Blizzard is a smart company they would evermake a game like that. And if they did it would be a financial failure, because it doesn't matter how good the devs are or how much polish you put on the game, sandbox is a fundamentaly flawed game design that will not do very well.
How is it a fundamentally flawed game design? I agree that the masses will never play a sandbox, but that does not mean that the genre is fundamentally flawed. Sandbox will never work for the masses because it is to steep of a learning curve and the masses love to have their hand held.
East Carolina University, Computer Science BS, 2011 -------------------- Current game: DAOC
Games played and quit: L2, PlanetSide, RF Online, GuildWars, SWG, COH/COV, Vanguard, LOTRO, WoW, WW2 Online, FFXI, Auto-Assault, EVE Online, ShadowBane, RYL, Rappelz, Last Chaos, Myst Online, POTBS, EQ2, Warhammer Online, AoC, Aion, Champions Online, Star Trek Online, Allods, Darkfall.
The options being looked at are too black and white. If anything blizzard would take the best of both style games, combine what works, fix what is fixable and then add in whatever feels missing.
In my opinion that is what is really needed. Taking the best of both and making something greater. It will not appeal to hardcore niche players, but I think many would find it enjoyable.
Blizzard will never make a MMO that has any significant learning curve, their philosophy is to make mindless games for the mindless gamer, and it has been proven that the masses are mindless gamers or else WoW would not have been so popular.
You could say that about any mmorpg if you wanted. It isn't like it takes a huge amount of intellect to play these games. Depending on the game it boils down more to the level of patience and perseverance one has than it does anything else.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
What makes me laugh about blizzard is they make $15 a month from 12 million customers = 180 million dollars a month. Obviously this does not include server costs and staff but purely sub sales. From one months revenue they would have enough money to make 2 AAA mmo's. After all WoW had a budget of 50 million.
It's even more pathetic when they release starcraft 2 costing more than your average PC game and then milk it by releasing it 3 times.
The options being looked at are too black and white. If anything blizzard would take the best of both style games, combine what works, fix what is fixable and then add in whatever feels missing.
In my opinion that is what is really needed. Taking the best of both and making something greater. It will not appeal to hardcore niche players, but I think many would find it enjoyable.
I agree. I really think that is what could be the "next big thing" in mmorpgs is a game that combines both elements in a manner that appeals to the masses.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Blizzard will never make a MMO that has any significant learning curve, their philosophy is to make mindless games for the mindless gamer, and it has been proven that the masses are mindless gamers or else WoW would not have been so popular.
You could say that about any mmorpg if you wanted. It isn't like it takes a huge amount of intellect to play these games. Depending on the game it boils down more to the level of patience and perseverance one has than it does anything else.
Older MMO's like DAOC and EQ had pretty large learning curves, to a new mmo player those games definitely took a while to even learn how to attack or where you need to go. Normally this just sounds like a nuisance, but its the price you pay to have a game that has a world that feels natural and not linear. In WoW you start at point A and move down your narrow path that has higher level mobs the farther you get from the starting point. This is easy, 0 learning curve, but also a complete immersion breaker and takes away any depth and realism to the game.
Also as far as wow game play that is mindless, look at pvp. In DAOC you have 8 man roaming groups, so much strategy involved, more strategy even in just how you roam than what most other games PVP involves. Arena style pvp takes away so much of the on the spot skill and strategy that other good PVP games have.
East Carolina University, Computer Science BS, 2011 -------------------- Current game: DAOC
Games played and quit: L2, PlanetSide, RF Online, GuildWars, SWG, COH/COV, Vanguard, LOTRO, WoW, WW2 Online, FFXI, Auto-Assault, EVE Online, ShadowBane, RYL, Rappelz, Last Chaos, Myst Online, POTBS, EQ2, Warhammer Online, AoC, Aion, Champions Online, Star Trek Online, Allods, Darkfall.
Blizzard is a smart company they would evermake a game like that. And if they did it would be a financial failure, because it doesn't matter how good the devs are or how much polish you put on the game, sandbox is a fundamentaly flawed game design that will not do very well.
How is it a fundamentally flawed game design? I agree that the masses will never play a sandbox, but that does not mean that the genre is fundamentally flawed. Sandbox will never work for the masses because it is to steep of a learning curve and the masses love to have their hand held.
Sandboxes are by design games that don't have a lot of dev made content in them and rely on psuedo social simulation for content, and the majority of people find that really boring. That is why they are flawed games because they are just not fun for most people. I don't think it has anything to do with learning curve rather the type of content they support that is just not very appealing no matter how well it is done.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
Older MMO's like DAOC and EQ had pretty large learning curves, to a new mmo player those games definitely took a while to even learn how to attack or where you need to go. Normally this just sounds like a nuisance, but its the price you pay to have a game that has a world that feels natural and not linear. In WoW you start at point A and move down your narrow path that has higher level mobs the farther you get from the starting point. This is easy, 0 learning curve, but also a complete immersion breaker and takes away any depth and realism to the game.
Also as far as wow game play that is mindless, look at pvp. In DAOC you have 8 man roaming groups, so much strategy involved, more strategy even in just how you roam than what most other games PVP involves. Arena style pvp takes away so much of the on the spot skill and strategy that other good PVP games have.
We may be arguing more over semantics than anything else. What I will say is that the level of instant gratification in these games or the expectation of it amongst players is stunning.
There are things I miss from those days and there are other things I hope I never experience in an mmorpg again. There is no doubt that the majority of mmos have become simplified in many ways, but I don't chalk it all up to "mindless". Hell, some of the things that used to be around in the old games seemed rather mindless to me especially in hindsight.
You could even say to an extent that part of the reason the learning curve seems so minimal now to those of us that have been playing these games for quite some time is because...well...we've been playing these games for quite some time. I'm not saying that it hasn't been simplified, but you have to admit regardless how the game eases you into things you and I aren't going to struggle with a game now like we did when we first began our romp through this genre.
I miss the sense of community back from those days more than I do anything else. Whether it was simply the time, game design, or because it was more of a niche community people just seemed to be way more helpful, outgoing, and all around friendly than what you see today.
EDIT: As I find myself doing more often than not apologies OP. Not trying to derail the thread.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Not a problem, sometimes a discussion leads to other discussions.
To some of the other posters,
I think if Blizzard did a sandbox type game the way in which they did it would be genre defining. Another system others would envy and ultimately copy. I think they do in every repsect have that ability. Others will disagree.
As to defining a Sandbox? That can be defined differently per each individual. Id like to see open gameplay, an open class system, a political system, Set citys with the ability to be destroyed with new ones popping up, and lore that becomes player driven with a nice lore system. The ability to build siege weapons and a deeper crafting system. And something awesome thought up for mobs, like a group of mad scientists or necro types that create a unique mob or open a portal that lets enemys spew out and cause havoc.
I think Blizzard could pull that off no problem personally. If they wanted to.
The options being looked at are too black and white. If anything blizzard would take the best of both style games, combine what works, fix what is fixable and then add in whatever feels missing.
In my opinion that is what is really needed. Taking the best of both and making something greater. It will not appeal to hardcore niche players, but I think many would find it enjoyable.
I agree. I really think that is what could be the "next big thing" in mmorpgs is a game that combines both elements in a manner that appeals to the masses.
They already have a game that is going to do that, it's name is SWTOR.
They already have a game that is going to do that, it's name is SWTOR.
Much as I am looking forward to that game can't say anything I have seen about it leads me to believe it is going to be a hybrid combining themepark and sandbox elements. Granted I haven't been following it real closely so I could have overlooked them.
What are the sandbox elements?
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
What makes me laugh about blizzard is they make $15 a month from 12 million customers = 180 million dollars a month. Obviously this does not include server costs and staff but purely sub sales. From one months revenue they would have enough money to make 2 AAA mmo's. After all WoW had a budget of 50 million.
It's even more pathetic when they release starcraft 2 costing more than your average PC game and then milk it by releasing it 3 times.
As if you wouldnt take the cash if the customers pay regardless what you do
Blizzard is owned by a large corporation. Their next MMO will be whatever the suits at the top of the pyramid believe will cost the least while making the most money.
The day is long past when big name gaming companies were run by gamers.
They already have a game that is going to do that, it's name is SWTOR.
Much as I am looking forward to that game can't say anything I have seen about it leads me to believe it is going to be a hybrid combining themepark and sandbox elements. Granted I haven't been following it real closely so I could have overlooked them.
What are the sandbox elements?
Open world exploration. Open world pvp and possibly pvp servers. Dedicated crafting and harvesting. Just a few things that are defined as sandbox systems. Couple that with the more themepark systems and there you go.
What makes me laugh about blizzard is they make $15 a month from 12 million customers = 180 million dollars a month. Obviously this does not include server costs and staff but purely sub sales. From one months revenue they would have enough money to make 2 AAA mmo's. After all WoW had a budget of 50 million.
It's even more pathetic when they release starcraft 2 costing more than your average PC game and then milk it by releasing it 3 times.
As if you wouldnt take the cash if the customers pay regardless what you do
What's your point? They could make any MMO they want with one months were of subs.
Open world exploration. Open world pvp and possibly pvp servers. Dedicated crafting and harvesting. Just a few things that are defined as sandbox systems. Couple that with the more themepark systems and there you go.
I think most that are referring to a hybrid, least me anyways, are referring to things such as the ability to create your own cities, harvestable areas, etc. and what this entails far as forming alliances, defending them, or taking control of others. In other words being able to build the world to a degree while at the same time having elements in place for those that would rather have dungeons and adventures set up for them.
I mean by your description of a hybrid then we already have that in WoW.
That isn't to say I don't think SWTOR will be a hit. In fact, unless, Bioware falls flat on their face I can't see how least for a time that game won't end up being the second most populated p2p game least in the West. Hell, pending on how well done it is it could be one of the few games to actually threaten WoW to a degree. Granted we'll see what happens when the game actually goes live. I have high hopes for that game.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Open world exploration. Open world pvp and possibly pvp servers. Dedicated crafting and harvesting. Just a few things that are defined as sandbox systems. Couple that with the more themepark systems and there you go.
Open world pvp is perhaps the hardest thing to make work in a game that isn't exclusively focused on that. There is just to much that can go wrong and make things less than fun. It is the one area I think would benefit from some blending with other game elements.
Open world exploration. Open world pvp and possibly pvp servers. Dedicated crafting and harvesting. Just a few things that are defined as sandbox systems. Couple that with the more themepark systems and there you go.
Open world pvp is perhaps the hardest thing to make work in a game that isn't exclusively focused on that. There is just to much that can go wrong and make things less than fun. It is the one area I think would benefit from some blending with other game elements.
Open world pvp works just fine, the major problem is people who have never player in mmos with such a mechanic think that it is far far worse than it actually is.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
we can hope next year blizzcon will finally reveal it.. its been a while now, and i was surprised this years blizzcon was lacking ;/
anyway , they never said it wont be sandbox so why you keep saying it wont is beyond me, there is no info to deny it being sandbox ( and im not exactly sandbox gamer to even want one )
and they will probably target different audience , considering cata is relaunching wow, so its not like they giving up on wow theme park, and creating new one to replace, probably not yet in another 5 years probably,
my hope was on this year i even had my hopes that an announcement would temporarily fill the void
Let us face facts Blizzard would need to see a major increase in the number of sandbox fans for them to sink funds into it. They would most likely run with star craft, it would end up a lot like any ground based, factional, sandbox. Guilds make cities to increase the land the faction controls, the enemy factions sack your city and take the city node to build their own city where yours was. It would feel oddly familiar because they would take the best stuff from every sandbox out there and polish it up so it runs just a bit better and call it innovative.
Blizzard is a smart company, they don't go for NEW they go for Tried and True, it makes money and investors like that. The mmo failure rate is pretty staggering, while most of the ones that launch stay going for years, very few ever get the lime light. As far as buisness is concerned the lime light is success, it means increased sub's which increases profit and allows for the company to channel excess funds into other areas of development.
What makes me laugh about blizzard is they make $15 a month from 12 million customers = 180 million dollars a month. Obviously this does not include server costs and staff but purely sub sales. From one months revenue they would have enough money to make 2 AAA mmo's. After all WoW had a budget of 50 million.
It's even more pathetic when they release starcraft 2 costing more than your average PC game and then milk it by releasing it 3 times.
As if you wouldnt take the cash if the customers pay regardless what you do
What's your point? They could make any MMO they want with one months were of subs.
Why do you create new content? To keep the masses happy.
What if the masses are already happy? You need no content.
Do you decide to create stuff just for giggles or do you keep the cash? The cash- your'e a company.
What makes me laugh about blizzard is they make $15 a month from 12 million customers = 180 million dollars a month. Obviously this does not include server costs and staff but purely sub sales. From one months revenue they would have enough money to make 2 AAA mmo's. After all WoW had a budget of 50 million.
It's even more pathetic when they release starcraft 2 costing more than your average PC game and then milk it by releasing it 3 times.
They do not have 12 million people paying $15 a month. Not even half of that is actual subscriptions, and that comes from WoW EU/Americas... people paying by time cards in Asia, though counted for active WoW accounts - do not count as actual subs.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Blizzard is a smart company they would evermake a game like that. And if they did it would be a financial failure, because it doesn't matter how good the devs are or how much polish you put on the game, sandbox is a fundamentaly flawed game design that will not do very well.
How is it a fundamentally flawed game design? I agree that the masses will never play a sandbox, but that does not mean that the genre is fundamentally flawed. Sandbox will never work for the masses because it is to steep of a learning curve and the masses love to have their hand held.
It is more about time commitment, imo. In general, doing anything in sandbox games takes more time. Why a game like WoW can pull such numbers is largely because you can log on for just 15 to 30 minutes and feel like you accomplish something. Instant gratification is a very importat factor when looking at the mass market.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
What if they did make a sandbox mmo? Would it be any good? Would their be any themepark elements in it as well? If it was a huge hit would that cause other developers to persue a sandbox style game? Would they rip off some of minecrafts uberness even though they're probably well into its development cycle? Would it quiet Blizzard naysayers at all?
Discuss.
I personally would be over joyed if they did. And id probably offer organs on the black market if i thought it could get me into the beta. What kind of design do you think they would use?
Imho they are not gona make sandbox, unless theirs marketing managers told them in furute are ppl gona play sandbox MMOs. Blizzard does mostly games for money. What I mean is - simple game for tons of ppl but still fun. Because lets face it sometimes simple thing is way more fun than complicated thing. But there is more "new" and casual kinda players than hardcore so they will probably do "WoW 2" kind of game. And if they wont it will be interesting to see what it will be like.
I assume they also wait for some new features for MMO what they can copy and make "better" suited for theirs thing. Cause tell me whats innovative in Starcraft, Warcraft or Diablo, those games are just "true" strategies or action RPG as it should be - means for mass player base. Ofc there is nothing wrong about that they are company so they want to make money but also it means they ply wont do anything innovative even with MMO.
Played: Lineage 2,Guild Wars 1 and 2, Age of Conan, Ragnarok Online, LOTRO, World of Warcraft, League of Legends, EvE online Tried: KAL Online, Face of Mankind, ROSE online Playing: CS:GO
Comments
How is it a fundamentally flawed game design? I agree that the masses will never play a sandbox, but that does not mean that the genre is fundamentally flawed. Sandbox will never work for the masses because it is to steep of a learning curve and the masses love to have their hand held.
East Carolina University, Computer Science BS, 2011
--------------------
Current game: DAOC
Games played and quit: L2, PlanetSide, RF Online, GuildWars, SWG, COH/COV, Vanguard, LOTRO, WoW, WW2 Online, FFXI, Auto-Assault, EVE Online, ShadowBane, RYL, Rappelz, Last Chaos, Myst Online, POTBS, EQ2, Warhammer Online, AoC, Aion, Champions Online, Star Trek Online, Allods, Darkfall.
Waiting on: Earthrise
Names: Citio, Goldie, Sportacus
The options being looked at are too black and white. If anything blizzard would take the best of both style games, combine what works, fix what is fixable and then add in whatever feels missing.
In my opinion that is what is really needed. Taking the best of both and making something greater. It will not appeal to hardcore niche players, but I think many would find it enjoyable.
You could say that about any mmorpg if you wanted. It isn't like it takes a huge amount of intellect to play these games. Depending on the game it boils down more to the level of patience and perseverance one has than it does anything else.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
What makes me laugh about blizzard is they make $15 a month from 12 million customers = 180 million dollars a month. Obviously this does not include server costs and staff but purely sub sales. From one months revenue they would have enough money to make 2 AAA mmo's. After all WoW had a budget of 50 million.
It's even more pathetic when they release starcraft 2 costing more than your average PC game and then milk it by releasing it 3 times.
I agree. I really think that is what could be the "next big thing" in mmorpgs is a game that combines both elements in a manner that appeals to the masses.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Older MMO's like DAOC and EQ had pretty large learning curves, to a new mmo player those games definitely took a while to even learn how to attack or where you need to go. Normally this just sounds like a nuisance, but its the price you pay to have a game that has a world that feels natural and not linear. In WoW you start at point A and move down your narrow path that has higher level mobs the farther you get from the starting point. This is easy, 0 learning curve, but also a complete immersion breaker and takes away any depth and realism to the game.
Also as far as wow game play that is mindless, look at pvp. In DAOC you have 8 man roaming groups, so much strategy involved, more strategy even in just how you roam than what most other games PVP involves. Arena style pvp takes away so much of the on the spot skill and strategy that other good PVP games have.
East Carolina University, Computer Science BS, 2011
--------------------
Current game: DAOC
Games played and quit: L2, PlanetSide, RF Online, GuildWars, SWG, COH/COV, Vanguard, LOTRO, WoW, WW2 Online, FFXI, Auto-Assault, EVE Online, ShadowBane, RYL, Rappelz, Last Chaos, Myst Online, POTBS, EQ2, Warhammer Online, AoC, Aion, Champions Online, Star Trek Online, Allods, Darkfall.
Waiting on: Earthrise
Names: Citio, Goldie, Sportacus
Sandboxes are by design games that don't have a lot of dev made content in them and rely on psuedo social simulation for content, and the majority of people find that really boring. That is why they are flawed games because they are just not fun for most people. I don't think it has anything to do with learning curve rather the type of content they support that is just not very appealing no matter how well it is done.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
I respect Blizzard's ability as craftsmen, but they lack the imagination needed to create a successful sandbox. They will stick with what they know.
We may be arguing more over semantics than anything else. What I will say is that the level of instant gratification in these games or the expectation of it amongst players is stunning.
There are things I miss from those days and there are other things I hope I never experience in an mmorpg again. There is no doubt that the majority of mmos have become simplified in many ways, but I don't chalk it all up to "mindless". Hell, some of the things that used to be around in the old games seemed rather mindless to me especially in hindsight.
You could even say to an extent that part of the reason the learning curve seems so minimal now to those of us that have been playing these games for quite some time is because...well...we've been playing these games for quite some time. I'm not saying that it hasn't been simplified, but you have to admit regardless how the game eases you into things you and I aren't going to struggle with a game now like we did when we first began our romp through this genre.
I miss the sense of community back from those days more than I do anything else. Whether it was simply the time, game design, or because it was more of a niche community people just seemed to be way more helpful, outgoing, and all around friendly than what you see today.
EDIT: As I find myself doing more often than not apologies OP. Not trying to derail the thread.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Not a problem, sometimes a discussion leads to other discussions.
To some of the other posters,
I think if Blizzard did a sandbox type game the way in which they did it would be genre defining. Another system others would envy and ultimately copy. I think they do in every repsect have that ability. Others will disagree.
As to defining a Sandbox? That can be defined differently per each individual. Id like to see open gameplay, an open class system, a political system, Set citys with the ability to be destroyed with new ones popping up, and lore that becomes player driven with a nice lore system. The ability to build siege weapons and a deeper crafting system. And something awesome thought up for mobs, like a group of mad scientists or necro types that create a unique mob or open a portal that lets enemys spew out and cause havoc.
I think Blizzard could pull that off no problem personally. If they wanted to.
They already have a game that is going to do that, it's name is SWTOR.
Much as I am looking forward to that game can't say anything I have seen about it leads me to believe it is going to be a hybrid combining themepark and sandbox elements. Granted I haven't been following it real closely so I could have overlooked them.
What are the sandbox elements?
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
As if you wouldnt take the cash if the customers pay regardless what you do
Pi*1337/100 = 42
Blizzard is owned by a large corporation. Their next MMO will be whatever the suits at the top of the pyramid believe will cost the least while making the most money.
The day is long past when big name gaming companies were run by gamers.
Open world exploration. Open world pvp and possibly pvp servers. Dedicated crafting and harvesting. Just a few things that are defined as sandbox systems. Couple that with the more themepark systems and there you go.
What's your point? They could make any MMO they want with one months were of subs.
I think most that are referring to a hybrid, least me anyways, are referring to things such as the ability to create your own cities, harvestable areas, etc. and what this entails far as forming alliances, defending them, or taking control of others. In other words being able to build the world to a degree while at the same time having elements in place for those that would rather have dungeons and adventures set up for them.
I mean by your description of a hybrid then we already have that in WoW.
That isn't to say I don't think SWTOR will be a hit. In fact, unless, Bioware falls flat on their face I can't see how least for a time that game won't end up being the second most populated p2p game least in the West. Hell, pending on how well done it is it could be one of the few games to actually threaten WoW to a degree. Granted we'll see what happens when the game actually goes live. I have high hopes for that game.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Open world pvp is perhaps the hardest thing to make work in a game that isn't exclusively focused on that. There is just to much that can go wrong and make things less than fun. It is the one area I think would benefit from some blending with other game elements.
Open world pvp works just fine, the major problem is people who have never player in mmos with such a mechanic think that it is far far worse than it actually is.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
my hope was on this year i even had my hopes that an announcement would temporarily fill the void
but alas http://www.geekosystem.com/new-blizzard-mmo/
[
but with unstoppable forces like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwyMB19q7ms&feature=related
i don't know how they'll pull their bootstraps up.
]
Just when you think you have all the answers, I change the questions.
Let us face facts Blizzard would need to see a major increase in the number of sandbox fans for them to sink funds into it. They would most likely run with star craft, it would end up a lot like any ground based, factional, sandbox. Guilds make cities to increase the land the faction controls, the enemy factions sack your city and take the city node to build their own city where yours was. It would feel oddly familiar because they would take the best stuff from every sandbox out there and polish it up so it runs just a bit better and call it innovative.
Blizzard is a smart company, they don't go for NEW they go for Tried and True, it makes money and investors like that. The mmo failure rate is pretty staggering, while most of the ones that launch stay going for years, very few ever get the lime light. As far as buisness is concerned the lime light is success, it means increased sub's which increases profit and allows for the company to channel excess funds into other areas of development.
Why do you create new content? To keep the masses happy.
What if the masses are already happy? You need no content.
Do you decide to create stuff just for giggles or do you keep the cash? The cash- your'e a company.
Pi*1337/100 = 42
They do not have 12 million people paying $15 a month. Not even half of that is actual subscriptions, and that comes from WoW EU/Americas... people paying by time cards in Asia, though counted for active WoW accounts - do not count as actual subs.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
It is more about time commitment, imo. In general, doing anything in sandbox games takes more time. Why a game like WoW can pull such numbers is largely because you can log on for just 15 to 30 minutes and feel like you accomplish something. Instant gratification is a very importat factor when looking at the mass market.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
Imho they are not gona make sandbox, unless theirs marketing managers told them in furute are ppl gona play sandbox MMOs.
Blizzard does mostly games for money. What I mean is - simple game for tons of ppl but still fun. Because lets face it sometimes simple thing is way more fun than complicated thing. But there is more "new" and casual kinda players than hardcore so they will probably do "WoW 2" kind of game. And if they wont it will be interesting to see what it will be like.
I assume they also wait for some new features for MMO what they can copy and make "better" suited for theirs thing.
Cause tell me whats innovative in Starcraft, Warcraft or Diablo, those games are just "true" strategies or action RPG as it should be - means for mass player base. Ofc there is nothing wrong about that they are company so they want to make money but also it means they ply wont do anything innovative even with MMO.
Played: Lineage 2,Guild Wars 1 and 2, Age of Conan, Ragnarok Online, LOTRO, World of Warcraft, League of Legends, EvE online
Tried: KAL Online, Face of Mankind, ROSE online
Playing: CS:GO