You know what so many time did i heard that theory: we put dummies in a feild because our server are too weak to have any good scenario attached to them, we don't have the resource blabla. This excuse just isn't even valid. You don't need any sort of resource to have few mob follow a pathway, all the npc do that in all the fucking town in every damn mmo.
You are just making a caricature of what i'm saying and call for the win, but your are the one which is riduculous here as much as the games you are defending. I don't ask the mobs to talk back to me and have them tell me about their life when i ask them something right, i just want the mob to act like the event is meant for them to act, and not be scarecrow in a field. You don't need a lot of imagination to make this happen, you don't need a lot of computer resource either, you just need to do it in fact and code it that way. Puting nice theatral decors won't help make an event dynamic, thats not the decors that will create any dynamic feeling, thats my point here. Have the mobs follow some simple tasks, like defending the wood they are cuting the tree from when they build their siege machinery. You don't need a bunch of super computer and some pen&paer freedom of imagination to code that are you?
GW2 does have things like that. Not all events are large scale and many of the large scale events have other events leading up to them or surrounding them. For instance, when the Shatterer's minions destroy Steeleye Span's mortars and canons, a caravan of supplies is sent from a further location in order to repair them.
We also know that the centaurs have their own bases and camps, that there will be several events surrounding them and not all of those events are going to be attacks on towns. We know that players are able to push the centaurs further back after the invasion and this suggests a more gradual advance than just a mad dash on the village. We also know that in WvW PvP, there are mines and resources which need to be defended, which spawn caravans to take those resources to where they'll be useful and which need to be protected. It's not too much of a leap to assume that some of the code for these events has made its way into PvE and that enemies (particularly a race's main domestic threat - for the humans, this is centaurs, for the norn its the dredge etc.) may mine and prepare their assaults.
The issue in revealling such events for PvE (at least in detail) is that they'll probably be connected to something that the dev team is holding back on - crafting. We know crafting is in the game, that both wells and vials of water exist... but very little more than that.
Still what makes an event dynamic is simply its effect on the world and how players have a chance to influence that. One of the events I'm looking forward to most is a simple 'starter' event that involves picking up bunnies and releasing them into the wild to stop them attacking a farmer's watermelons xD It's cute, it adds flavour to the world and yet it still effects the world in a very real, very apparent way (after its done, you can buy some of the watermelons you saved). Aside from farming, watering crops and such, NPCs also gather water for their pets, throw parties etc. The world is much more dynamic, much more 'alive' than I've seen in prior games.
"Those who stand at the top determine what's wrong and what's right. This very place is neutral ground! Justice will prevail, you say? But of course it will! Whoever wins this war becomes justice!"
I[object Window]ll give you a simple exemple, you see those mobs, but they don[object Window]t rush on you for exemple, they don[object Window]t use strategy to defend what the event is about, at least it doesn[object Window]t look as it is, they seam to be dummies you have to cut apart, thats all. If centaur invade a town do you actually see them camping the town, then rushing in, burning the house and making the child cry when stealing their candies?
Hope it helped to make you understand.
Yes, I do understand what you want. You want every creature in the game, that is involved with the event, to have a real life purpose, doing things that make sense in the context. If there is a garrison, you want guards on patrols, with enough patrols to look like they actually could protect the garrison. You also want a [object Window]delta force[object Window] type contingent in the group working the outer limits of the bivouac, looking for holes in the line. How about a scheduled crapper routine for every NPC? Maybe they should come to attention and salute every time the [object Window]Boss[object Window] is around.
[object Window]
I think you see my point. These are games, designed to be played online, by todays computers. What you are asking for is every player to have a T3 line to their house, a supercomputer on thier desk, and care what those little soldiers on the other sides title are and what their job is supposed to be. These games are not for you. Go and play your tabletop, paper war games. That[object Window]s where you get that level of detail. Otherwise lighten up and have fun!
You know what so many time did i heard that theory: we put dummies in a feild because our server are too weak to have any good scenario attached to them, we don't have the resource blabla. This excuse just isn't even valid. You don't need any sort of resource to have few mob follow a pathway, all the npc do that in all the fucking town in every damn mmo.
You are just making a caricature of what i'm saying and call for the win, but your are the one which is riduculous here as much as the games you are defending. I don't ask the mobs to talk back to me and have them tell me about their life when i ask them something right, i just want the mob to act like the event is meant for them to act, and not be scarecrow in a field. You don't need a lot of imagination to make this happen, you don't need a lot of computer resource either, you just need to do it in fact and code it that way. Puting nice theatral decors won't help make an event dynamic, thats not the decors that will create any dynamic feeling, thats my point here. Have the mobs follow some simple tasks, like defending the wood they are cuting the tree from when they build their siege machinery. You don't need a bunch of super computer and some pen&paer freedom of imagination to code that are you?
You seem to be complaining that when the bandits attack and overrun the farm, they then do absolutely nothing. I have to ask why they would do anything anyway. The bandits' purpose was to take over the farm, if they accomplished that, why would they need to do anything else other than hang out there. They accomplished their purpose and disrupted the normal state of being, there is no point in having them running around looking like chickens with their heads' cut off.
I[object Window]ll give you a simple exemple, you see those mobs, but they don[object Window]t rush on you for exemple, they don[object Window]t use strategy to defend what the event is about, at least it doesn[object Window]t look as it is, they seam to be dummies you have to cut apart, thats all. If centaur invade a town do you actually see them camping the town, then rushing in, burning the house and making the child cry when stealing their candies?
Hope it helped to make you understand.
Yes, I do understand what you want. You want every creature in the game, that is involved with the event, to have a real life purpose, doing things that make sense in the context. If there is a garrison, you want guards on patrols, with enough patrols to look like they actually could protect the garrison. You also want a [object Window]delta force[object Window] type contingent in the group working the outer limits of the bivouac, looking for holes in the line. How about a scheduled crapper routine for every NPC? Maybe they should come to attention and salute every time the [object Window]Boss[object Window] is around.
[object Window]
I think you see my point. These are games, designed to be played online, by todays computers. What you are asking for is every player to have a T3 line to their house, a supercomputer on thier desk, and care what those little soldiers on the other sides title are and what their job is supposed to be. These games are not for you. Go and play your tabletop, paper war games. That[object Window]s where you get that level of detail. Otherwise lighten up and have fun!
You know what so many time did i heard that theory: we put dummies in a feild because our server are too weak to have any good scenario attached to them, we don't have the resource blabla. This excuse just isn't even valid. You don't need any sort of resource to have few mob follow a pathway, all the npc do that in all the fucking town in every damn mmo.
You are just making a caricature of what i'm saying and call for the win, but your are the one which is riduculous here as much as the games you are defending. I don't ask the mobs to talk back to me and have them tell me about their life when i ask them something right, i just want the mob to act like the event is meant for them to act, and not be scarecrow in a field. You don't need a lot of imagination to make this happen, you don't need a lot of computer resource either, you just need to do it in fact and code it that way. Puting nice theatral decors won't help make an event dynamic, thats not the decors that will create any dynamic feeling, thats my point here. Have the mobs follow some simple tasks, like defending the wood they are cuting the tree from when they build their siege machinery. You don't need a bunch of super computer and some pen&paer freedom of imagination to code that are you?
You seem to be complaining that when the bandits attack and overrun the farm, they then do absolutely nothing. I have to ask why they would do anything anyway. The bandits' purpose was to take over the farm, if they accomplished that, why would they need to do anything else other than hang out there. They accomplished their purpose and disrupted the normal state of being, there is no point in having them running around looking like chickens with their heads' cut off.
I believe they stated something along the lines that it would affect the village and such, maybe increasign prices of items and such because farmers can't get their crops and the cows will start dieing. In one of their videos something along the lines of that was mentions. That the event will have an impact on the world and won't just be something like, the bandits will no just hang out there and everything else will be the same. So as said, if they gothrough with what was said it could have an impact on the merchants and other thins.
If Guild Wars was made to be a sandbox game it wouldn't be Guild Wars at all. What I am saying is that Guild Wars is known for its lore as well as its gameplay. If you don't have a storyline to follow like in the original it won't be Guild Wars. You might as well call it Crap Sandbox.
You can free roam in GW 2 of course. If you want the story you can follow your personal storyline. Thats the beauty of it. They give you a choice as they did in GW 1. In prophecies post searing you can travel the whole continent without having to do a mission objective(which tells the main story). I hate sandboxes because they remind me of GTA and I hate GTA. In GTA nothing is happening until you cue a quest and all I did was run around the city stealing cars without wanting to do a quest because odds are it would still have me stealing cars.
In GW 2 stuff happens constantly , they are called dynamic events. Dynamic Events took the grind and put it into something more productive. In other MMOs you grind one monster the whole day for something good. In GW2 you grind dynamic events which are ever changing and different rewards. Repetitiveness is fun to some people; I liked farming in Diablo 2 because killing creatures was so easy. But in the MMO world it takes so long to kill just one creature and move on. This is why I play GW is because I am not sitting in one place in the world and killing the same thing over and over again to max my level or get good gear. Strategizing for whats up ahead has always been the flare.
its important to note that the majority of the events you see in the Human part of the demo are strait out of the main city and hence the first thing you see when you leave the tutorial. It wouldnt make sense to throw a new player into the fray of a huge chain event the second they leave the tutorial.
also the bandit group taking over the farm doesnt stop with them taking over the farm, infact their purpose wasnt to necissarily take it over. They where actually trying to burn the hay stacks to lower bread sales in the city, and they try poisoning the water supply as well from that northern region.
I've watched a few of the 50 minute vids and it seems more of the same spoonfed crap we've had for years. I hear about "dynamic content" yet every bit of it seems scripted. It may not have WoWs "kill/collect x" but it still has the NPCs waving huge flags saying "i'm here, go do x then y, when you're done I will flash bright green and you can move onto the next part of the script."
Maybe that's just the tutorial? I'm genuinely asking what's so great about it, something not shown in the videos?
Have you played GW1? Honestly, I didnt get the hype and belief until I tried it but now I am actually hyped for GW2 just on the evidence of the first game.
I love sandbox and me and the GF bought GW just for something to do while we waited for Arche Age now that Rift had failed for us, but we love it and are both more then happy to play it (and GW2) until AA gets here. I have always said that themepark is fun when done right, despite loving sandboxes in the main, and GW is that.
Arenanet do themepark, but they do it with ambition, scope, and style and that has won it a lot of fans. I guess that carries a lot of people forward to this game.
I have a new trust in Arenanet to deliver a great themepark game... I couldnt have diven a s**t before.
My actual only worry is that they will make GW2 'too MMORPG' and discard what made their first game so good... As long as they have faith in their way it will be cool.
You know, maybe it deserves its own thread for discussion, but I do not believe GW2 is a theme park outside of the personal story.
You have dynamic events that chain into other events, but nothing about this is mandatory. You don't have to start at the first event in the chain. You can join in any time. You don't have to follow it to the end of the chain. You can drop out anytime. You don't have to do any particular event at all. You can walk around and do any event in the zone if you want, or you can wander and try to find the events they put in the corners of the world to reward the explorer types. You can replay any event you want to replay (assuming you come back and its running). You can mentor down or sidekick up and do whatever content you feel like doing at any time (assuming you have a high level buddy for sidekicking).
Yes, there will be suggested levels for zones and events, but what game doesn't have a level range to its zones? If that makes GW2 a theme park, then EQ1 was a theme park.
Do you guys agree or disagree?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I agree, I don't think it's much of a themepark. You have many choices and can almost do any of the content on day one by sidekicking up. And then when your a high level you can sidekick back down, if you want. I think GW2 is actually pretty sandboxy.
I didn't even know people were saying it was a themepark.
I was half responding to the poster before me. GW1 can be pretty linear at times and I think he was saying that he liked GW1 enough that he wouldn't mind if GW2 was also a theme park.
But there is also just so much misinformation and so many misconceptions out there (people thinking that dynamic events are exactly like quests, for instance) that I felt like it would be good to come right out and state that I didn't think it was just a standard theme park MMO.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
You know, maybe it deserves its own thread for discussion, but I do not believe GW2 is a theme park outside of the personal story.
You have dynamic events that chain into other events, but nothing about this is mandatory. You don't have to start at the first event in the chain. You can join in any time. You don't have to follow it to the end of the chain. You can drop out anytime. You don't have to do any particular event at all. You can walk around and do any event in the zone if you want, or you can wander and try to find the events they put in the corners of the world to reward the explorer types. You can replay any event you want to replay (assuming you come back and its running). You can mentor down or sidekick up and do whatever content you feel like doing at any time (assuming you have a high level buddy for sidekicking).
Yes, there will be suggested levels for zones and events, but what game doesn't have a level range to its zones? If that makes GW2 a theme park, then EQ1 was a theme park.
Do you guys agree or disagree?
Well, a themepark is defined by the fact that it's a park with pre set rides to go on, it isnt defined by forcing you to go on them, or even what order you go on them. The best themeparks have choice and variety, but GW2 will do just that... offer you pre set rides for you to enjoy. And thats fine.
it is perfectly reasonable for themepark games to offer choice in what you do at any given time (think of going to Disneyland... you chose what rides to go on and in what order, if at all). Themepark dosent mean 'linear' (tedious limiting games like Rift just choose to be linear because it's cheaper to build), it means pre built rides within it's space for the player to use.
GW2 will be 100% themepark, and thats fine, because thats what Arenanet excel at building, as demonstrated by GW1.
(Mentoring or whatever also has nothing to do with it being sandbox or themepark.)
I agree, I don't think it's much of a themepark. You have many choices and can almost do any of the content on day one by sidekicking up. And then when your a high level you can sidekick back down, if you want. I think GW2 is actually pretty sandboxy.
Themepark dosent mean linear by defintion.
Themeparks can easily include choice, they are still themeparks.
It's just bad themeparks that don't offer choice and choose to be linear because it's cheaper to make.
GW2 is a themepark, but there isn nothing wrong at all with a good themepark that is designed with ambition, scope, and imagination.
You know, maybe it deserves its own thread for discussion, but I do not believe GW2 is a theme park outside of the personal story.
You have dynamic events that chain into other events, but nothing about this is mandatory. You don't have to start at the first event in the chain. You can join in any time. You don't have to follow it to the end of the chain. You can drop out anytime. You don't have to do any particular event at all. You can walk around and do any event in the zone if you want, or you can wander and try to find the events they put in the corners of the world to reward the explorer types. You can replay any event you want to replay (assuming you come back and its running). You can mentor down or sidekick up and do whatever content you feel like doing at any time (assuming you have a high level buddy for sidekicking).
Yes, there will be suggested levels for zones and events, but what game doesn't have a level range to its zones? If that makes GW2 a theme park, then EQ1 was a theme park.
Do you guys agree or disagree?
I guess that'd depend on your definition of "sandbox" and "themepark". GW2 lets you do any of the available content, but it's still all content that the devs provide for you to enjoy. You can't go out and, for example, open a store in Divinity's Reach. You're not on rails most of the time (your personal storyline will at least be branching), but I don't think that's all it takes to make a game a sandbox. Of course, I tend to prefer themeparks over sandboxes anyway, so that's fine with me.
Answer me this: do you consider GTAIV to be a themepark or a sandbox?
When someone is refering to sandbox they aren't refering to sandbox, since technically Every MMO is Sandbox. According anyways to the definition of a sandbox as it applies to console games.
Most players refering to a game being sandbox, they really mean Player created content, or player manipulated content. I personally think Dynamic Events are a form of Sandbox game play. Not to mention we have the World vs. World vs. World Called the Mists which also features PvP versons of Dynamic Events. Rumors are that it will mirror RTS games like starcraft where your server collect resources to build seige, fortresses, fortifications. Where you change the terrain. If someone doesn't consider that Sandbox I don't know what is. If they think the lack of rules is sandbox than technically it is no longer a video game since all games are bound by rules, even EVE Online. As the only thing that really makes eve Sandbox is the pvp system of collecting resources and battleing over territory, and possibly the market but that is in iffy one. If there reason for sandbox is that the Mists is its own Zone and not as large as something like 0.0 sec well than I think they aren't arguing sandbox anymore just semantics and opinon.
To sum it up when I hear someone say Sandbox they are just saying I want areas of the game that I as a player can personally controll permenately and kill anyone that traspasses on my land.
Will really have to wait for info on the Mists to be released to argue this, I think it is to early to define it as sandbox or themepark since the game isn't complete and we only know a tiny bit of information about the game.
When someone is refering to sandbox they aren't refering to sandbox, since technically Every MMO is Sandbox.
No, not true, even 'technically'.
To sum it up when I hear someone say Sandbox they are just saying I want areas of the game that I as a player can personally controll permenately and kill anyone that traspasses on my land.
When someone is refering to sandbox they aren't refering to sandbox, since technically Every MMO is Sandbox.
No, not true, even 'technically'.
To sum it up when I hear someone say Sandbox they are just saying I want areas of the game that I as a player can personally controll permenately and kill anyone that traspasses on my land.
Again, not true.
Than what is Sandbox? you arent actually saying anything just the words "not true" which isnt an argument. Sandbox people want player run zones that they can control, dominate and fight over. Anything that give unlimited player control is no longer a game since games are bound in rules, the perfect sandbox by definition is infinite possibilities without rules therefore it would not be a game. Player created content has major problems and you can see that by just looking at CoX. The term Sandbox is very vague on what people expect it to be in a game. I have never experienced railroad in an MMO, even games like WoW. the only real restraint is level, which EVE Online even has, you can start anywhere you like in EVE but than again a lot of the missions are pointless without any direction. You still have to level up factions to get better missions.
When someone is refering to sandbox they aren't refering to sandbox, since technically Every MMO is Sandbox.
No, not true, even 'technically'.
To sum it up when I hear someone say Sandbox they are just saying I want areas of the game that I as a player can personally controll permenately and kill anyone that traspasses on my land.
Again, not true.
Than what is Sandbox? you arent actually saying anything just the words "not true" which isnt an argument. Sandbox people want player run zones that they can control, dominate and fight over.
When someone is refering to sandbox they aren't refering to sandbox, since technically Every MMO is Sandbox.
No, not true, even 'technically'.
To sum it up when I hear someone say Sandbox they are just saying I want areas of the game that I as a player can personally controll permenately and kill anyone that traspasses on my land.
Again, not true.
Than what is Sandbox? you arent actually saying anything just the words "not true" which isnt an argument.
/shrug... wasnt trying to have an argument, I was just making a statement.
Sandbox people want player run zones that they can control, dominate and fight over.
No, A Tale in the Desert is as pure a sandbox as you can get in today's market, and it has none of the fighting or struggle you seem to think defines the term.
Anything that give unlimited player control is no longer a game since games are bound in rules
Comments
GW2 does have things like that. Not all events are large scale and many of the large scale events have other events leading up to them or surrounding them. For instance, when the Shatterer's minions destroy Steeleye Span's mortars and canons, a caravan of supplies is sent from a further location in order to repair them.
We also know that the centaurs have their own bases and camps, that there will be several events surrounding them and not all of those events are going to be attacks on towns. We know that players are able to push the centaurs further back after the invasion and this suggests a more gradual advance than just a mad dash on the village. We also know that in WvW PvP, there are mines and resources which need to be defended, which spawn caravans to take those resources to where they'll be useful and which need to be protected. It's not too much of a leap to assume that some of the code for these events has made its way into PvE and that enemies (particularly a race's main domestic threat - for the humans, this is centaurs, for the norn its the dredge etc.) may mine and prepare their assaults.
The issue in revealling such events for PvE (at least in detail) is that they'll probably be connected to something that the dev team is holding back on - crafting. We know crafting is in the game, that both wells and vials of water exist... but very little more than that.
Still what makes an event dynamic is simply its effect on the world and how players have a chance to influence that. One of the events I'm looking forward to most is a simple 'starter' event that involves picking up bunnies and releasing them into the wild to stop them attacking a farmer's watermelons xD It's cute, it adds flavour to the world and yet it still effects the world in a very real, very apparent way (after its done, you can buy some of the watermelons you saved). Aside from farming, watering crops and such, NPCs also gather water for their pets, throw parties etc. The world is much more dynamic, much more 'alive' than I've seen in prior games.
"Those who stand at the top determine what's wrong and what's right. This very place is neutral ground! Justice will prevail, you say? But of course it will! Whoever wins this war becomes justice!"
You seem to be complaining that when the bandits attack and overrun the farm, they then do absolutely nothing. I have to ask why they would do anything anyway. The bandits' purpose was to take over the farm, if they accomplished that, why would they need to do anything else other than hang out there. They accomplished their purpose and disrupted the normal state of being, there is no point in having them running around looking like chickens with their heads' cut off.
I believe they stated something along the lines that it would affect the village and such, maybe increasign prices of items and such because farmers can't get their crops and the cows will start dieing. In one of their videos something along the lines of that was mentions. That the event will have an impact on the world and won't just be something like, the bandits will no just hang out there and everything else will be the same. So as said, if they gothrough with what was said it could have an impact on the merchants and other thins.
Anyone else think this thread is just another rehash of "Anything that isn't 100% sandbox SUCKS"?
QFT
I am tired of all the sandbox lovers trying to turn every MMO into a sandbox. Sandbox games are mady by indie games not AAA quality companies...
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
If Guild Wars was made to be a sandbox game it wouldn't be Guild Wars at all. What I am saying is that Guild Wars is known for its lore as well as its gameplay. If you don't have a storyline to follow like in the original it won't be Guild Wars. You might as well call it Crap Sandbox.
You can free roam in GW 2 of course. If you want the story you can follow your personal storyline. Thats the beauty of it. They give you a choice as they did in GW 1. In prophecies post searing you can travel the whole continent without having to do a mission objective(which tells the main story). I hate sandboxes because they remind me of GTA and I hate GTA. In GTA nothing is happening until you cue a quest and all I did was run around the city stealing cars without wanting to do a quest because odds are it would still have me stealing cars.
In GW 2 stuff happens constantly , they are called dynamic events. Dynamic Events took the grind and put it into something more productive. In other MMOs you grind one monster the whole day for something good. In GW2 you grind dynamic events which are ever changing and different rewards. Repetitiveness is fun to some people; I liked farming in Diablo 2 because killing creatures was so easy. But in the MMO world it takes so long to kill just one creature and move on. This is why I play GW is because I am not sitting in one place in the world and killing the same thing over and over again to max my level or get good gear. Strategizing for whats up ahead has always been the flare.
-I am here to perform logic
its important to note that the majority of the events you see in the Human part of the demo are strait out of the main city and hence the first thing you see when you leave the tutorial. It wouldnt make sense to throw a new player into the fray of a huge chain event the second they leave the tutorial.
also the bandit group taking over the farm doesnt stop with them taking over the farm, infact their purpose wasnt to necissarily take it over. They where actually trying to burn the hay stacks to lower bread sales in the city, and they try poisoning the water supply as well from that northern region.
Have you played GW1? Honestly, I didnt get the hype and belief until I tried it but now I am actually hyped for GW2 just on the evidence of the first game.
I love sandbox and me and the GF bought GW just for something to do while we waited for Arche Age now that Rift had failed for us, but we love it and are both more then happy to play it (and GW2) until AA gets here. I have always said that themepark is fun when done right, despite loving sandboxes in the main, and GW is that.
Arenanet do themepark, but they do it with ambition, scope, and style and that has won it a lot of fans. I guess that carries a lot of people forward to this game.
I have a new trust in Arenanet to deliver a great themepark game... I couldnt have diven a s**t before.
My actual only worry is that they will make GW2 'too MMORPG' and discard what made their first game so good... As long as they have faith in their way it will be cool.
You know, maybe it deserves its own thread for discussion, but I do not believe GW2 is a theme park outside of the personal story.
You have dynamic events that chain into other events, but nothing about this is mandatory. You don't have to start at the first event in the chain. You can join in any time. You don't have to follow it to the end of the chain. You can drop out anytime. You don't have to do any particular event at all. You can walk around and do any event in the zone if you want, or you can wander and try to find the events they put in the corners of the world to reward the explorer types. You can replay any event you want to replay (assuming you come back and its running). You can mentor down or sidekick up and do whatever content you feel like doing at any time (assuming you have a high level buddy for sidekicking).
Yes, there will be suggested levels for zones and events, but what game doesn't have a level range to its zones? If that makes GW2 a theme park, then EQ1 was a theme park.
Do you guys agree or disagree?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I agree, I don't think it's much of a themepark. You have many choices and can almost do any of the content on day one by sidekicking up. And then when your a high level you can sidekick back down, if you want. I think GW2 is actually pretty sandboxy.
I was half responding to the poster before me. GW1 can be pretty linear at times and I think he was saying that he liked GW1 enough that he wouldn't mind if GW2 was also a theme park.
But there is also just so much misinformation and so many misconceptions out there (people thinking that dynamic events are exactly like quests, for instance) that I felt like it would be good to come right out and state that I didn't think it was just a standard theme park MMO.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Well, a themepark is defined by the fact that it's a park with pre set rides to go on, it isnt defined by forcing you to go on them, or even what order you go on them. The best themeparks have choice and variety, but GW2 will do just that... offer you pre set rides for you to enjoy. And thats fine.
it is perfectly reasonable for themepark games to offer choice in what you do at any given time (think of going to Disneyland... you chose what rides to go on and in what order, if at all). Themepark dosent mean 'linear' (tedious limiting games like Rift just choose to be linear because it's cheaper to build), it means pre built rides within it's space for the player to use.
GW2 will be 100% themepark, and thats fine, because thats what Arenanet excel at building, as demonstrated by GW1.
(Mentoring or whatever also has nothing to do with it being sandbox or themepark.)
Themepark dosent mean linear by defintion.
Themeparks can easily include choice, they are still themeparks.
It's just bad themeparks that don't offer choice and choose to be linear because it's cheaper to make.
GW2 is a themepark, but there isn nothing wrong at all with a good themepark that is designed with ambition, scope, and imagination.
I guess that'd depend on your definition of "sandbox" and "themepark". GW2 lets you do any of the available content, but it's still all content that the devs provide for you to enjoy. You can't go out and, for example, open a store in Divinity's Reach. You're not on rails most of the time (your personal storyline will at least be branching), but I don't think that's all it takes to make a game a sandbox. Of course, I tend to prefer themeparks over sandboxes anyway, so that's fine with me.
Answer me this: do you consider GTAIV to be a themepark or a sandbox?
<edit> Wow, completely ninja-ed.
When someone is refering to sandbox they aren't refering to sandbox, since technically Every MMO is Sandbox. According anyways to the definition of a sandbox as it applies to console games.
Most players refering to a game being sandbox, they really mean Player created content, or player manipulated content. I personally think Dynamic Events are a form of Sandbox game play. Not to mention we have the World vs. World vs. World Called the Mists which also features PvP versons of Dynamic Events. Rumors are that it will mirror RTS games like starcraft where your server collect resources to build seige, fortresses, fortifications. Where you change the terrain. If someone doesn't consider that Sandbox I don't know what is. If they think the lack of rules is sandbox than technically it is no longer a video game since all games are bound by rules, even EVE Online. As the only thing that really makes eve Sandbox is the pvp system of collecting resources and battleing over territory, and possibly the market but that is in iffy one. If there reason for sandbox is that the Mists is its own Zone and not as large as something like 0.0 sec well than I think they aren't arguing sandbox anymore just semantics and opinon.
To sum it up when I hear someone say Sandbox they are just saying I want areas of the game that I as a player can personally controll permenately and kill anyone that traspasses on my land.
Will really have to wait for info on the Mists to be released to argue this, I think it is to early to define it as sandbox or themepark since the game isn't complete and we only know a tiny bit of information about the game.
Than what is Sandbox? you arent actually saying anything just the words "not true" which isnt an argument. Sandbox people want player run zones that they can control, dominate and fight over. Anything that give unlimited player control is no longer a game since games are bound in rules, the perfect sandbox by definition is infinite possibilities without rules therefore it would not be a game. Player created content has major problems and you can see that by just looking at CoX. The term Sandbox is very vague on what people expect it to be in a game. I have never experienced railroad in an MMO, even games like WoW. the only real restraint is level, which EVE Online even has, you can start anywhere you like in EVE but than again a lot of the missions are pointless without any direction. You still have to level up factions to get better missions.