Aw come on now, some of us played EVE and it sure wasn't for the graphics.
The advantage of designing a game based out of giant flying boxes in an area where the main defining characteristic is 'extremely empty'. Why, it's so empty some might even call it 'space'.
Anything you do is an extreme graphical upgrade over RL.
Unfortunately for fantasy based games, people are intimately familiar with what people and trees look like, so it's held to a little harsher standards.
I mean, did they even ever get people walking on space stations at EVE yet?
I don't get what sandbox can't have a good story? like.....why oh why?
Never realy played a sandbox mmo before, but what do people do if they don't want combat and story in there? just crafting and......exploring?
What you need to understand that in a well crafted sandbox style virtual world it is the other players who are the real story. Any story content added by the Developers is just backdrop for the players to craft their own adventures.
And that's what you get in a game like EVE. Nobody cares about the "lore" in the game. The real stories are about which Corp (guild) is on top, which Corp crushed another, which one was betrayed and had all their money stolen, etc.
Actually, I thought the lore was one of the strongest points of EVE. There are some very well written story line missions. After reading the novel about EVE by Tony Gonzalez, I thought it was cool as hell that many of the characters are in the game. I actually changed my reputation and joined Sebiestor Tribe just because their CEO was a main character in the book (nevermind that they also happened to have the best L4 agent in Minmatar space!). It was the player corp politics that I didn't care about.
A good sandbox game should have both lore/story AND the mechanics necessary to have interesting player created stories.
There's 2 AAA sandbox titles upcoming, ArcheAge and WoD.
Thats not an answer to the OP's question. You dont know if itll live up to the OP's expectations. More companies have tried to release MMO's that offer a lot of freedom, packed with features and content and raised high expectations before release. How many succeeded so far?
Well, the question was wouldn't creating an AAA sandbox just be too expensive now.
Apparently it isn't too expensive since some companies are working on them, AAA sandbox style MMORPG's.
O come on. It still remains to be seen if they can deliver on what they promise. How far away are those games from release? Based on what we've seen so far, with complex and feature rich MMO's released prematurely (because of financial reasons) , it is not so strange to think that it may be too expensive.
As long as such a MMO as the OP wants isnt released, his question remains unanswered.
He was questioning whether making AAA sandbox MMORPG's would be too expensive: here we have 2 companies who are in the process right now of developing AAA sandbox MMO's.
He didn't ask whether creating a successful AAA sandbox MMO's was too expensive.
So, AAA sandbox titles are on the way, 2 of them: how successful they'll be we'll see at their launch.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Personally, I think that aspiring minor league developers should focus on apps - small games that can be interlinked. Rather than start with a map and populate it, create one minigame system that's fun on its own with some hooks that can be fleshed out as connected minigames. Let your world grow from those nuggets.
(that said, I spend far too much time daydreaming and not enough actually doing anything)
There's 2 AAA sandbox titles upcoming, ArcheAge and WoD.
Thats not an answer to the OP's question. You dont know if itll live up to the OP's expectations. More companies have tried to release MMO's that offer a lot of freedom, packed with features and content and raised high expectations before release. How many succeeded so far?
Well, the question was wouldn't creating an AAA sandbox just be too expensive now. Apparently it isn't too expensive since some companies are working on them, AAA sandbox style MMORPG's.
O come on. It still remains to be seen if they can deliver on what they promise. How far away are those games from release? Based on what we've seen so far, with complex and feature rich MMO's released prematurely (because of financial reasons) , it is not so strange to think that it may be too expensive. As long as such a MMO as the OP wants isnt released, his question remains unanswered.
That and nobody knows what CCP is going to do with WoD. It could be a 2D sidescroller for all anyone knows. People have already inserted their own interpretation of what they want WoD to be, with no information from CCP.
A Triple-A sandbox could be very successful if well done. It's the "well done" part that's tricky. I don't think a pure sandbox would attract as many people as a hybrid, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be very successful.
There are some things inherent in a pure sandbox that would work against the wide appeal. * Virtual Worlds for most people are boring. If they were going to take off, they would have taken off in the 90's when all the tools for creating them were being pushed out to developers. They didn't. If people wanted to walk long distances to do something, they'd walk to the grocery store. You don't even get endorphins pumping for your virtual walking, so it's even more boring. Notice I said, "Most People". In terms of making money, the Game aspect makes more money than the Virtual World aspect of mmorpg. * Populations need to be pretty high. A pure sandbox is almost by definition big. The bigger it is, the more people you need to make it not feel empty. You can concentrate more people into smaller areas, but then the developer has spent money on unused virtual real estate. You can make the world smaller, but then the developer is working against the pure sandbox concept. Add to this the smaller audience for a pure sandbox game (it is smaller, don't kid yourself) and it becomes harder to make the world feel populated and to feel like sandbox at the same time. * Regarding housing, people are dumb. Individuals might be pretty smart, but populations of people are dumb. If you let them build houses just anywhere, they will and it will make a mess. If you limit the building of houses they'll complain. Either way you spread people out or separate them from each other making the world feel more empty. If the housing isn't there, it's not a sandbox. Developers can't win.
So, my point is that sandboxes can be successful (some already are), but a pure sandbox has things working against it just by being a sandbox that would work against it being AAA successful.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
That and nobody knows what CCP is going to do with WoD. It could be a 2D sidescroller for all anyone knows. People have already inserted their own interpretation of what they want WoD to be, with no information from CCP.
It's true that they didn't reveal much about World of Darkness.
However, there's some bits of info to be found about it.
There's Gamespot stating that WoD will be a sandbox-style MMO (see here)
Also, Nathan Richardson from CCP states that they're 'a sandbox oriented company that likes to create tools for players and for the players to actually become a meaningful part of the world for the other players' (see here, quote from the video at 20:30)
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Originally posted by MMO.Maverick Originally posted by lizardbones
That and nobody knows what CCP is going to do with WoD. It could be a 2D sidescroller for all anyone knows. People have already inserted their own interpretation of what they want WoD to be, with no information from CCP.
It's true that they didn't reveal much about World of Darkness. However, there's some bits of info to be found about it. There's Gamespot stating that WoD will be a sandbox-style MMO (see here)
Also, Nathan Richardson from CCP states that they're 'a sandbox oriented company that likes to create tools for players and for the players to actually become a meaningful part of the world for the other players' (see here, quote from the video at 20:30)
It could still be a 2D sidescrolling sandbox mmorpg. I don't think it will. I think CCP has a lot of knowledge on how to build a large scale game for lots of people to play and I'm looking forward to seeing what happens. That doesn't mean it will have mass market appeal. It doesn't mean it won't have mass market appeal either. There is a LOT that's left open to interpretation for the game and people are happily interpreting away based on what they want from the game.
You are, however, the first person who appears to have actually seen something other than a rumor on what's going on with WoD.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
He was questioning whether making AAA sandbox MMORPG's would be too expensive: here we have 2 companies who are in the process right now of developing AAA sandbox MMO's.
He didn't ask whether creating a successful AAA sandbox MMO's was too expensive.
So, AAA sandbox titles are on the way, 2 of them: how successful they'll be we'll see at their launch.
You have to take into account if its successfull or not. If its successfull, even an unfinished released game will get the chance to improve in time untill it reaches the state that the OP asks for. Also it gives incentive to future investors to invest in these complex projects. What the OP asks for is more then what is currently on the market.
EVE for example only reached its current state because it was a success.
Other attempts to create a hybrid MMO like the OP asks for, had to release prematurely with way less available features because of budget limits. And because of the unfinished state didnt became a success because the players didnt want to pay to wait for the game to complete. So the developers didnt get the chance to build all those features in the game that they had in mind. In the end they didnt manage to build their MMO because it proved to be too expensive for them (or their investors).
Based on past experience there is nothing a developer can do to make us (or investors for that matter) believe that they can succeed in releasing a polished and bugfree MMO with that many complex features as the OP asks for. Not untill the first company manages to release one anyway, or at least a promising beta. So it still has to be seen if it proves to be too expensive.
- Actually has dev. designed questlines and themeparks within it (not just an empty space)
- Is persistent (allows players to make their 'permanent' mark on the dev. designed landscape)
- Allows for easy, fun, customisable and involving non-story gaming (ie. player run crafting, economy etc)
- Allows for different types of non-story gaming (ie. socialising AND PVP) to co-exist side-by-side
- Is large enough for a typical MMO features like exploration
- Is bug free and resilient.
I mean, it's hard enough and expensive enough making on-rails linear themepark MMOs (SWTOR seems to be budgeted at $150m-$300m) so what chance does an AAA Sandbox have?
'back in the day' when MMOs had considerably smaller dev team and less funds they were able to create very in depth games. The only thing that has changed really between then and now when it comes to cost is the art department best I can tell.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Originally posted by Larsa I agree that developing a sandbox is actually cheaper than making a themepark (no instances, cutscenes, voice actors, NPCs, quests, etc. required). However, the last sandbox game developed from a AAA company was the original SWG in 2003. Yeah, 8 years ago, since then not a single AAA sandbox came on the market. It seems the big players in the gaming industry are just following the highly successful example set by Blizzard.
If you think SWG was a Sandbox then you need to rethink. It was a quest driven game from the outset. Sure it had some sandbox elements to it but it was far from sandbox.
You have to take into account if its successfull or not.
Based on past experience there is nothing a developer can do to make us (or investors for that matter) believe that they can succeed in releasing a polished and bugfree MMO with that many complex features as the OP asks for. Not untill the first company manages to release one anyway, or at least a promising beta. So it still has to be seen if it proves to be too expensive.
OP states: 'I mean, it's hard enough and expensive enough making on-rails linear themepark MMOs (SWTOR seems to be budgeted at $150m-$300m) so what chance does an AAA Sandbox have?'
The OP is taking SWTOR, an unreleased still-in-development AAA title, as an example in regards to his question if creating AAA sandboxes would be too expensive, so I don't see why I shouldn't use 2 other unreleased, still-in-development AAA sandbox titles in relation to his question.
After all, the OP is doing exactly the same, looking at MMORPG's that aren't released yet but still in development.
Anyway, this discussion is starting to enter the twilight zone of irrelevance and ridiculousness, I'm going to leave it at this. No need to keep pingpong debating over eachother's interpretation of the OP, we've read all the various arguments already.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Originally posted by redsauce By an 'AAA sandbox' I mean one that: - Actually has dev. designed questlines and themeparks within it (not just an empty space) - Is persistent (allows players to make their 'permanent' mark on the dev. designed landscape) - Allows for easy, fun, customisable and involving non-story gaming (ie. player run crafting, economy etc) - Allows for different types of non-story gaming (ie. socialising AND PVP) to co-exist side-by-side - Is large enough for a typical MMO features like exploration - Is bug free and resilient. I mean, it's hard enough and expensive enough making on-rails linear themepark MMOs (SWTOR seems to be budgeted at $150m-$300m) so what chance does an AAA Sandbox have?
'back in the day' when MMOs had considerably smaller dev team and less funds they were able to create very in depth games. The only thing that has changed really between then and now when it comes to cost is the art department best I can tell.
There is no standard architecture for mmorpgs. There are game engines, but that's all they are is engines. You have to build everything else around them. A lot of the stuff, like chat, has to be reimplemented from scratch, even though in game chat has existed forever.
On top of the no standards thing, the graphics changes take 2 to 6 times longer to develop compared to just the last generation of game engines. This is if your team is experienced with the new engine and how to get the models in there. I have no idea how much it's ballooned up since the EQ1 or Ultima days.
That doesn't mean you couldn't develop a AAA sandbox. Find the investors, hire the people and you can do it. Making it successful is a whole different thing.
* edit * Actually, just convince investors that it could be successful and you have the money, which is the only thing between developing the game and just designing it. Like making the game successful, whether or not you are capable of seeing the project from start to finish is a whole different thing as well.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I agree that developing a sandbox is actually cheaper than making a themepark (no instances, cutscenes, voice actors, NPCs, quests, etc. required).
However, the last sandbox game developed from a AAA company was the original SWG in 2003. Yeah, 8 years ago, since then not a single AAA sandbox came on the market. It seems the big players in the gaming industry are just following the highly successful example set by Blizzard.
If you think SWG was a Sandbox then you need to rethink. It was a quest driven game from the outset. Sure it had some sandbox elements to it but it was far from sandbox.
SWG had very little quest elements in it and most of them were part of specific themeparks which were actually not that easy to find. SWG was a very broad sandbox that lacked much depth.
Im happy with my ZZZ sandbox Darkfall with beautifull world and polished game, and alot improvements with regualar patches and free expansions for this FREE FOR ALL FULL LOOT PVP MMO of GREATNESS.
And soon alot of new content that would give you wet dreams:)
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009..... In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
Originally posted by Torik SWG had very little quest elements in it and most of them were part of specific themeparks which were actually not that easy to find. SWG was a very broad sandbox that lacked much depth.
Sounds like you weren't the target audience. I happened to absolutely love the completely open world as opposed to the mind numbingly boring lineral quest progressions MMOs have turned into lately.
The depth was made by the players of the game. I never ever lacked for content in early on SWG since all the content I enjoyed was made by exploring with friends, or creating a city with people around me or making clothes for entertainers in various cities or harvesting the best materials my army of surveyors had found for me.
Even the hard to find themeparks were more fun simply because they were hard to find. You had to put effort into rewards and player made items were better than looted items so people had reasons to interact.
I've recently started playing WoW again and made it to level 71 in 5 days and, not including guild mates, have spoken to a total of 3 people the entire time. Even in dungeon groups there's no talking other than "your DPS and items suck and you suck" type comments.
In SWG at any given moment I had people waiting for me to log in to try out new clothes or meet them in the wilds for an adventure or something. All of that has been lost by the dumbing down and mindless droning of the themepark MMO style.
I don't think it'd be more expensive to create. The issue is finding a major developer with the vision and will to risk that type of money on an MMO sub-genre that isn't seen as a moneymaker.
Thus, the sandbox has become the purview of indies, who, underfunded, are trying to tap into that existing niche.
Personally, I prefer a real virtual world and sandbox style of game, so I'll go where I can enjoy that type of gameplay. Right now, that means Mortal Online and Xsyon. No matter their problems, they give me the experience I want to play. And, that's really the point of this type of leisure activity, isn't it?
SWG had very little quest elements in it and most of them were part of specific themeparks which were actually not that easy to find. SWG was a very broad sandbox that lacked much depth.
I've recently started playing WoW again and made it to level 71 in 5 days and, not including guild mates, have spoken to a total of 3 people the entire time. Even in dungeon groups there's no talking other than "your DPS and items suck and you suck" type comments.
In SWG at any given moment I had people waiting for me to log in to try out new clothes or meet them in the wilds for an adventure or something. All of that has been lost by the dumbing down and mindless droning of the themepark MMO style.
No offense but this is all down to you and the way you play the game. I started WoW again two weeks ago after a month and a half off. I'm still only lvl 27 and currently have 32 people on my friends list.
As for SWG. I would call it a sandbox. However I found that game to be the most boring peice of garbage I have ever played.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
No offense but this is all down to you and the way you play the game. I started WoW again two weeks ago after a month and a half off. I'm still only lvl 27 and currently have 32 people on my friends list.
Well wait to get to 85 and all you get is, your Gearscore is too low, and your dps suck.
- Actually has dev. designed questlines and themeparks within it (not just an empty space)
- Is persistent (allows players to make their 'permanent' mark on the dev. designed landscape)
- Allows for easy, fun, customisable and involving non-story gaming (ie. player run crafting, economy etc)
- Allows for different types of non-story gaming (ie. socialising AND PVP) to co-exist side-by-side
- Is large enough for a typical MMO features like exploration
- Is bug free and resilient.
I mean, it's hard enough and expensive enough making on-rails linear themepark MMOs (SWTOR seems to be budgeted at $150m-$300m) so what chance does an AAA Sandbox have?
Just copy UO (without full PVP for the new carebear generation) how difficult can it be?
Oh wait, someone decided that sandboxes don't sell
Wait until Bethesda makes Morrowind Online................then we talk about it
No offense but this is all down to you and the way you play the game. I started WoW again two weeks ago after a month and a half off. I'm still only lvl 27 and currently have 32 people on my friends list.
Right. You just happen to make 32 new friends and you're not even lvl 27 and this all in 2 weeks? Sounds a bit unbelievable, mate. Unless those friends are from playing WoW months to years, or you just added everyone who spoke more than 2 friendly sentences to you
No offense meant, mate, I just find it hard to believe, but who knows, you might just be the exception to the rule instead of 'add friend'-trigger happy.
As for community and MMORPG's, it depends upon the persons themselves, but some MMORPG's lean themselves better for a thriving community than others, the way the gameplay design is and what kind of behaviour it stimulates and encourages.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
No offense but this is all down to you and the way you play the game. I started WoW again two weeks ago after a month and a half off. I'm still only lvl 27 and currently have 32 people on my friends list.
Right. You just happen to make 32 new friends and you're not even lvl 27 and this all in 2 weeks? Sounds a bit unbelievable, mate. Unless those friends are from playing WoW months to years, or you just added everyone who spoke more than 2 friendly sentences to you
No offense meant, mate, I just find it hard to believe, but who knows, you might just be the exception to the rule instead of 'add friend'-trigger happy.
As for community and MMORPG's, it depends upon the persons themselves, but some MMORPG's lean themselves better for a thriving community than others, the way the gameplay design is and what kind of behaviour it stimulates and encourages.
Meeting nice people is not difficult, it's pretty darn easy. You just talk with people, thats it. Every place you go to, in general chat, with people running the quests around you, pretty darn easy. I would say 32 people is a snap, anyone who actually put effort in meeting people could meet hundreds. I'm not the exception to the rule, I'm just an average joe.
Gameplay may, and I stress may, cause one type of behaviour to be dominant but that is so flimsy. In hardcore fffa games that people think are full of asshats and gankers, people on these boards talk about the great friends and community, in the most solo game of all Istaria, people talk about great community and sharing, and great rp.
Asshats, gankers, griefers, and great people are in all communities bar none.
Great people are easy to find.
Venge
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Asshats, gankers, griefers, and great people are in all communities bar none.
Oh, I agree fully to that.
You'll find asshats, idiots and good, great people in crime infested ghettos as well as in a cosy suburb or a university campus.
That doesn't mean that there isn't a different emerging behaviour, or different community identity, in each of those locations, with more crime and vice in one location compared to others.
Same with server types, MMORPG's, and emerging behaviour on those.
Or to put it extreme in black and white: some MMORPG's and servers are more like a ghetto and some are more like a suburb or holiday resort.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Why, last time I was playing an 'MMORPG', I went out of my way to explain how I used to play real games, that were really fun, not like these crap XBox-Kiddy console games masquerading as MMORPGs that you get nowadays, and how if these people were playing the sort of real games I used to play, they most certainly wouldn't be able to continue playing the pile of crap they were playing right now, and maybe they could stop being such carebear noobs.
They were incredibly rude to me in response, and kept telling me to 'Go play those old games if they're so great', when I was really looking out for them and trying to impart some of my MMO veteran wisdom to them.
Comments
The advantage of designing a game based out of giant flying boxes in an area where the main defining characteristic is 'extremely empty'. Why, it's so empty some might even call it 'space'.
Anything you do is an extreme graphical upgrade over RL.
Unfortunately for fantasy based games, people are intimately familiar with what people and trees look like, so it's held to a little harsher standards.
I mean, did they even ever get people walking on space stations at EVE yet?
Actually, I thought the lore was one of the strongest points of EVE. There are some very well written story line missions. After reading the novel about EVE by Tony Gonzalez, I thought it was cool as hell that many of the characters are in the game. I actually changed my reputation and joined Sebiestor Tribe just because their CEO was a main character in the book (nevermind that they also happened to have the best L4 agent in Minmatar space!). It was the player corp politics that I didn't care about.
A good sandbox game should have both lore/story AND the mechanics necessary to have interesting player created stories.
O come on. It still remains to be seen if they can deliver on what they promise. How far away are those games from release? Based on what we've seen so far, with complex and feature rich MMO's released prematurely (because of financial reasons) , it is not so strange to think that it may be too expensive.
As long as such a MMO as the OP wants isnt released, his question remains unanswered.
Lol. Whatever, mate.
He was questioning whether making AAA sandbox MMORPG's would be too expensive: here we have 2 companies who are in the process right now of developing AAA sandbox MMO's.
He didn't ask whether creating a successful AAA sandbox MMO's was too expensive.
So, AAA sandbox titles are on the way, 2 of them: how successful they'll be we'll see at their launch.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Personally, I think that aspiring minor league developers should focus on apps - small games that can be interlinked. Rather than start with a map and populate it, create one minigame system that's fun on its own with some hooks that can be fleshed out as connected minigames. Let your world grow from those nuggets.
(that said, I spend far too much time daydreaming and not enough actually doing anything)
That and nobody knows what CCP is going to do with WoD. It could be a 2D sidescroller for all anyone knows. People have already inserted their own interpretation of what they want WoD to be, with no information from CCP.
A Triple-A sandbox could be very successful if well done. It's the "well done" part that's tricky. I don't think a pure sandbox would attract as many people as a hybrid, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be very successful.
There are some things inherent in a pure sandbox that would work against the wide appeal.
* Virtual Worlds for most people are boring. If they were going to take off, they would have taken off in the 90's when all the tools for creating them were being pushed out to developers. They didn't. If people wanted to walk long distances to do something, they'd walk to the grocery store. You don't even get endorphins pumping for your virtual walking, so it's even more boring. Notice I said, "Most People". In terms of making money, the Game aspect makes more money than the Virtual World aspect of mmorpg.
* Populations need to be pretty high. A pure sandbox is almost by definition big. The bigger it is, the more people you need to make it not feel empty. You can concentrate more people into smaller areas, but then the developer has spent money on unused virtual real estate. You can make the world smaller, but then the developer is working against the pure sandbox concept. Add to this the smaller audience for a pure sandbox game (it is smaller, don't kid yourself) and it becomes harder to make the world feel populated and to feel like sandbox at the same time.
* Regarding housing, people are dumb. Individuals might be pretty smart, but populations of people are dumb. If you let them build houses just anywhere, they will and it will make a mess. If you limit the building of houses they'll complain. Either way you spread people out or separate them from each other making the world feel more empty. If the housing isn't there, it's not a sandbox. Developers can't win.
So, my point is that sandboxes can be successful (some already are), but a pure sandbox has things working against it just by being a sandbox that would work against it being AAA successful.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
It's true that they didn't reveal much about World of Darkness.
However, there's some bits of info to be found about it.
There's Gamespot stating that WoD will be a sandbox-style MMO (see here)
Also, Nathan Richardson from CCP states that they're 'a sandbox oriented company that likes to create tools for players and for the players to actually become a meaningful part of the world for the other players' (see here, quote from the video at 20:30)
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
However, there's some bits of info to be found about it.
There's Gamespot stating that WoD will be a sandbox-style MMO (see here)
Also, Nathan Richardson from CCP states that they're 'a sandbox oriented company that likes to create tools for players and for the players to actually become a meaningful part of the world for the other players' (see here, quote from the video at 20:30)
It could still be a 2D sidescrolling sandbox mmorpg. I don't think it will. I think CCP has a lot of knowledge on how to build a large scale game for lots of people to play and I'm looking forward to seeing what happens. That doesn't mean it will have mass market appeal. It doesn't mean it won't have mass market appeal either. There is a LOT that's left open to interpretation for the game and people are happily interpreting away based on what they want from the game.
You are, however, the first person who appears to have actually seen something other than a rumor on what's going on with WoD.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
You have to take into account if its successfull or not. If its successfull, even an unfinished released game will get the chance to improve in time untill it reaches the state that the OP asks for. Also it gives incentive to future investors to invest in these complex projects. What the OP asks for is more then what is currently on the market.
EVE for example only reached its current state because it was a success.
Other attempts to create a hybrid MMO like the OP asks for, had to release prematurely with way less available features because of budget limits. And because of the unfinished state didnt became a success because the players didnt want to pay to wait for the game to complete. So the developers didnt get the chance to build all those features in the game that they had in mind. In the end they didnt manage to build their MMO because it proved to be too expensive for them (or their investors).
Based on past experience there is nothing a developer can do to make us (or investors for that matter) believe that they can succeed in releasing a polished and bugfree MMO with that many complex features as the OP asks for. Not untill the first company manages to release one anyway, or at least a promising beta. So it still has to be seen if it proves to be too expensive.
'back in the day' when MMOs had considerably smaller dev team and less funds they were able to create very in depth games. The only thing that has changed really between then and now when it comes to cost is the art department best I can tell.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
If you think SWG was a Sandbox then you need to rethink. It was a quest driven game from the outset. Sure it had some sandbox elements to it but it was far from sandbox.
OP states: 'I mean, it's hard enough and expensive enough making on-rails linear themepark MMOs (SWTOR seems to be budgeted at $150m-$300m) so what chance does an AAA Sandbox have?'
The OP is taking SWTOR, an unreleased still-in-development AAA title, as an example in regards to his question if creating AAA sandboxes would be too expensive, so I don't see why I shouldn't use 2 other unreleased, still-in-development AAA sandbox titles in relation to his question.
After all, the OP is doing exactly the same, looking at MMORPG's that aren't released yet but still in development.
Anyway, this discussion is starting to enter the twilight zone of irrelevance and ridiculousness, I'm going to leave it at this. No need to keep pingpong debating over eachother's interpretation of the OP, we've read all the various arguments already.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
There is no standard architecture for mmorpgs. There are game engines, but that's all they are is engines. You have to build everything else around them. A lot of the stuff, like chat, has to be reimplemented from scratch, even though in game chat has existed forever.
On top of the no standards thing, the graphics changes take 2 to 6 times longer to develop compared to just the last generation of game engines. This is if your team is experienced with the new engine and how to get the models in there. I have no idea how much it's ballooned up since the EQ1 or Ultima days.
That doesn't mean you couldn't develop a AAA sandbox. Find the investors, hire the people and you can do it. Making it successful is a whole different thing.
* edit *
Actually, just convince investors that it could be successful and you have the money, which is the only thing between developing the game and just designing it. Like making the game successful, whether or not you are capable of seeing the project from start to finish is a whole different thing as well.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
SWG had very little quest elements in it and most of them were part of specific themeparks which were actually not that easy to find. SWG was a very broad sandbox that lacked much depth.
Im happy with my ZZZ sandbox Darkfall with beautifull world and polished game, and alot improvements with regualar patches and free expansions for this FREE FOR ALL FULL LOOT PVP MMO of GREATNESS.
And soon alot of new content that would give you wet dreams:)
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
Sounds like you weren't the target audience. I happened to absolutely love the completely open world as opposed to the mind numbingly boring lineral quest progressions MMOs have turned into lately.
The depth was made by the players of the game. I never ever lacked for content in early on SWG since all the content I enjoyed was made by exploring with friends, or creating a city with people around me or making clothes for entertainers in various cities or harvesting the best materials my army of surveyors had found for me.
Even the hard to find themeparks were more fun simply because they were hard to find. You had to put effort into rewards and player made items were better than looted items so people had reasons to interact.
I've recently started playing WoW again and made it to level 71 in 5 days and, not including guild mates, have spoken to a total of 3 people the entire time. Even in dungeon groups there's no talking other than "your DPS and items suck and you suck" type comments.
In SWG at any given moment I had people waiting for me to log in to try out new clothes or meet them in the wilds for an adventure or something. All of that has been lost by the dumbing down and mindless droning of the themepark MMO style.
I don't think it'd be more expensive to create. The issue is finding a major developer with the vision and will to risk that type of money on an MMO sub-genre that isn't seen as a moneymaker.
Thus, the sandbox has become the purview of indies, who, underfunded, are trying to tap into that existing niche.
Personally, I prefer a real virtual world and sandbox style of game, so I'll go where I can enjoy that type of gameplay. Right now, that means Mortal Online and Xsyon. No matter their problems, they give me the experience I want to play. And, that's really the point of this type of leisure activity, isn't it?
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
No offense but this is all down to you and the way you play the game. I started WoW again two weeks ago after a month and a half off. I'm still only lvl 27 and currently have 32 people on my friends list.
As for SWG. I would call it a sandbox. However I found that game to be the most boring peice of garbage I have ever played.
Venge
Well wait to get to 85 and all you get is, your Gearscore is too low, and your dps suck.
Just copy UO (without full PVP for the new carebear generation) how difficult can it be?
Oh wait, someone decided that sandboxes don't sell
Wait until Bethesda makes Morrowind Online................then we talk about it
Right. You just happen to make 32 new friends and you're not even lvl 27 and this all in 2 weeks? Sounds a bit unbelievable, mate. Unless those friends are from playing WoW months to years, or you just added everyone who spoke more than 2 friendly sentences to you
No offense meant, mate, I just find it hard to believe, but who knows, you might just be the exception to the rule instead of 'add friend'-trigger happy.
As for community and MMORPG's, it depends upon the persons themselves, but some MMORPG's lean themselves better for a thriving community than others, the way the gameplay design is and what kind of behaviour it stimulates and encourages.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Meeting nice people is not difficult, it's pretty darn easy. You just talk with people, thats it. Every place you go to, in general chat, with people running the quests around you, pretty darn easy. I would say 32 people is a snap, anyone who actually put effort in meeting people could meet hundreds. I'm not the exception to the rule, I'm just an average joe.
Gameplay may, and I stress may, cause one type of behaviour to be dominant but that is so flimsy. In hardcore fffa games that people think are full of asshats and gankers, people on these boards talk about the great friends and community, in the most solo game of all Istaria, people talk about great community and sharing, and great rp.
Asshats, gankers, griefers, and great people are in all communities bar none.
Great people are easy to find.
Venge
Venge
Oh, I agree fully to that.
You'll find asshats, idiots and good, great people in crime infested ghettos as well as in a cosy suburb or a university campus.
That doesn't mean that there isn't a different emerging behaviour, or different community identity, in each of those locations, with more crime and vice in one location compared to others.
Same with server types, MMORPG's, and emerging behaviour on those.
Or to put it extreme in black and white: some MMORPG's and servers are more like a ghetto and some are more like a suburb or holiday resort.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Why, last time I was playing an 'MMORPG', I went out of my way to explain how I used to play real games, that were really fun, not like these crap XBox-Kiddy console games masquerading as MMORPGs that you get nowadays, and how if these people were playing the sort of real games I used to play, they most certainly wouldn't be able to continue playing the pile of crap they were playing right now, and maybe they could stop being such carebear noobs.
They were incredibly rude to me in response, and kept telling me to 'Go play those old games if they're so great', when I was really looking out for them and trying to impart some of my MMO veteran wisdom to them.
Haha Meowhead.