows that People like Theme Park Element more.
And again, you still ignoring the main point of the question. WHat makes UO clones Innovating, that EQ Clones arnt?
I ll tell you what makes Uo Innovating and EQ and its clones and wow alike is not. Perfoming loads and loads of various actions like begging in streets, become a burglar and break into other ppl's houses,u could get killed in pvp and loose loot, Uo had risk due to your actions,u could make enemies if u did soething wrong with serious consequenses into the game, DUE TO ALL these interactivity with others players go to a very high lvl, risk is also chained part with innovation,in eq, wow, u have nothing to loose if die,so no risk therefore.adventuring and discovering places and things in a huge massive world is also a factor u dont meet in wow which by now is complete instanced after all ( after last patch u dont even have to move to the dungeon u just queqe and wait to be teleported inside) and many many other things i suggest u go and read UO ex- player reports about their personal stories and expiriences during their playtime in UO and i ensure u u ll get astonished.
OK so it’s ok to Clone Ultima Online, but it’s not ok to Clone Everquest?
Well, neither is that good idea because we have already played those games a lot. Using some parts from both games is of course logical but games that feels like you already played them before is never ok.
The reason the community dislike EQ clones more than UO clones is probably because there are zillion EQ clones and few UO clones, and few if any UO clone actually feels like the original game.
The companies needs new ideas to bring us games that have a different experience, remaking older game will not give evolve the genre. As I see it should they both look on other genres and on pen and paper RPGs to evolve the games.
Well these older gamers Moved on to Everquest, so that alone proves that MMORPG players mostly want less freedom as that.
UO to EverQuest to WoW, <--------this movement shows that People like Theme Park Element more.
And again, you still ignoring the main point of the question. WHat makes UO clones Innovating, that EQ Clones arnt?
I ll tell you what makes Uo Innovating and EQ and its clones and wow alike is not. Perfoming loads and loads of various actions like begging in streets, become a burglar and break into other ppl's houses,u could get killed in pvp and loose loot, Uo had risk due to your actions,u could make enemies if u did soething wrong with serious consequenses into the game, DUE TO ALL these interactivity with others players go to a very high lvl, risk is also chained part with innovation,in eq, wow, u have nothing to loose if die,so no risk therefore.adventuring and discovering places and things in a huge massive world is also a factor u dont meet in wow which by now is complete instanced after all ( after last patch u dont even have to move to the dungeon u just queqe and wait to be teleported inside) and many many other things i suggest u go and read UO ex- player reports about their personal stories and expiriences during their playtime in UO and i ensure u u ll get astonished.
There is nothing wrong in cloning the game featrues, the problem is that MMOs lately are nothing else then mere copies of succesful competition. There is no real innovation. Further more some players are tired of theme park restrictions, closed, often instanced worlds, never ending boring quest lines ( kill x bears anyone ? ) and level/gear grind. Most of MMO developers are in the deadlock of standards established by World of Warcraft.
They are too afraid to create something new and orginial, partly because players demand that standard in any new product and next complain that new game is just a clone of WoW. The only innovative games which managed to survive on the market are probably EvE, Fallen Earth and Darkfall. Aion fails to deliever, because it is nothing else then a copy of WoW and Lineage 2.
You can't compete on the same market with WoW, a new MMO is far from beging fully functional and polished and if it offers mainly the standard WoW experience it won't survive. It is a shame really that huge developing companies can't produce nothing new and take a risk, only indie companies actually make a stand.
There is nothing wrong in cloning the game featrues, the problem is that MMOs lately are nothing else then mere copies of succesful competition. There is no real innovation. Further more some players are tired of theme park restrictions, closed, often instanced worlds, never ending boring quest lines ( kill x bears anyone ? ) and level/gear grind. Most of MMO developers are in the deadlock of standards established by World of Warcraft. They are too afraid to create something new and orginial, partly because players demand that standard in any new product and next complain that new game is just a clone of WoW. The only innovative games which managed to survive on the market are probably EvE, Fallen Earth and Darkfall. Aion fails to deliever, because it is nothing else then a copy of WoW and Lineage 2. You can't compete on the same market with WoW, a new MMO is far from beging fully functional and polished and if it offers mainly the standard WoW experience it won't survive. It is a shame really that huge developing companies can't produce nothing new and take a risk, only indie companies actually make a stand.
There is nothing wrong in cloning the game featrues, the problem is that MMOs lately are nothing else then mere copies of succesful competition. There is no real innovation. Further more some players are tired of theme park restrictions, closed, often instanced worlds, never ending boring quest lines ( kill x bears anyone ? ) and level/gear grind. Most of MMO developers are in the deadlock of standards established by World of Warcraft. They are too afraid to create something new and orginial, partly because players demand that standard in any new product and next complain that new game is just a clone of WoW. The only innovative games which managed to survive on the market are probably EvE, Fallen Earth and Darkfall. Aion fails to deliever, because it is nothing else then a copy of WoW and Lineage 2. You can't compete on the same market with WoW, a new MMO is far from beging fully functional and polished and if it offers mainly the standard WoW experience it won't survive. It is a shame really that huge developing companies can't produce nothing new and take a risk, only indie companies actually make a stand.
Cloning does NOT EQUAL INNOVATING
SO STOP ASKIGN FOR INNOVATION!!!
Calm down kid, none is calling coping an innovation.
What I am saying is that companies distorted the proper proportions between coping well established mechanics and coming forward with something new and not seen before. Take a look at WAR, it is probably in 90 % a copy of WoW. That's not a proper proportions for a success.
Another thing is much less successful sandbox games on the market and some people believe that the next step should be a hybrid of theme park and a sandbox game. I can imagine a nice sandbox MMO with a strong Warhammer's lore.
Blizzard's next MMO is going to be a sandbox, albeit completely and utterly casual (moreso than WoW). I will stake $50,000 of my own savings on this bet if anyone wants to match me, ha! You all know people want a Sandbox game so bad. And Blizzard is very smart. They know this too. And what better way to dominate the entire genre than to own the biggest Theme Park game - AND - the biggest Sandbox game?!
So...rest assured, the Good news is: a highly polished sandbox game is on its way. The Bad news is: Blizzard will be the one dominating that side of the market as well. I swear to god, that is going to be the irony of it all.
p.s. - I'm not a Blizzard hater. They develop excellent games with top notch polish and design. I'm just not a fan of their over simplified, hold-your-hand, disney-esque MMO. And even THAT is not saying WoW sucks. Its a great starter MMO and simple enough for young children to play.
Really? Aside from the small number on THIS website (lets face it a couple of thousand may sound like a lot, but in MMO terms it's nothing). Personally, I've yet to be convinced that there's enough to warrant Blizzard spending 40+ million bucks on the development of a pure sandbox game.
However, Blizzards playerbase is more likely to respond positively to another MMO with themepark elements than one that was completely sandbox. Therefore, I'm more of the opinion that a hybrid is more likely than a true sandbox game. One that has both sandbox and themepark elements.
There is nothing wrong in cloning the game featrues, the problem is that MMOs lately are nothing else then mere copies of succesful competition. There is no real innovation. Further more some players are tired of theme park restrictions, closed, often instanced worlds, never ending boring quest lines ( kill x bears anyone ? ) and level/gear grind. Most of MMO developers are in the deadlock of standards established by World of Warcraft. They are too afraid to create something new and orginial, partly because players demand that standard in any new product and next complain that new game is just a clone of WoW. The only innovative games which managed to survive on the market are probably EvE, Fallen Earth and Darkfall. Aion fails to deliever, because it is nothing else then a copy of WoW and Lineage 2. You can't compete on the same market with WoW, a new MMO is far from beging fully functional and polished and if it offers mainly the standard WoW experience it won't survive. It is a shame really that huge developing companies can't produce nothing new and take a risk, only indie companies actually make a stand.
Borrowing good features and cloning is not the same thing. If a game feels like EQ, UO or Wow when you play it it is a clone. If the game have certain features like a similar kind of crafting but a different feeling of how you actually play the game then it is not a clone.
Some features do give a very similar gameplay, like "the holy triad" and skills with a certain cooldown, add a few of those features and the game will be too close to the older games and few people are interested to change their current game to one with similar gameplay (well, it makes some sense with UO players where the graphics really are outdate).
But it is not true that only indie game devs do their own thing. Some larger companies are also making their own MMOs now and do their own things, like Bioware and Bethesda. And are CCP and Arenanet indie companies or not? They are both doing their own things too.
The fact is: A new game must be better than the old game for people to change (unless they played the old for many years and are really bored). Just better isn't enough. And similar games don't give you the great feeling you had from your first MMO wither, a games needs to be very different for that.
Really? Aside from the small number on THIS website (lets face it a couple of thousand may sound like a lot, but in MMO terms it's nothing). Personally, I've yet to be convinced that there's enough to warrant Blizzard spending 40+ million bucks on the development of a pure sandbox game.
However, Blizzards playerbase is more likely to respond positively to another MMO with themepark elements than one that was completely sandbox. Therefore, I'm more of the opinion that a hybrid is more likely than a true sandbox game. One that has both sandbox and themepark elements.
Yup.
You're not thinking outside the box nor business-wise. Blizzard is not interested in "double dipping" into their already established player base. New prospects = new money. And despite what people may think, there is a huge interest in sandbox games. The Sims proved it. Millions played and loved it. Blizzard wants those millions of NEW people who played and enjoyed that (but have no interest in or ever considered playing current MMOs).
They're looking to create a new market. New targets. They already have your money. They want the people who never will play World of Warcraft to play their "new" game. I'm telling you. Blizzard's new goldmine lies in a very casual Sandbox game. I'm sorry but their new MMO is not being made for you or any of us. Its being made for anyone else who's not currently playing an MMO. That is not to say that millions of WoW players won't play it too. Alot will. But they will still keep their WoW account because the two games will be entirely different. See where I am going with this? Double profits.
When you think about this from a business perspective, it will start to make more absolute sense. But, your right, it may have a few theme parked elements in it. But certainly not focused on theme park. The vast majority of it will be completely sandbox. It will be a Sims-like MMO. I'm betting on it.
make a fun game and it will strike gold. doesnt matter if its another UO , EQ or which ever were your first real MMO. sure the get to max lvl/max skills, have been beaten to death. for anyone who aint new to MMOs... now what WoW have done right is....advertise and believe in their product. its the first social accepted MMO you could spend the 15$/month for - that price sounds insane for anyone who aint playing MMOs. even have less geekish friends who believed that WoW were the first MMO... doesnt matter who clone who...just make a game with friggin depth and coop needing elements...the modern MMOs try too hard copy what singleplayer games and console´s always will do the best....trying to make action games.
You need some English lessons, but your post was one of the more refreshing one's I've read over the last few years after all the same back and forth comments.
I agree, and appreciate some new spin on the subject.
WoW? Please. EQ had little to no quest. The typical quest in EQ gave no XP, and most took days or hours to complete. Before WoW came along, there was no instant regen in EQ. You sat your butt down, and waited 15 agonizing minutes. Raids? Ok, but EQ didn't start out as a raiding game. Raids didn't become the focus of EQ until sometime in 2001, or whenever PoP was released. Group play. WoW has terrible group play. WoW only encourages grouping at max level.
The differences are endless between these two games. Anyone who thinks they are similar has never played EQ. I wish there was a current game that copied EQ mechanics and spirit. Now, all we have are a bunch of single player games where you don't group until you're ready to get geared for raiding. Sad.
Its not so much the whole 'quest' thing that is used to compare a game like WoW to EQ. People use the game structure itself to compare. EQ was essentially the first graphical 3D mmo to use Archtypes, Area Progression (Zone based) and 2 factions. WoW built off this (even the devs have stated that if EQ never existed then WoW wouldnt have either, Rob Pardo interview).
By EQ clone they dont mean exact carbon copy, but rather a large collection of ideas and principles. It has nothing to do with group vs solo play or quests/no quests. Its also not meant as an insult to EQ or games that followed it in the same basic image. Its just easier to compare those games to EQ seeing as the basic principles are the same.
Also, most of the comparrisons are to current EQ (as EQ is now) vs Classic EQ.
In a very broad overview the two games are similar. However, humans and chimps are also similar in a broad overview and share most of the same DNA.
It's all those little differences which make them into completely different things. When you start playing a character in WoW the basic day to day gameplay is vastly different than what it was in old EQ. Again, in a broad general sense, looking at them from a distance with your eyes squinted nearly shut they are similar but when you get down to the actual gameplay of old EQ and WoW they are almost nothing alike except in the most general description that you fight things in a fantasy world and you gain levels with a character.
To the best of my knowledge there has never been an EQ clone. Maybe they tried with Vanguard but it crashed and burned in a carnival of errors. I'm not sure how close it was; I stayed away for my own reasons.
But anyway, no, there has never been a polished clone of EQ. I wish someone would clone it. Make a clone with the same gameplay EQ had during the leveling phase in the first year or two and leave out the raiding and I'd finally have a new game to play I could be happy with. It wouldn't be my dream game but at least it would be fun.
Calling WoW a EQ clone is like calling a chimp a human clone. I mean, after all, they both have two eyes and two hands, right? So they are exactly the same thing, right?
WoW? Please. EQ had little to no quest. The typical quest in EQ gave no XP, and most took days or hours to complete. Before WoW came along, there was no instant regen in EQ. You sat your butt down, and waited 15 agonizing minutes. Raids? Ok, but EQ didn't start out as a raiding game. Raids didn't become the focus of EQ until sometime in 2001, or whenever PoP was released. Group play. WoW has terrible group play. WoW only encourages grouping at max level.
The differences are endless between these two games. Anyone who thinks they are similar has never played EQ. I wish there was a current game that copied EQ mechanics and spirit. Now, all we have are a bunch of single player games where you don't group until you're ready to get geared for raiding. Sad.
Its not so much the whole 'quest' thing that is used to compare a game like WoW to EQ. People use the game structure itself to compare. EQ was essentially the first graphical 3D mmo to use Archtypes, Area Progression (Zone based) and 2 factions. WoW built off this (even the devs have stated that if EQ never existed then WoW wouldnt have either, Rob Pardo interview).
By EQ clone they dont mean exact carbon copy, but rather a large collection of ideas and principles. It has nothing to do with group vs solo play or quests/no quests. Its also not meant as an insult to EQ or games that followed it in the same basic image. Its just easier to compare those games to EQ seeing as the basic principles are the same.
Also, most of the comparrisons are to current EQ (as EQ is now) vs Classic EQ.
In a very broad overview the two games are similar. However, humans and chimps are also similar in a broad overview and share most of the same DNA.
It's all those little differences which make them into completely different things. When you start playing a character in WoW the basic day to day gameplay is vastly different than what it was in old EQ. Again, in a broad general sense, looking at them from a distance with your eyes squinted nearly shut they are similar but when you get down to the actual gameplay of old EQ and WoW they are almost nothing alike except in the most general description that you fight things in a fantasy world and you gain levels with a character.
To the best of my knowledge there has never been an EQ clone. Maybe they tried with Vanguard but it crashed and burned in a carnival of errors. I'm not sure how close it was; I stayed away for my own reasons.
But anyway, no, there has never been a polished clone of EQ. I wish someone would clone it. Make a clone with the same gameplay EQ had during the leveling phase in the first year or two and leave out the raiding and I'd finally have a new game to play I could be happy with. It wouldn't be my dream game but at least it would be fun.
Calling WoW a EQ clone is like calling a chimp a human clone. I mean, after all, they both have two eyes and two hands, right? So they are exactly the same thing, right?
Just give me an MMO again that has depth, freedom and immersion. Every game in the last 4 or more years has lacked these elements. World of Warcraft is a nice, fun and simple game...but its very linear in the sense that the only point of it is to grind for the next level of gear. That's it. There's no possible deviation from it. You start at A and end at B. When the next expansion hits, I already know exactly where I'll start and where I'll end...even before I've installed the game to my HDD. You'll ultimately be doing the exact same thing you did in the last expansion. Sigh.
It's the same problem with every other major MMO that has followed this format.
Older games like UO gave you the freedom to shape your destiny and the freedom to do whatever you wanted (some with consequences). It was a true adventure. You actually felt like you were in a virtual world where anything was possible (and it was). Contrary to belief, it was very popular. People will argue that UO didn't have the same numbers of WoW. But it was a different time back then. And those numbers were, in fact, quite astounding for a time when not many were familiar with PCs...much less the internet.
Anyway, bring back the depth.
Well these older gamers Moved on to Everquest, so that alone proves that MMORPG players mostly want less freedom as that.
UO to EverQuest to WoW, <--------this movement shows that People like Theme Park Element more.
And again, you still ignoring the main point of the question. WHat makes UO clones Innovating, that EQ Clones arnt?
I think you are wrong.
Sure, people went from EQ to WoW, but remember that WoW was released when EQ was going downhill (releasing an unfinished, shit expansion every 5 months. Buy this expansion, get unfished LOY zones that have no loot tables, etc.)
People were ready to leave EQ at the same time WoW was released. If WoW wasn't released, those people would not even be playing an MMORPG probably.
If there are any EQ players playing WoW (I really doubt it), I assume they are just waiting for a decent EQ-like MMORPG to come out. People can't go back to the original EQ though, because of how SOE ruined it. They have nowhere to go, so they will hang around in whatever MMORPG they happen to be in atm.
I guarantee the next EQ-like MMORPG that comes out, a sandbox type with no instancing, people will flock there. I know I will.
Every MMORPG that comes out anymore is just linear trash. AION, WAR, AOC, WOW, etc. are all linear games. There were never any decent sandboxes released, sandboxes like original EQ.
Actually a lot of people hope someone makes a new and decent clone of UO.
And WOW was not an Everquest clone. WOW took the best working features from MMOs and put it into their game with as few bugs as possible.
And in my delirium I would call WOW the best EQ and UO clone as it has questing combined with many playstyles. You even can specialize your classes in WOW with skillpoints whichj most classgames do not allow.
No, WoW did not take the "best working features from MMOs". They took the features that appealed to the worst players. Instancing, no death penalties, no competition, instanced PVE,PVP, linear gameplay, minimaps, markers on your maps during quests showing you where to go, etc.
So it's not the best features, it's features that appeal to masses of bad players who are too lousy to play an MMORPG that is remotely challenging.
Its not that people hate EQ clones. Its that there are a lot of people who are just tired of EQ clones. Its kinda like if all video games were all just the same Mario 3 knock offs over and over again. Sure, each game might be slightly different (setting/characters), but in the end you just crave something totally different - like maybe a FPS or Sim game just to break up the monotony. After all, the world would be a very bland place if all you had was Vanilla Ice Cream to choose from.
Name one decent MMORPG that was an "EQ Clone". They've all been WoW clones, and all the WoW clones are failures. Get a clue
(even the devs have stated that if EQ never existed then WoW wouldnt have either, Rob Pardo interview).
Because EQ made MMOs popular. Just like EVE wouldn't exist without EQ, because EQ brought investors to the market.
There are certainly similarities between EQ and WoW(they are both RPG based games), but there are similarities between EVE and EQ, too. Tanks, DPS and support roles, no? You're telling me EVE doesn't have archetypes or classes? C'mon, you're brighter than that.
Hey, Im not arguing with you... just giving a little insight into why people use the EQ clone thing.
Thing is, the system EvE uses is a skill based system akin to UO where the player becomes a specific role over time using skill point allocation or skill training. EvE is more UO in space than a game that can be compared to EQ.
WoW and EQ use the same passive character progression system where you level and points are allocated for you depending on your class. You also only obtain skills designed for that class as well as weapons/gear etc (Druid only epic gear, Paladin only epic gear, Shaman only epic gear, etc).
Basically EQ/WoW - roles are defined from teh start.
UO/EvE - player defines their role over time and by choice.
Uhh. You're wrong? I don't know what else to say.
In EQ you are defined by what class you pick.
In WoW you pick a class, then you can play any role basically because of the 'talent system'. They gave every class every ability. A druid can tank, be DPS, or be a healer. Since classes can do most things in a game like WoW, your class doesn't matter all that much.
If I pick a Paladin in Everquest, I can tank and heal. But I can't change that mid-game like in stupid games like WoW
So when you pick a character in WoW, your role is defined over time, not at character creation. EQ had better defined classes and roles than WoW did.
(even the devs have stated that if EQ never existed then WoW wouldnt have either, Rob Pardo interview).
Because EQ made MMOs popular. Just like EVE wouldn't exist without EQ, because EQ brought investors to the market.
There are certainly similarities between EQ and WoW(they are both RPG based games), but there are similarities between EVE and EQ, too. Tanks, DPS and support roles, no? You're telling me EVE doesn't have archetypes or classes? C'mon, you're brighter than that.
Hey, Im not arguing with you... just giving a little insight into why people use the EQ clone thing.
Thing is, the system EvE uses is a skill based system akin to UO where the player becomes a specific role over time using skill point allocation or skill training. EvE is more UO in space than a game that can be compared to EQ.
WoW and EQ use the same passive character progression system where you level and points are allocated for you depending on your class. You also only obtain skills designed for that class as well as weapons/gear etc (Druid only epic gear, Paladin only epic gear, Shaman only epic gear, etc).
Basically EQ/WoW - roles are defined from teh start.
UO/EvE - player defines their role over time and by choice.
Uhh. You're wrong? I don't know what else to say.
In EQ you are defined by what class you pick.
In WoW you pick a class, then you can play any role basically because of the 'talent system'. They gave every class every ability. A druid can tank, be DPS, or be a healer. Since classes can do most things in a game like WoW, your class doesn't matter all that much.
If I pick a Paladin in Everquest, I can tank and heal. But I can't change that mid-game like in stupid games like WoW
So when you pick a character in WoW, your role is defined over time, not at character creation. EQ had better defined classes and roles than WoW did.
WoW is a clone of EQ.
It uses the same class system. (main--> Sub Class)
You seem to be blind. Because if there was no EQ, there would be no WoW. WoW follows EQ, in the grindy feel, and in the use of Large Scale PvE.
Also it introduced the use of Quest, and Lvls. WoW is not 100% EQ, but it evolved from EQ.
Comments
As others have said it's not that there is an issue with "cloning" EQ, it's that there has not been an equal or even significant attempt to recreate the gameplay/mechanics and more sim-like features of UO. What some people don't get (because everything has to be either or in their little worlds) is that the vast majority of people on board with this sentiment aren't saying to stop making games like EQ. They are saying we need more games like UO. Just as the Themepark style of games gets a new update every year we'd like to see the other type of game get the same update from equivalent companies.
Too many themepark lovers get their shorts in a knot thinking there is some attack on their favored type game. If they'd come off the defensiveand look at the genre they'd see the imbalance and understand why we want more of the other. We like to have games that we like to play too! And as for any comments about going back and playing those older games, I'd respond okay, how about you go back and play the the older themepark ones. Everyone likes to have an updated version with refined mechanics and new worlds to explore.
HOW IN THE WORLD DOES CLONING== INNOVATING????
Answer that BUDDY!!!!!
All I read on this forum from these EQ clone Haters, is that it is making the genre Less Innovating!
But How would a UO Clone not also do the same thing?
I didn't say that cloning equaled innovation, BUDDY!
I stated that certain folks are want more games to be made in the mold of UO as there is a lack of games made in that method. I also stated that those games would see updates to those systems/mechanics. Updates by nature of the world would prohibit it from being a clone.
And also as I pointed out and you completely ignored, there aren't alot of UO like games out. So even if it was a clone it'd be offering more variety of gameplay than what we're getting at current.
So UO is not open anymore?
So how would a UO clone be innovating if people can already play UO?
As others have said it's not that there is an issue with "cloning" EQ, it's that there has not been an equal or even significant attempt to recreate the gameplay/mechanics and more sim-like features of UO. What some people don't get (because everything has to be either or in their little worlds) is that the vast majority of people on board with this sentiment aren't saying to stop making games like EQ. They are saying we need more games like UO. Just as the Themepark style of games gets a new update every year we'd like to see the other type of game get the same update from equivalent companies.
Too many themepark lovers get their shorts in a knot thinking there is some attack on their favored type game. If they'd come off the defensiveand look at the genre they'd see the imbalance and understand why we want more of the other. We like to have games that we like to play too! And as for any comments about going back and playing those older games, I'd respond okay, how about you go back and play the the older themepark ones. Everyone likes to have an updated version with refined mechanics and new worlds to explore.
HOW IN THE WORLD DOES CLONING== INNOVATING????
Answer that BUDDY!!!!!
All I read on this forum from these EQ clone Haters, is that it is making the genre Less Innovating!
But How would a UO Clone not also do the same thing?
I didn't say that cloning equaled innovation, BUDDY!
I stated that certain folks are want more games to be made in the mold of UO as there is a lack of games made in that method. I also stated that those games would see updates to those systems/mechanics. Updates by nature of the world would prohibit it from being a clone.
And also as I pointed out and you completely ignored, there aren't alot of UO like games out. So even if it was a clone it'd be offering more variety of gameplay than what we're getting at current.
So UO is not pen anymore?
So how would a UO clone be innovating if people can already play UO?
I don't understand your first question. Not sure what a writing utensil (pen) has to do with UO.
Again, I never mentioned the word "innovating ". I stated that a game made in the mold of UO with UPDATES TO THE GAME"S SYSTEMS/MECHANICS would bring much needed variety to the current stream of themepark mania games.
Again, updates to those systems/mechanics could contain this innovation you are searching for. As to how they would update those systems/mechanics in an innovative way, I don't know. They don't pay me to come with those ideas. If they did pay me, I could think of more than a few ways and yet preserve the feel of the original UO game.
"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
As others have said it's not that there is an issue with "cloning" EQ, it's that there has not been an equal or even significant attempt to recreate the gameplay/mechanics and more sim-like features of UO. What some people don't get (because everything has to be either or in their little worlds) is that the vast majority of people on board with this sentiment aren't saying to stop making games like EQ. They are saying we need more games like UO. Just as the Themepark style of games gets a new update every year we'd like to see the other type of game get the same update from equivalent companies.
Too many themepark lovers get their shorts in a knot thinking there is some attack on their favored type game. If they'd come off the defensiveand look at the genre they'd see the imbalance and understand why we want more of the other. We like to have games that we like to play too! And as for any comments about going back and playing those older games, I'd respond okay, how about you go back and play the the older themepark ones. Everyone likes to have an updated version with refined mechanics and new worlds to explore.
HOW IN THE WORLD DOES CLONING== INNOVATING????
Answer that BUDDY!!!!!
All I read on this forum from these EQ clone Haters, is that it is making the genre Less Innovating!
But How would a UO Clone not also do the same thing?
I didn't say that cloning equaled innovation, BUDDY!
I stated that certain folks are want more games to be made in the mold of UO as there is a lack of games made in that method. I also stated that those games would see updates to those systems/mechanics. Updates by nature of the world would prohibit it from being a clone.
And also as I pointed out and you completely ignored, there aren't alot of UO like games out. So even if it was a clone it'd be offering more variety of gameplay than what we're getting at current.
So UO is not pen anymore?
So how would a UO clone be innovating if people can already play UO?
I don't understand your first question. Not sure what a writing utensil (pen) has to do with UO.
Again, I never mentioned the word "innovating ". I stated that a game made in the mold of UO with UPDATES TO THE GAME"S SYSTEMS/MECHANICS would bring much needed variety to the current stream of themepark mania games.
Again, updates to those systems/mechanics could contain this innovation you are searching for. As to how they would update those systems/mechanics in an innovative way, I don't know. They don't pay me to come with those ideas. If they did pay me, I could think of more than a few ways and yet preserve the feel of the original UO game.
The word was Open, the O didnt come threw.
But still my point is that Innovating things can also be done in Everquest Clones, not just in UO clones. (By Updates like you said about UO Clones)
Well the situation ia quite simple. Ppl would like to see a major title with high standards of quality sandbox game delivered.Since wow arrived u have a high standard theme park game in the market. Now ppl want the same in sandbox terms. An improved version of UO with decent 3d grafix and the quality of Uo in gameplay terms even improved if possible in some terms.Now why ppl are getting angry and complain ? Cause every time they see a theme park launching, or a bad sandbox ,they see it as an another failed chance to meet their long-wished opportunity to play the game they are always dreaming to.
As for the Op who s askign why shouldnt we waiting for a EQ 's clones instead? Well market is full of eq 's clones , wow , lotro etc. But tbh i dont if a good EQ clone now would make great sales cause after wow everyone is compairing every new game with it. I dont know if a great crafting system and the ability to own your own house is by itselfs enough motivation to play a game.
As others have said it's not that there is an issue with "cloning" EQ, it's that there has not been an equal or even significant attempt to recreate the gameplay/mechanics and more sim-like features of UO. What some people don't get (because everything has to be either or in their little worlds) is that the vast majority of people on board with this sentiment aren't saying to stop making games like EQ. They are saying we need more games like UO. Just as the Themepark style of games gets a new update every year we'd like to see the other type of game get the same update from equivalent companies.
Too many themepark lovers get their shorts in a knot thinking there is some attack on their favored type game. If they'd come off the defensiveand look at the genre they'd see the imbalance and understand why we want more of the other. We like to have games that we like to play too! And as for any comments about going back and playing those older games, I'd respond okay, how about you go back and play the the older themepark ones. Everyone likes to have an updated version with refined mechanics and new worlds to explore.
HOW IN THE WORLD DOES CLONING== INNOVATING????
Answer that BUDDY!!!!!
All I read on this forum from these EQ clone Haters, is that it is making the genre Less Innovating!
But How would a UO Clone not also do the same thing?
I didn't say that cloning equaled innovation, BUDDY!
I stated that certain folks are want more games to be made in the mold of UO as there is a lack of games made in that method. I also stated that those games would see updates to those systems/mechanics. Updates by nature of the world would prohibit it from being a clone.
And also as I pointed out and you completely ignored, there aren't alot of UO like games out. So even if it was a clone it'd be offering more variety of gameplay than what we're getting at current.
So UO is not pen anymore?
So how would a UO clone be innovating if people can already play UO?
I don't understand your first question. Not sure what a writing utensil (pen) has to do with UO.
Again, I never mentioned the word "innovating ". I stated that a game made in the mold of UO with UPDATES TO THE GAME"S SYSTEMS/MECHANICS would bring much needed variety to the current stream of themepark mania games.
Again, updates to those systems/mechanics could contain this innovation you are searching for. As to how they would update those systems/mechanics in an innovative way, I don't know. They don't pay me to come with those ideas. If they did pay me, I could think of more than a few ways and yet preserve the feel of the original UO game.
The word was Open, the O didnt come threw.
But still my point is that Innovating things can also be done in Everquest Clones, not just in UO clones. (By Updates like you said about UO Clones)
And I never said that innovation couldn't be done in EQ clones. I am saying that there are plenty of EQ clones being made (by that I mean games patterned after EQ) and that there are not the same amount being patterned after UO. Many MMO gamers would like to see more games patterened after UO to add diversity and choice to the types of MMOs they can play.
I think many of the people you were addressing your initial post at aren't saying that "innovation" can't be done in an EQ clone. I think they are just tired of playing EQ clones in general, whether they innovate or not. They want the gameplay/mechanic that would be found in an UO clone. If that UO clone has some innovations that keep within the lines of the style of gameplay that that type of MMO offered, then good.
"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
If it was a crafting system as in depth as the original SWG's and a housing system like UOs or Original SWG's, and the player crafting system was the only way to get finished items, and it was a PvP game set up like EvE's sector space (1.0 to 0.0) with respect to law and nPC guards....
I'd lifetime sub.
"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
Well you EQ Clone haters
STOP USING INNOVATION AS AN EXCUSE TO HATE!!!
Ask for UO Clones, but stop trying to use the same prased excuse that EQ Clones has killed the Innovation.
Because it is not Innovation that you want. It is the UO clones that you want.
Clones!= Innovating
Well these older gamers Moved on to Everquest, so that alone proves that MMORPG players mostly want less freedom as that.
UO to EverQuest to WoW, <--------this movement shows that People like Theme Park Element more.
And again, you still ignoring the main point of the question. WHat makes UO clones Innovating, that EQ Clones arnt?
I ll tell you what makes Uo Innovating and EQ and its clones and wow alike is not. Perfoming loads and loads of various actions like begging in streets, become a burglar and break into other ppl's houses,u could get killed in pvp and loose loot, Uo had risk due to your actions,u could make enemies if u did soething wrong with serious consequenses into the game, DUE TO ALL these interactivity with others players go to a very high lvl, risk is also chained part with innovation,in eq, wow, u have nothing to loose if die,so no risk therefore.adventuring and discovering places and things in a huge massive world is also a factor u dont meet in wow which by now is complete instanced after all ( after last patch u dont even have to move to the dungeon u just queqe and wait to be teleported inside) and many many other things i suggest u go and read UO ex- player reports about their personal stories and expiriences during their playtime in UO and i ensure u u ll get astonished.
Well, neither is that good idea because we have already played those games a lot. Using some parts from both games is of course logical but games that feels like you already played them before is never ok.
The reason the community dislike EQ clones more than UO clones is probably because there are zillion EQ clones and few UO clones, and few if any UO clone actually feels like the original game.
The companies needs new ideas to bring us games that have a different experience, remaking older game will not give evolve the genre. As I see it should they both look on other genres and on pen and paper RPGs to evolve the games.
Well these older gamers Moved on to Everquest, so that alone proves that MMORPG players mostly want less freedom as that.
UO to EverQuest to WoW, <--------this movement shows that People like Theme Park Element more.
And again, you still ignoring the main point of the question. WHat makes UO clones Innovating, that EQ Clones arnt?
I ll tell you what makes Uo Innovating and EQ and its clones and wow alike is not. Perfoming loads and loads of various actions like begging in streets, become a burglar and break into other ppl's houses,u could get killed in pvp and loose loot, Uo had risk due to your actions,u could make enemies if u did soething wrong with serious consequenses into the game, DUE TO ALL these interactivity with others players go to a very high lvl, risk is also chained part with innovation,in eq, wow, u have nothing to loose if die,so no risk therefore.adventuring and discovering places and things in a huge massive world is also a factor u dont meet in wow which by now is complete instanced after all ( after last patch u dont even have to move to the dungeon u just queqe and wait to be teleported inside) and many many other things i suggest u go and read UO ex- player reports about their personal stories and expiriences during their playtime in UO and i ensure u u ll get astonished.
HTF is that Innovating if it is done in UO?
Think!!!
There is nothing wrong in cloning the game featrues, the problem is that MMOs lately are nothing else then mere copies of succesful competition. There is no real innovation. Further more some players are tired of theme park restrictions, closed, often instanced worlds, never ending boring quest lines ( kill x bears anyone ? ) and level/gear grind. Most of MMO developers are in the deadlock of standards established by World of Warcraft.
They are too afraid to create something new and orginial, partly because players demand that standard in any new product and next complain that new game is just a clone of WoW. The only innovative games which managed to survive on the market are probably EvE, Fallen Earth and Darkfall. Aion fails to deliever, because it is nothing else then a copy of WoW and Lineage 2.
You can't compete on the same market with WoW, a new MMO is far from beging fully functional and polished and if it offers mainly the standard WoW experience it won't survive. It is a shame really that huge developing companies can't produce nothing new and take a risk, only indie companies actually make a stand.
Cloning does NOT EQUAL INNOVATING
SO STOP ASKIGN FOR INNOVATION!!!
Cloning does NOT EQUAL INNOVATING
SO STOP ASKIGN FOR INNOVATION!!!
Calm down kid, none is calling coping an innovation.
What I am saying is that companies distorted the proper proportions between coping well established mechanics and coming forward with something new and not seen before. Take a look at WAR, it is probably in 90 % a copy of WoW. That's not a proper proportions for a success.
Another thing is much less successful sandbox games on the market and some people believe that the next step should be a hybrid of theme park and a sandbox game. I can imagine a nice sandbox MMO with a strong Warhammer's lore.
Here's the irony of all this:
Blizzard's next MMO is going to be a sandbox, albeit completely and utterly casual (moreso than WoW). I will stake $50,000 of my own savings on this bet if anyone wants to match me, ha! You all know people want a Sandbox game so bad. And Blizzard is very smart. They know this too. And what better way to dominate the entire genre than to own the biggest Theme Park game - AND - the biggest Sandbox game?!
So...rest assured, the Good news is: a highly polished sandbox game is on its way. The Bad news is: Blizzard will be the one dominating that side of the market as well. I swear to god, that is going to be the irony of it all.
p.s. - I'm not a Blizzard hater. They develop excellent games with top notch polish and design. I'm just not a fan of their over simplified, hold-your-hand, disney-esque MMO. And even THAT is not saying WoW sucks. Its a great starter MMO and simple enough for young children to play.
Really? Aside from the small number on THIS website (lets face it a couple of thousand may sound like a lot, but in MMO terms it's nothing). Personally, I've yet to be convinced that there's enough to warrant Blizzard spending 40+ million bucks on the development of a pure sandbox game.
However, Blizzards playerbase is more likely to respond positively to another MMO with themepark elements than one that was completely sandbox. Therefore, I'm more of the opinion that a hybrid is more likely than a true sandbox game. One that has both sandbox and themepark elements.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
Borrowing good features and cloning is not the same thing. If a game feels like EQ, UO or Wow when you play it it is a clone. If the game have certain features like a similar kind of crafting but a different feeling of how you actually play the game then it is not a clone.
Some features do give a very similar gameplay, like "the holy triad" and skills with a certain cooldown, add a few of those features and the game will be too close to the older games and few people are interested to change their current game to one with similar gameplay (well, it makes some sense with UO players where the graphics really are outdate).
But it is not true that only indie game devs do their own thing. Some larger companies are also making their own MMOs now and do their own things, like Bioware and Bethesda. And are CCP and Arenanet indie companies or not? They are both doing their own things too.
The fact is: A new game must be better than the old game for people to change (unless they played the old for many years and are really bored). Just better isn't enough. And similar games don't give you the great feeling you had from your first MMO wither, a games needs to be very different for that.
Really? Aside from the small number on THIS website (lets face it a couple of thousand may sound like a lot, but in MMO terms it's nothing). Personally, I've yet to be convinced that there's enough to warrant Blizzard spending 40+ million bucks on the development of a pure sandbox game.
However, Blizzards playerbase is more likely to respond positively to another MMO with themepark elements than one that was completely sandbox. Therefore, I'm more of the opinion that a hybrid is more likely than a true sandbox game. One that has both sandbox and themepark elements.
Yup.
You're not thinking outside the box nor business-wise. Blizzard is not interested in "double dipping" into their already established player base. New prospects = new money. And despite what people may think, there is a huge interest in sandbox games. The Sims proved it. Millions played and loved it. Blizzard wants those millions of NEW people who played and enjoyed that (but have no interest in or ever considered playing current MMOs).
They're looking to create a new market. New targets. They already have your money. They want the people who never will play World of Warcraft to play their "new" game. I'm telling you. Blizzard's new goldmine lies in a very casual Sandbox game. I'm sorry but their new MMO is not being made for you or any of us. Its being made for anyone else who's not currently playing an MMO. That is not to say that millions of WoW players won't play it too. Alot will. But they will still keep their WoW account because the two games will be entirely different. See where I am going with this? Double profits.
When you think about this from a business perspective, it will start to make more absolute sense. But, your right, it may have a few theme parked elements in it. But certainly not focused on theme park. The vast majority of it will be completely sandbox. It will be a Sims-like MMO. I'm betting on it.
You need some English lessons, but your post was one of the more refreshing one's I've read over the last few years after all the same back and forth comments.
I agree, and appreciate some new spin on the subject.
Once upon a time....
Its not so much the whole 'quest' thing that is used to compare a game like WoW to EQ. People use the game structure itself to compare. EQ was essentially the first graphical 3D mmo to use Archtypes, Area Progression (Zone based) and 2 factions. WoW built off this (even the devs have stated that if EQ never existed then WoW wouldnt have either, Rob Pardo interview).
By EQ clone they dont mean exact carbon copy, but rather a large collection of ideas and principles. It has nothing to do with group vs solo play or quests/no quests. Its also not meant as an insult to EQ or games that followed it in the same basic image. Its just easier to compare those games to EQ seeing as the basic principles are the same.
Also, most of the comparrisons are to current EQ (as EQ is now) vs Classic EQ.
In a very broad overview the two games are similar. However, humans and chimps are also similar in a broad overview and share most of the same DNA.
It's all those little differences which make them into completely different things. When you start playing a character in WoW the basic day to day gameplay is vastly different than what it was in old EQ. Again, in a broad general sense, looking at them from a distance with your eyes squinted nearly shut they are similar but when you get down to the actual gameplay of old EQ and WoW they are almost nothing alike except in the most general description that you fight things in a fantasy world and you gain levels with a character.
To the best of my knowledge there has never been an EQ clone. Maybe they tried with Vanguard but it crashed and burned in a carnival of errors. I'm not sure how close it was; I stayed away for my own reasons.
But anyway, no, there has never been a polished clone of EQ. I wish someone would clone it. Make a clone with the same gameplay EQ had during the leveling phase in the first year or two and leave out the raiding and I'd finally have a new game to play I could be happy with. It wouldn't be my dream game but at least it would be fun.
Calling WoW a EQ clone is like calling a chimp a human clone. I mean, after all, they both have two eyes and two hands, right? So they are exactly the same thing, right?
Its not so much the whole 'quest' thing that is used to compare a game like WoW to EQ. People use the game structure itself to compare. EQ was essentially the first graphical 3D mmo to use Archtypes, Area Progression (Zone based) and 2 factions. WoW built off this (even the devs have stated that if EQ never existed then WoW wouldnt have either, Rob Pardo interview).
By EQ clone they dont mean exact carbon copy, but rather a large collection of ideas and principles. It has nothing to do with group vs solo play or quests/no quests. Its also not meant as an insult to EQ or games that followed it in the same basic image. Its just easier to compare those games to EQ seeing as the basic principles are the same.
Also, most of the comparrisons are to current EQ (as EQ is now) vs Classic EQ.
In a very broad overview the two games are similar. However, humans and chimps are also similar in a broad overview and share most of the same DNA.
It's all those little differences which make them into completely different things. When you start playing a character in WoW the basic day to day gameplay is vastly different than what it was in old EQ. Again, in a broad general sense, looking at them from a distance with your eyes squinted nearly shut they are similar but when you get down to the actual gameplay of old EQ and WoW they are almost nothing alike except in the most general description that you fight things in a fantasy world and you gain levels with a character.
To the best of my knowledge there has never been an EQ clone. Maybe they tried with Vanguard but it crashed and burned in a carnival of errors. I'm not sure how close it was; I stayed away for my own reasons.
But anyway, no, there has never been a polished clone of EQ. I wish someone would clone it. Make a clone with the same gameplay EQ had during the leveling phase in the first year or two and leave out the raiding and I'd finally have a new game to play I could be happy with. It wouldn't be my dream game but at least it would be fun.
Calling WoW a EQ clone is like calling a chimp a human clone. I mean, after all, they both have two eyes and two hands, right? So they are exactly the same thing, right?
Come on Man/Lady
stop acting Dumb.
Is Darkfall 100% UO? No but still a UO Clone
Is WAR 100% like EQ? No,, but still a EQ Clone
Well these older gamers Moved on to Everquest, so that alone proves that MMORPG players mostly want less freedom as that.
UO to EverQuest to WoW, <--------this movement shows that People like Theme Park Element more.
And again, you still ignoring the main point of the question. WHat makes UO clones Innovating, that EQ Clones arnt?
I think you are wrong.
Sure, people went from EQ to WoW, but remember that WoW was released when EQ was going downhill (releasing an unfinished, shit expansion every 5 months. Buy this expansion, get unfished LOY zones that have no loot tables, etc.)
People were ready to leave EQ at the same time WoW was released. If WoW wasn't released, those people would not even be playing an MMORPG probably.
If there are any EQ players playing WoW (I really doubt it), I assume they are just waiting for a decent EQ-like MMORPG to come out. People can't go back to the original EQ though, because of how SOE ruined it. They have nowhere to go, so they will hang around in whatever MMORPG they happen to be in atm.
I guarantee the next EQ-like MMORPG that comes out, a sandbox type with no instancing, people will flock there. I know I will.
Every MMORPG that comes out anymore is just linear trash. AION, WAR, AOC, WOW, etc. are all linear games. There were never any decent sandboxes released, sandboxes like original EQ.
No, WoW did not take the "best working features from MMOs". They took the features that appealed to the worst players. Instancing, no death penalties, no competition, instanced PVE,PVP, linear gameplay, minimaps, markers on your maps during quests showing you where to go, etc.
So it's not the best features, it's features that appeal to masses of bad players who are too lousy to play an MMORPG that is remotely challenging.
Name one decent MMORPG that was an "EQ Clone". They've all been WoW clones, and all the WoW clones are failures. Get a clue
(even the devs have stated that if EQ never existed then WoW wouldnt have either, Rob Pardo interview).
Because EQ made MMOs popular. Just like EVE wouldn't exist without EQ, because EQ brought investors to the market.
There are certainly similarities between EQ and WoW(they are both RPG based games), but there are similarities between EVE and EQ, too. Tanks, DPS and support roles, no? You're telling me EVE doesn't have archetypes or classes? C'mon, you're brighter than that.
Hey, Im not arguing with you... just giving a little insight into why people use the EQ clone thing.
Thing is, the system EvE uses is a skill based system akin to UO where the player becomes a specific role over time using skill point allocation or skill training. EvE is more UO in space than a game that can be compared to EQ.
WoW and EQ use the same passive character progression system where you level and points are allocated for you depending on your class. You also only obtain skills designed for that class as well as weapons/gear etc (Druid only epic gear, Paladin only epic gear, Shaman only epic gear, etc).
Basically EQ/WoW - roles are defined from teh start.
UO/EvE - player defines their role over time and by choice.
Uhh. You're wrong? I don't know what else to say.
In EQ you are defined by what class you pick.
In WoW you pick a class, then you can play any role basically because of the 'talent system'. They gave every class every ability. A druid can tank, be DPS, or be a healer. Since classes can do most things in a game like WoW, your class doesn't matter all that much.
If I pick a Paladin in Everquest, I can tank and heal. But I can't change that mid-game like in stupid games like WoW
So when you pick a character in WoW, your role is defined over time, not at character creation. EQ had better defined classes and roles than WoW did.
(even the devs have stated that if EQ never existed then WoW wouldnt have either, Rob Pardo interview).
Because EQ made MMOs popular. Just like EVE wouldn't exist without EQ, because EQ brought investors to the market.
There are certainly similarities between EQ and WoW(they are both RPG based games), but there are similarities between EVE and EQ, too. Tanks, DPS and support roles, no? You're telling me EVE doesn't have archetypes or classes? C'mon, you're brighter than that.
Hey, Im not arguing with you... just giving a little insight into why people use the EQ clone thing.
Thing is, the system EvE uses is a skill based system akin to UO where the player becomes a specific role over time using skill point allocation or skill training. EvE is more UO in space than a game that can be compared to EQ.
WoW and EQ use the same passive character progression system where you level and points are allocated for you depending on your class. You also only obtain skills designed for that class as well as weapons/gear etc (Druid only epic gear, Paladin only epic gear, Shaman only epic gear, etc).
Basically EQ/WoW - roles are defined from teh start.
UO/EvE - player defines their role over time and by choice.
Uhh. You're wrong? I don't know what else to say.
In EQ you are defined by what class you pick.
In WoW you pick a class, then you can play any role basically because of the 'talent system'. They gave every class every ability. A druid can tank, be DPS, or be a healer. Since classes can do most things in a game like WoW, your class doesn't matter all that much.
If I pick a Paladin in Everquest, I can tank and heal. But I can't change that mid-game like in stupid games like WoW
So when you pick a character in WoW, your role is defined over time, not at character creation. EQ had better defined classes and roles than WoW did.
WoW is a clone of EQ.
It uses the same class system. (main--> Sub Class)
You seem to be blind. Because if there was no EQ, there would be no WoW. WoW follows EQ, in the grindy feel, and in the use of Large Scale PvE.
Also it introduced the use of Quest, and Lvls. WoW is not 100% EQ, but it evolved from EQ.