Originally posted by FreedomBlade Originally posted by elocke I just love how people keep throwing the term WoW clone theme park around. Show me ONE game that is as good/equal to WoW. I can't think of any. I can think of plenty of games lately that TRY to be like WoW and fail. Therefore this argument isn't really about WoW themepark games but about companies trying to get a piece of the pie that WoW has and failing miserably. To me that points to lack of originality or just complete disregard for what made WoW popular in the first place. So the problem isn't the game type, sandbox or themepark(personally I like hybrids of these, i.e. FFXI and such) but the quality, originality, and polish of games post WoW era.
I feel sorry for this guy ^^^^ And I completely agree with the OP. However I am very suprised he has not tried Darkfall, that is about as close to Ultima Online 2 as we are going to get. Mortal Online might have been but is just to bugged out. I think I just talked myself into resubbing Darkfall.... Oh no !!!!!! But seriously Ultima Online is not playable anymore, I tried it again recently and thought WTF did I really play that?
Rofl. You feel sorry for me and then talk about Darkfall. That's priceless.
I just love how people keep throwing the term WoW clone theme park around. Show me ONE game that is as good/equal to WoW. I can't think of any. I can think of plenty of games lately that TRY to be like WoW and fail. Therefore this argument isn't really about WoW themepark games but about companies trying to get a piece of the pie that WoW has and failing miserably.
To me that points to lack of originality or just complete disregard for what made WoW popular in the first place. So the problem isn't the game type, sandbox or themepark(personally I like hybrids of these, i.e. FFXI and such) but the quality, originality, and polish of games post WoW era.
I feel sorry for this guy ^^^^
And I completely agree with the OP. However I am very suprised he has not tried Darkfall, that is about as close to Ultima Online 2 as we are going to get. Mortal Online might have been but is just to bugged out.
I think I just talked myself into resubbing Darkfall.... Oh no !!!!!!
But seriously Ultima Online is not playable anymore, I tried it again recently and thought WTF did I really play that?
Rofl. You feel sorry for me and then talk about Darkfall. That's priceless.
It's got potential, but it's just not there yet. Total gankfest and pointless to play.
a lot of us have less time than in the past, point taken but sandbox does not have to mean huge time sinks
a point was made that suggested that the real problem is linear game play > well thats the direct product of preset game play
A point was made that I pissed off the people who like themeparks. I probably should have worded my title better but the point is "you" are the dominant force in the market so either stop paying for subpar games or allow me to have an opinion on them.
I agree with you in many ways OP, but there are many gamers who prefer the themepark model. In fact, it appears as though the majority of the market prefers it.
When these people actually do try a sandbox MMO, they have no idea what to do. They find it to be much too harsh and they don't like the fact that there is no direction...
I wouldn't say it is really anyone's fault that sandbox games are not the norm anymore. Developers make games that appeal to the largest player base. Right now that happens to be themepark games.
What's sad is that a lot of the "themepark" fans really don't like the themeparks either. It's just a quick and easy way to level. All that a lot of them really want is end game loot, so instead of games we get these 1-2 month questing tutorials that allow everyone to rapidly be at "end game."
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
To the OP: What makes you think that 'themeparkers' do not get it? What if the 'themeparkers' simply do not want it? Your position implies that people in your labeled category have not considered playing other game styles before selecting to play thempark style games. Where do you draw that conclusion from?
Partially because in the past 5 or 6 years or so there haven't been many good games released that incorporate some of the best features of the early games (which had bad features of course) so many of today's gamers don't know that they're missing.
Even though most of the early titles still exist, they've been changed over time to become hollow shells of what made them great (hence the calls for classic servers all the time in EQ, DAOC and Ultima)
Also, it seems most modern MMO's have a hard time retaining people's interest anymore, its the same thing every time, release to big fanfare and box purchases only to see the sub base trickle away to 100-300K at best in most cases.
I believe that if a good sandbox type game was released today it would have a pretty decent draw, say up to 500K subs, but wouldn't expect it to ever draw down WOW's numbers which is probably why it will never be attempted, at least by the big Dev houses.
This is all a matter of perception, as bemoaned by "vets" mostly. A lot of people simply, happily, play their games, instead of inhabiting forums talking about the good ol' days.
As far as trickling to 100-300K, keep in mind that UO, AC, and DAOC never topped 300K subs at any one time, and that was with limited competition. EQ1 was the beast back then, because it almost hit 500K
Wish I could answer why we don't get more sandbox style games.. I'm really into skill based progression, as it seems alot of mmo players are. My only guess is that business don't see the sustainable income without the gear driven progression in todays games?? Not sure..
I've stated it before though, with Ryzom going open source, my guess is we will start to see some open source offerings based on the Ryzom core. Problem is, like any open source offering, don't expect much in the form of advertising, etc. But it will be interesting to see what comes of this over the next few years..
I've been spinning my wheels in the mmo mudpit for the last 6 months after being gone for a year and a half completely sick of what we were being offered.. Maybe it's time to do the same thing for another 18-24 months and see what's available then. I mean, there seems to be some themepark style games on the horizon that look good in their own right, and a couple that even have my interest, problem is, like most themepark games, they most likely won't hold my interest for more than 1-3 months.. I want something I can play for years, and look forward to for years, not something that after three months or so is 'endgame' or 'alt'...
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
a lot of us have less time than in the past, point taken but sandbox does not have to mean huge time sinks
a point was made that suggested that the real problem is linear game play > well thats the direct product of preset game play
A point was made that I pissed off the people who like themeparks. I probably should have worded my title better but the point is "you" are the dominant force in the market so either stop paying for subpar games or allow me to have an opinion on them.
Um no....STFU and like it :P J/K
Seriously though....what others do with their gaming dollars(as long as it doesnt go against a games EULA) is their choice.
As a long time gamer(41 in RL), I have no problem with things that require a little more thought to complete. I like to have a vast world to roam in. That is about where it ends for similarities between me and sandboxers.
I DONT believe allowing folks to add quests is a good thing in a persistent world. Nor do I think they should be plopping down houses in a big empty world ala SWG. FFA PVP....yeah right....not in any game I am playing.
I have yet to play a better game than EQ1. Maybe WOW was/is, but the GFX turned me off 2 weeks past launch....so I wouldnt know.
Give me a vast open world, with a plethora of different mobs to experience and I am a happy camper. I enjoy ROLL play not ROLE play.
This thread reminds me of a post I saw in DF forums complaining about folks wanting to have the rules of DF changed....and the Devs doing it. Should people pay money for what they dont like? No they shouldnt. So how is it our fault when devs want our money?
Perhaps the sandbox crowd should make a habit of carrying 4 or 5 subs each if they wanna see more sandbox titles.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
I think the point when you start worrying more about labeling games than having fun is the day you should give up gaming. Labels aren't everything. Sure, I started out with a sandbox game (SWG) but I've been around gaming long enough to know that there is more to gaming than categorizing every little thing.
This. So much this.
Every so often, threads like these come around, with people moaning about themeparks and sandboxes, and going off on long, pointless rants about both. It's almost like clockwork.
Personally, I don't care what category a game falls into. As long as it's fun and I enjoy my time in it, that's all that matters.
This just seemed like a big rant in favor of FFA PvP. Humorously the words Sandbox and Theme Park get tossed in but their addition does more to create an effect and garner replies than actually make a constructive point.
Personally I see nothing Sandbox-ish about PvP. PvP is a rigid combat mechanic and Sandbox, as it originally applied to the video game industry 10 years ago, is about free-form building or directionless creativity; ala SimCity. PvP has nothing to do with it.
Honestly I think you FFA PvPers would be a lot happier if you just asked for FFA PvP games and stopped trying to come up with labels to aggressively chuck at new games - Theme Park, Carebear, Linear - which have, at best, ambiguous definitions, and at worse simply fail to express what you actually want. At the very least you might find a few developers that can understand what in god's name you're trying to say in your excessively long and complaint-ridden posts.
The morning sun has vanquished the horrible night.
Thats the other thing I get accused of. For the record I was the carebear miner that recalled away the second I saw red.
Just because someone doesn't want themepark play does not necessairly mean they are of the raw meat eating pvp type.
I happen to enjoy some pvp but honestly I'm not a guy who plays mmos to pvp. I play mmos to do e-business selling widgets to people doing pvp yes......but I've always been far more interested in the crafting side of things when it comes down to it.
Wow has you all conditioned imho. you think this is the be all and end all of gaming and that anyone who wants something other than whats become the norm for you is some ecentric from days passed.
The truth of it is i much enjoy being a little fish in a big pond but to peg me as a pvp ffa hard core guy is just a symptom of the problem. There is much more capabilities in a direct x engine then the wow clones have shown us lately.
Sandbox games are time investment whores. They're normally solo unfriendly or if they are accessible they are an incredibly long winded grind.
These games are normally very light in Pve content, have confusing skill systems, UI and require a good amount of research both in game through help chat, help tutorials and out of game sources.
As time has gone on more and more people just don't want to invest in a world simulation.
I love or loved games like UO, SWG, Eve and Ryzom. These world simulations that I love come at a price.
I need to sink major hours to get the most out of them, I have to build strong social ties where people can rely and trust me as a dedicated member of that world simulators community.
Think about it. World of warcraft was changed from a semi-hardcore raiders game to a more casual friendly,less demanding group experience. People were bitching and bitching about paying for content that they havent had the chance to experience.
That was only raiding, what would they say if they were told world simulations were similarly demanding but ten fold?
Remeber the old "This is a game and not a job" or "I want to play on my terms not on someone elses schedule"?
Let those guys come play Eve and run a active defence, let them feel that need to log in to seem like they are pulling their wieght in a corporation, two to three hour roams, logistics, scanning for hours for little reward, playing for weeks and comming up a loser overall lol.
Let these guys play Ryzom and grind packs of mobs or dig in the sand as the onyl form of enertaintent for a few months.
Let them log into darkfall, with little pve content, no reason to play other than to raise attributes and not get ganked by a roaming gang and deal with a harsh unfun death penalty.
Like I said, I love these games but I totally understand why people would rather play less demanding mmos like WoW or Lotro.
There are certain 'Sandbox' pieces of games that aren't incorporated in games today. Why is there no "Themepark game" with a good clothing tailoring system to make people look as unique as you want? Why are there no games that have real-world housing (not instanced) that can be freely decorated? It's not like the technology isn't there (EQ2 for example). So, it just feels like the 'WoW-like' era has brought us nothing but quests, gear, and grinding only. Why not throw some amazing ideas in there that do not equal a mathematical stat number that will help your character? Sandbox does not have to be gankfest.
Disclaimer: This is not a troll post and is not here to promote any negative energy. Although this may be a criticism, it is not meant to offend anyone. If a moderator feels the post is inappropriate, please remove it immediately before it is subject to consideration for a warning. Thank you.
Originally posted by Rekindle Thats the other thing I get accused of. For the record I was the carebear miner that recalled away the second I saw red.
Just because someone doesn't want themepark play does not necessairly mean they are of the raw meat eating pvp type.
I happen to enjoy some pvp but honestly I'm not a guy who plays mmos to pvp. I play mmos to do e-business selling widgets to people doing pvp yes......but I've always been far more interested in the crafting side of things when it comes down to it.
Wow has you all conditioned imho. you think this is the be all and end all of gaming and that anyone who wants something other than whats become the norm for you is some ecentric from days passed.
The truth of it is i much enjoy being a little fish in a big pond but to peg me as a pvp ffa hard core guy is just a symptom of the problem. There is much more capabilities in a direct x engine then the wow clones have shown us lately.
Truthfully, I'm more FFXI conditioned then WoW. Although, what WoW has going for it is accessibility and the controls are ultra smooth. Take those 2 elements and throw them into any other game, especially a FFXI type game, with so much depth it I could write a novel on all the things you can do in the game, and you have a winner.
This just seemed like a big rant in favor of FFA PvP. Humorously the words Sandbox and Theme Park get tossed in but their addition does more to create an effect and garner replies than actually make a constructive point.
Personally I see nothing Sandbox-ish about PvP. PvP is a rigid combat mechanic and Sandbox, as it originally applied to the video game industry 10 years ago, is about free-form building or directionless creativity; ala SimCity. PvP has nothing to do with it.
Honestly I think you FFA PvPers would be a lot happier if you just asked for FFA PvP games and stopped trying to come up with labels to aggressively chuck at new games - Theme Park, Carebear, Linear - which have, at best, ambiguous definitions, and at worse simply fail to express what you actually want. At the very least you might find a few developers that can understand what in god's name you're trying to say in your excessively long and complaint-ridden posts.
Sandbox (or lack of) has nothing to do with PVP. Those are two entirely separate concepts.
I say second life is a sandbox. Why? Because you can do anything in Second Life. You want a new face? Make a new face. You want to run a bar on the beach? You can do that too.
.
Why do you say Eve is a sandbox? Can you build a bar on the beach in Eve and serve drinks?
qft. Second Life is one of the very fee TRUE sandboxes. Most "sandboxes" people play now are basically themepark sandboxes. You do very predescribed things, in predescribed places, and create predescribed things.
You know I don't enjoy RTS games anymore and haven't for a long time.But I don't go into every RTS forum and complain aobut it or try to get every RTS type game turned into a gnere I do like.I just don't paly thme anymore and buy the genres I do like of which there are plenty.
Originally posted by theelement2 I'd just like to state i absolutely concur with your post.
You can tell by my post count, coupled with my join date that i really do not often post back to anything here as its often complete drivel written by a 14 year old. However what you've said is spot on. The genre really does need its paradigms shifted, to try to preserve what little integrity the genre, the developers and of course the players have left. f2p is an obvious backwards step for the consumer, the reasons why are everywhere on this board and others so i wont go into it) but yes, what is the point of "winning" a theme park mmo when there is nothing to lose, it takes ALL of the value away from an "accomplishment" when you realise that given the time EVERYBODY will accomplish exactly the same things in exactly the same way.
Where is the diversity? Where is the creativity? Where is the challenge or intrigue? Where are the Developers?
We're done with meatgrinder themepark MMO's they were stale in 2004
EDIT: And by "do not often post back" i mean, actually this is my first post back in Four years. thats a sign of the level of drivvel here :P
Yeah I agree, and also agree with the OP. I'm not 35, but have been playing mmo's well before my join date to mmorpg.com and I know where the OP is coming from. Thing is,... I honestly believe we've left the era of devs programming towards a good game and have been setting in a stale mate of devs programming games by using little ticks and cutting corners just to get sell titles and keep as many subs as possible.
If I had the chance to ask 1 question to the MMO development companies of today, it would be... What happened to making games fun and then getting subs that way, because of late, it has felt like a scam when you read into any "new" game being developed.
Feels like you've been thrown some BS to buy a set of steak knives or something...
Originally posted by uquipu Originally posted by Rekindleanyway have a nice day.
. What is a sandbox? . I say second life is a sandbox. Why? Because you can do anything in Second Life. You want a new face? Make a new face. You want to run a bar on the beach? You can do that too. . Why do you say Eve is a sandbox? Can you build a bar on the beach in Eve and serve drinks?
...and a sandbox game is just an option world, free to roam, were you and the community do whatever for fun and adventure. Being able to do X amount more in 1 game than EVE DOES NOT make EVE fail to be a sandbox.
Sandboxes can be fun, but the real gem is between the two. Having a story and an intersting world you can interact with is tougher in a sandbox with nothing in it. A railed themepark experience is just as dull, however, since nothing you do matters. What you really want is a sandbox populated by well fleshed out NPCs with personality and agendas. Most sandboxes don't have that.
Important facts: 1. Free to Play games are poorly made. 2. Casuals are not all idiots, but idiots call themselves casuals. 3. Great solo and group content are not mutually exclusive, but they suffer when one is shoved into the mold of the other. The same is true of PvP and PvE. 4. Community is more important than you think.
...and a sandbox game is just an option world, free to roam, were you and the community do whatever for fun and adventure. Being able to do X amount more in 1 game than EVE DOES NOT make EVE fail to be a sandbox.
So if a game had one less option than Eve, would that fail to make it Sandbox? Is Eve the standard for the minimum number of options? What is the minimum number, in that case? 35 options? 10 options? Do the options need to be PvP options? Crafting options? Exploration options? Do the expansions count?
You can see pretty quickly why people get sick of Eve players on the forums. It's a shame that the game doesn't require your active attention to play it or we might get a bit fewer ridiculous comments around here.
Eve is an excellent PvP game. It has mind-boggling combat depth, decent crafting systems, and some really fun conquest and player-run empire conflict. Honestly you guys spend so much brain power straining over a way to label how Eve differs from MMO XYZ that you seem to completely miss the obvious mechanics staring you in the face.
Is it Sandbox? Honestly, it doesn't matter. You can label Eve Cheeseburger Delicious Purple Moon Delight Basketball and it won't change a single mechanic or a single reason why you enjoy it.
Although it will certainly make you considerably harder to understand.
The morning sun has vanquished the horrible night.
...and a sandbox game is just an option world, free to roam, were you and the community do whatever for fun and adventure. Being able to do X amount more in 1 game than EVE DOES NOT make EVE fail to be a sandbox.
So if a game had one less option than Eve, would that fail to make it Sandbox? Is Eve the standard for the minimum number of options? What is the minimum number, in that case? 35 options? 10 options? Do the options need to be PvP options? Crafting options? Exploration options? Do the expansions count?
You can see pretty quickly why people get sick of Eve players on the forums. It's a shame that the game doesn't require your active attention to play it or we might get a bit fewer ridiculous comments around here.
Eve is an excellent PvP game. It has mind-boggling combat depth, decent crafting systems, and some really fun conquest and player-run empire conflict. Honestly you guys spend so much brain power straining over a way to label how Eve differs from MMO XYZ that you seem to completely miss the obvious mechanics staring you in the face.
Is it Sandbox? Honestly, it doesn't matter. You can label Eve Cheeseburger Delicious Purple Moon Delight Basketball and it won't change a single mechanic or a single reason why you enjoy it.
Although it will certainly make you considerably harder to understand.
Honestly Eve has too many damn features & gameplay options. Seriously CCP keeps tossing new shit at us and they seem to forget that features need love after they're released. its a great game but i think it would be much better if they developed a few released features instead of churning out new experiences all the time.
I think the OP's problem is that he's comparing a games to a game he fell in love with.
I'm relatively new to the mmorpg scene, hell, im new to the rpg scene. First was LOTRO in 2007.
+10 years ago I was an avid FPS player. The game I fell in love with was Quake 2. Best game in the world to me. Thats the game I will love more than any other (I will have the logo tattooed on me in the future :-)). Played in alot clans and managed to score a place in a Division 1 UK clan. Best times of my multiplayer life.
Half-life was released and then counter-strike mod came out and Q2 died.
I compare every FPS to Q2 and how it made me feel and they all blow compared to that. So I don't play them anymore.
To the OP, just treat the new games as casual games becuase I can bet you none will make you feel how UO did.
Comments
And I completely agree with the OP. However I am very suprised he has not tried Darkfall, that is about as close to Ultima Online 2 as we are going to get. Mortal Online might have been but is just to bugged out.
I think I just talked myself into resubbing Darkfall.... Oh no !!!!!!
But seriously Ultima Online is not playable anymore, I tried it again recently and thought WTF did I really play that?
Rofl. You feel sorry for me and then talk about Darkfall. That's priceless.
It's got potential, but it's just not there yet. Total gankfest and pointless to play.
Like Trading Card Games? Click Here.
freedom can mean gankfest sometimes = point taken
a lot of us have less time than in the past, point taken but sandbox does not have to mean huge time sinks
a point was made that suggested that the real problem is linear game play > well thats the direct product of preset game play
A point was made that I pissed off the people who like themeparks. I probably should have worded my title better but the point is "you" are the dominant force in the market so either stop paying for subpar games or allow me to have an opinion on them.
I agree with you in many ways OP, but there are many gamers who prefer the themepark model. In fact, it appears as though the majority of the market prefers it.
When these people actually do try a sandbox MMO, they have no idea what to do. They find it to be much too harsh and they don't like the fact that there is no direction...
I wouldn't say it is really anyone's fault that sandbox games are not the norm anymore. Developers make games that appeal to the largest player base. Right now that happens to be themepark games.
What's sad is that a lot of the "themepark" fans really don't like the themeparks either. It's just a quick and easy way to level. All that a lot of them really want is end game loot, so instead of games we get these 1-2 month questing tutorials that allow everyone to rapidly be at "end game."
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
This is all a matter of perception, as bemoaned by "vets" mostly. A lot of people simply, happily, play their games, instead of inhabiting forums talking about the good ol' days.
As far as trickling to 100-300K, keep in mind that UO, AC, and DAOC never topped 300K subs at any one time, and that was with limited competition. EQ1 was the beast back then, because it almost hit 500K
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
Wish I could answer why we don't get more sandbox style games.. I'm really into skill based progression, as it seems alot of mmo players are. My only guess is that business don't see the sustainable income without the gear driven progression in todays games?? Not sure..
I've stated it before though, with Ryzom going open source, my guess is we will start to see some open source offerings based on the Ryzom core. Problem is, like any open source offering, don't expect much in the form of advertising, etc. But it will be interesting to see what comes of this over the next few years..
I've been spinning my wheels in the mmo mudpit for the last 6 months after being gone for a year and a half completely sick of what we were being offered.. Maybe it's time to do the same thing for another 18-24 months and see what's available then. I mean, there seems to be some themepark style games on the horizon that look good in their own right, and a couple that even have my interest, problem is, like most themepark games, they most likely won't hold my interest for more than 1-3 months.. I want something I can play for years, and look forward to for years, not something that after three months or so is 'endgame' or 'alt'...
"If I'd asked my customers what they wanted, they'd have said a faster horse." - Henry Ford
Um no....STFU and like it :P J/K
Seriously though....what others do with their gaming dollars(as long as it doesnt go against a games EULA) is their choice.
As a long time gamer(41 in RL), I have no problem with things that require a little more thought to complete. I like to have a vast world to roam in. That is about where it ends for similarities between me and sandboxers.
I DONT believe allowing folks to add quests is a good thing in a persistent world. Nor do I think they should be plopping down houses in a big empty world ala SWG. FFA PVP....yeah right....not in any game I am playing.
I have yet to play a better game than EQ1. Maybe WOW was/is, but the GFX turned me off 2 weeks past launch....so I wouldnt know.
Give me a vast open world, with a plethora of different mobs to experience and I am a happy camper. I enjoy ROLL play not ROLE play.
This thread reminds me of a post I saw in DF forums complaining about folks wanting to have the rules of DF changed....and the Devs doing it. Should people pay money for what they dont like? No they shouldnt. So how is it our fault when devs want our money?
Perhaps the sandbox crowd should make a habit of carrying 4 or 5 subs each if they wanna see more sandbox titles.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
This. So much this.
Every so often, threads like these come around, with people moaning about themeparks and sandboxes, and going off on long, pointless rants about both. It's almost like clockwork.
Personally, I don't care what category a game falls into. As long as it's fun and I enjoy my time in it, that's all that matters.
This just seemed like a big rant in favor of FFA PvP. Humorously the words Sandbox and Theme Park get tossed in but their addition does more to create an effect and garner replies than actually make a constructive point.
Personally I see nothing Sandbox-ish about PvP. PvP is a rigid combat mechanic and Sandbox, as it originally applied to the video game industry 10 years ago, is about free-form building or directionless creativity; ala SimCity. PvP has nothing to do with it.
Honestly I think you FFA PvPers would be a lot happier if you just asked for FFA PvP games and stopped trying to come up with labels to aggressively chuck at new games - Theme Park, Carebear, Linear - which have, at best, ambiguous definitions, and at worse simply fail to express what you actually want. At the very least you might find a few developers that can understand what in god's name you're trying to say in your excessively long and complaint-ridden posts.
The morning sun has vanquished the horrible night.
Thats the other thing I get accused of. For the record I was the carebear miner that recalled away the second I saw red.
Just because someone doesn't want themepark play does not necessairly mean they are of the raw meat eating pvp type.
I happen to enjoy some pvp but honestly I'm not a guy who plays mmos to pvp. I play mmos to do e-business selling widgets to people doing pvp yes......but I've always been far more interested in the crafting side of things when it comes down to it.
Wow has you all conditioned imho. you think this is the be all and end all of gaming and that anyone who wants something other than whats become the norm for you is some ecentric from days passed.
The truth of it is i much enjoy being a little fish in a big pond but to peg me as a pvp ffa hard core guy is just a symptom of the problem. There is much more capabilities in a direct x engine then the wow clones have shown us lately.
They get it, they just don't want it.
Sandbox games are time investment whores. They're normally solo unfriendly or if they are accessible they are an incredibly long winded grind.
These games are normally very light in Pve content, have confusing skill systems, UI and require a good amount of research both in game through help chat, help tutorials and out of game sources.
As time has gone on more and more people just don't want to invest in a world simulation.
I love or loved games like UO, SWG, Eve and Ryzom. These world simulations that I love come at a price.
I need to sink major hours to get the most out of them, I have to build strong social ties where people can rely and trust me as a dedicated member of that world simulators community.
Think about it. World of warcraft was changed from a semi-hardcore raiders game to a more casual friendly,less demanding group experience. People were bitching and bitching about paying for content that they havent had the chance to experience.
That was only raiding, what would they say if they were told world simulations were similarly demanding but ten fold?
Remeber the old "This is a game and not a job" or "I want to play on my terms not on someone elses schedule"?
Let those guys come play Eve and run a active defence, let them feel that need to log in to seem like they are pulling their wieght in a corporation, two to three hour roams, logistics, scanning for hours for little reward, playing for weeks and comming up a loser overall lol.
Let these guys play Ryzom and grind packs of mobs or dig in the sand as the onyl form of enertaintent for a few months.
Let them log into darkfall, with little pve content, no reason to play other than to raise attributes and not get ganked by a roaming gang and deal with a harsh unfun death penalty.
Like I said, I love these games but I totally understand why people would rather play less demanding mmos like WoW or Lotro.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
There are certain 'Sandbox' pieces of games that aren't incorporated in games today. Why is there no "Themepark game" with a good clothing tailoring system to make people look as unique as you want? Why are there no games that have real-world housing (not instanced) that can be freely decorated? It's not like the technology isn't there (EQ2 for example). So, it just feels like the 'WoW-like' era has brought us nothing but quests, gear, and grinding only. Why not throw some amazing ideas in there that do not equal a mathematical stat number that will help your character? Sandbox does not have to be gankfest.
Disclaimer: This is not a troll post and is not here to promote any negative energy. Although this may be a criticism, it is not meant to offend anyone. If a moderator feels the post is inappropriate, please remove it immediately before it is subject to consideration for a warning. Thank you.
Truthfully, I'm more FFXI conditioned then WoW. Although, what WoW has going for it is accessibility and the controls are ultra smooth. Take those 2 elements and throw them into any other game, especially a FFXI type game, with so much depth it I could write a novel on all the things you can do in the game, and you have a winner.
Sandbox (or lack of) has nothing to do with PVP. Those are two entirely separate concepts.
qft. Second Life is one of the very fee TRUE sandboxes. Most "sandboxes" people play now are basically themepark sandboxes. You do very predescribed things, in predescribed places, and create predescribed things.
Truth!
One day sandbox MMO devs will figure out what UO realized 10 years ago when they came out with Trammel.
This is why no new sandbox games ever capture the attention of the masses.
You know I don't enjoy RTS games anymore and haven't for a long time.But I don't go into every RTS forum and complain aobut it or try to get every RTS type game turned into a gnere I do like.I just don't paly thme anymore and buy the genres I do like of which there are plenty.
Yeah I agree, and also agree with the OP. I'm not 35, but have been playing mmo's well before my join date to mmorpg.com and I know where the OP is coming from. Thing is,... I honestly believe we've left the era of devs programming towards a good game and have been setting in a stale mate of devs programming games by using little ticks and cutting corners just to get sell titles and keep as many subs as possible.
If I had the chance to ask 1 question to the MMO development companies of today, it would be... What happened to making games fun and then getting subs that way, because of late, it has felt like a scam when you read into any "new" game being developed.
Feels like you've been thrown some BS to buy a set of steak knives or something...
(Akiraosc)
What is a sandbox?
.
I say second life is a sandbox. Why? Because you can do anything in Second Life. You want a new face? Make a new face. You want to run a bar on the beach? You can do that too.
.
Why do you say Eve is a sandbox? Can you build a bar on the beach in Eve and serve drinks?
...and a sandbox game is just an option world, free to roam, were you and the community do whatever for fun and adventure. Being able to do X amount more in 1 game than EVE DOES NOT make EVE fail to be a sandbox.
(Akiraosc)
Sandboxes can be fun, but the real gem is between the two. Having a story and an intersting world you can interact with is tougher in a sandbox with nothing in it. A railed themepark experience is just as dull, however, since nothing you do matters. What you really want is a sandbox populated by well fleshed out NPCs with personality and agendas. Most sandboxes don't have that.
Important facts:
1. Free to Play games are poorly made.
2. Casuals are not all idiots, but idiots call themselves casuals.
3. Great solo and group content are not mutually exclusive, but they suffer when one is shoved into the mold of the other. The same is true of PvP and PvE.
4. Community is more important than you think.
So if a game had one less option than Eve, would that fail to make it Sandbox? Is Eve the standard for the minimum number of options? What is the minimum number, in that case? 35 options? 10 options? Do the options need to be PvP options? Crafting options? Exploration options? Do the expansions count?
You can see pretty quickly why people get sick of Eve players on the forums. It's a shame that the game doesn't require your active attention to play it or we might get a bit fewer ridiculous comments around here.
Eve is an excellent PvP game. It has mind-boggling combat depth, decent crafting systems, and some really fun conquest and player-run empire conflict. Honestly you guys spend so much brain power straining over a way to label how Eve differs from MMO XYZ that you seem to completely miss the obvious mechanics staring you in the face.
Is it Sandbox? Honestly, it doesn't matter. You can label Eve Cheeseburger Delicious Purple Moon Delight Basketball and it won't change a single mechanic or a single reason why you enjoy it.
Although it will certainly make you considerably harder to understand.
The morning sun has vanquished the horrible night.
Honestly Eve has too many damn features & gameplay options. Seriously CCP keeps tossing new shit at us and they seem to forget that features need love after they're released. its a great game but i think it would be much better if they developed a few released features instead of churning out new experiences all the time.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
I think the OP's problem is that he's comparing a games to a game he fell in love with.
I'm relatively new to the mmorpg scene, hell, im new to the rpg scene. First was LOTRO in 2007.
+10 years ago I was an avid FPS player. The game I fell in love with was Quake 2. Best game in the world to me. Thats the game I will love more than any other (I will have the logo tattooed on me in the future :-)). Played in alot clans and managed to score a place in a Division 1 UK clan. Best times of my multiplayer life.
Half-life was released and then counter-strike mod came out and Q2 died.
I compare every FPS to Q2 and how it made me feel and they all blow compared to that. So I don't play them anymore.
To the OP, just treat the new games as casual games becuase I can bet you none will make you feel how UO did.
Sure about that...?