This is one of the few articles on this site that I have to agree with. TOR is the natural evolution of what the masses of todays MMORPG player wants. It might not be what I want or what you want but money is the key here.
WoW changed the industry to what it is today and I do believe that TOR will change the industry of tomorrow. For better or worse.
It really is simple to figure out. If it was a sandbox game that had 12 mil subs then TOR would have been a sandbox. The masses of mmo players just do not want to play a sandbox game. I dont really believe it would matter if the sandbox was polished or not.
The people who scream for sand box games on this forum and others are sadly the minority. Because of this there will probably never be a high budget AAA sandbox. It just isnt going to happen. Our only hope is that a competent small developer will be happy with much much smaller sub numbers and make something worth while and that the people who want this kind of game are patient enough to play and pay through the bugs, exploits, ..etc.
As far as TOR being a success or not only time will tell. I have to believe though being one of the most recognizable IP's in the world and having themepark game play pretty much secures this games spot as a heavy hitter with some crazy sub numbers. Just my opinion of course.
So in short, no. TOR will not be for everyone, its going to be a game for the Star Wars fan, that wants to live out those childhoood movie fantasies.
unless you wanted to be a hotshot fighter pilot or some badass smuggler who wanted to fly your own starship. The one glaring blemish on SWTOR's design is that *&(#@ing rail shooter.
But if you wanted to be a jedi (without being able to slice off people's limbs), you should be just fine in swtor.
Now if you all saw this from any of us in here,any,you could have said 'what a troll'..How much worse could it be when someone working (he gets payed for this,salaries mean money,money means motive,yes even in here) in this site writes it? I'd say its big bad mojo trolling..cause in this case,they have a profit behind their reasoning. Why do i bother? Good point..except 3 years ago,we had something called Gamespot. Before it became the commercial pimp it is today. That's why. MAybe the first,but doesn't mean the last..You may flame me away now for being so critical of MMORPG's intentions here. I wish you well.
Yup. You've got me. Every single positive thing that is ever said on this site is actually done for cash. In reality we're all hate mongers who don't even really like games. In fact, we sit around our Tuscan Villa (bought by all of our awesome ill gotten gains) and do nothing but talk about how crappy games are.
I remember when I heard about that Gamestop incident and thought to myself: Man, I'd like to swim in a vault of money like Scrooge McDuck, so to hell with my eithical and standards. to hell with my long term career, I'm going to write only paid articles for awesomeness from now on.
I just love living in a world where a person can't say a positive thing about anything without being accused of doing it for money. I love that people honestly think that myself and my profession are that shallow. It's awesome. Don't make me feel horrible at all.
Good thing I sold my principles long ago. Off to my money bin.
A well deserved reply.
I think it is indeed ridiculous to be so suspecting. Still, if I am allowed: every time I use that kind of irony my posts are deleted and I get a warning for trolling. Just saying.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
sry this article is complete BS. What about UO and SWG (pre nge) etc. Also sandbox games are ten times more complex to make, because of course making the game more complex. Everyone can make non-laggy "polished" themepark, well, because everywhere are boundaries and limitations and what a fraction of independece is given to player is only an illusion.
Those examples are IMVPO bad ones.
UO was an experimental game throughout the first years. If you listen to Lord British's interviews you know this. UO wasn't the result of genius planning, it was simply because back then they had no clue! They didn't know heck and more stumbled along the process. The deveoplers of UO admitted that themselves many times how much of a mess UO was for the first years.
SWG wasn't much different. Pre-CU combat was a disaster, totally imbalanced, and SWG was a shell of a game that only lived because it was STAR WARS and people used to be WAAAAY more generous and forgiving than these days. It took a year until most features were in the game, and NO ONE these days would wait that long!
Sorry but you just see the past through pink glasses.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
I disagree with this article saying that players are to blame for lack of sand-box games. The issue is that themepark MMOs are much easier to develop than a good sand-box. Furthermore, sand-box MMOs have failed because they usually have FFA PvP, which is a niche market. Other PvP games have failed because of imbalances in classes between factions and imbalances in population between factions. This has led to developers shifting towards PvE storytelling that is upcoming in Star Wars.
What people want is a sand-box game that isn't FFA PvP, has 3+ factions to balance out population issues in consentual PvP areas and nearly identical classes for each faction to eliminate class imbalances. The only company currently developing a game close to this is GW2, whereby 1 server fights 2 other servers in open-world PvP zones. I would suggest that the future of MMO development is either going to be if Star Wars can maintain a solid player population 1 year after launch or can Guild Wars 2. I'm sure Star Wars will sell a lot of boxes, but I question the replayability of a game that is story based. Furthermore, I have no idea how in the world PvP could possibly be balanced in Star Wars when you have force using players potentially fighting non-force using players. Finally, the scoundrel is the healing class in Star Wars???? Strange things going on at Bioware.
Originally posted by SBE1 I disagree with this article saying that players are to blame for lack of sand-box games. The issue is that themepark MMOs are much easier to develop than a good sand-box. Furthermore, sand-box MMOs have failed because they usually have FFA PvP, which is a niche market. Other PvP games have failed because of imbalances in classes between factions and imbalances in population between factions. This has led to developers shifting towards PvE storytelling that is upcoming in Star Wars. What people want is a sand-box game that isn't FFA PvP, has 3+ factions to balance out population issues in consentual PvP areas and nearly identical classes for each faction to eliminate class imbalances. The only company currently developing a game close to this is GW2, whereby 1 server fights 2 other servers in open-world PvP zones. I would suggest that the future of MMO development is either going to be if Star Wars can maintain a solid player population 1 year after launch or can Guild Wars 2. I'm sure Star Wars will sell a lot of boxes, but I question the replayability of a game that is story based. Furthermore, I have no idea how in the world PvP could possibly be balanced in Star Wars when you have force using players potentially fighting non-force using players. Finally, the scoundrel is the healing class in Star Wars???? Strange things going on at Bioware.
I agree to some points and disagree to others bcs of the monolithic approach. Anything right with saying that sandboxes do not fail bcs they be sandboxes but also heavily for other reasons. Though the absence of any story doesnt make it a good game but a game that lacks history, reason, motivation, foundation of things as even in a sandbox you dont start as the first ever human beeing. Imho a real virtual world approach offers many different experiences including a rich lore that is told by the game itself in form of epic storyarcs that offer quest adventures, be it pve or be it pvp.
The big fault is to force people to do something they do not like and therefor close out potential customers instead of enrich the game with all the different aspects. Concentration on a single aspect only works if there be very limited ressources and the very niche for your new mmo is unoccupied. Well its a big mountain of work but done right it will pay off to offer a good mmorpg that contains features of both worlds puzzled together into an appealing big picture. But you have to hit the window of oportunity and it does not open every time but once on five years maybe.
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
I disagree with this article saying that players are to blame for lack of sand-box games. The issue is that themepark MMOs are much easier to develop than a good sand-box. Furthermore, sand-box MMOs have failed because they usually have FFA PvP, which is a niche market. Other PvP games have failed because of imbalances in classes between factions and imbalances in population between factions. This has led to developers shifting towards PvE storytelling that is upcoming in Star Wars.
What people want is a sand-box game that isn't FFA PvP, has 3+ factions to balance out population issues in consentual PvP areas and nearly identical classes for each faction to eliminate class imbalances. The only company currently developing a game close to this is GW2, whereby 1 server fights 2 other servers in open-world PvP zones. I would suggest that the future of MMO development is either going to be if Star Wars can maintain a solid player population 1 year after launch or can Guild Wars 2. I'm sure Star Wars will sell a lot of boxes, but I question the replayability of a game that is story based. Furthermore, I have no idea how in the world PvP could possibly be balanced in Star Wars when you have force using players potentially fighting non-force using players. Finally, the scoundrel is the healing class in Star Wars???? Strange things going on at Bioware.
Story is an additional pillar. The story doesn't remove anything from a normal MMO. Replayability will be no less, if not more than current MMO's as well as upcoming MMO's. (I say it may have more simply due to the fact each class has an entirely different story and the amount of choices that can completely change the outcome)
World PvP can be easily balanced between force users and non-force users.
Scoundrel is not THE healing class, I believe Smuggler, Consular and maybe trooper have healing spec's (for the republic). I also don't understand why exactly the Scoundrel being a healer is something to complain about. Pretty sure medical supplies and equipment are often smuggled in Star Wars.
The only problem with sandbox games is that they aren't developed with AAA budgets. If anything, sandbox games are far more fun to just start out in because they are ripe with untapped opportunity.
If, for instance, Blizzard developed a sandbox game and dumped hundred million into it, then that game would be extremely successful regardless of the fact that its a sandbox. It's all about the money Lebowski.
The only reason themepark titles are prevalent is because Blizzard created a highly polished, quality, theme-park MMO... and because everyone is trying to copy it.
It's all about the quality of the product, not whether its a themepark or a sandbox. And quality usually requires a lot of money.
Eve is successful... not because its some sort of crazy anomaly amongst sandbox MMOs, but because its a polished, deep, well thought out, well designed game.
Games like Darkfall, Mortal Online, etc are not doing exceptionally well because they are low budget products with lots of design flaws. That's all there is to it.
Read this, and read it again Jon Wood. Read it it so much that it shows up in your dreams at night. This is the reason why there aren't any QUALITY sandbox games about or in production these days. If a company sank $100 million into a sandbox effort and polished it to the "d" as Trion did with Rift, you'd have a game that would do just as well or better than 95% of the "efforts" being made today.
But, neither you nor anyone on this site can name a sandbox MMO that has seen HALF of that investment amount put into it and worked on by a veteran team after 2004. Sure, we've seen half-baked attempts by a few companies whose only reason for making a sanbox attempt was that none of the big, budget capable AAA companies is doing it.
It's not as though I'm ignorant of the argument. It's just way too simplistic an argument to make. Of course the games would be better if they were better funded.
Here's the tough reality though:
No one is going to put that much money into developing a sandbox when sandboxes have, on the whole, been unsuccessful and not supported even by the players who claim to want them. We can flail our arms and jump up and down all we want and say we want it, but the fact and the statistics (which are what game companies actually pay attention to).
The article makes two very specific points:
First: No major investment is going to be made into a sandbox MMO unless the folks with the cash see that people will actually play them. and support them.
Second: Sandboxes, by their nautre, have to start small in order to properly grow to fit their audience. They can't just "spring forth" completely "finished".
The vicious circle is that any studio looking to make a sandbox, because they aren't going to have the large investment that comes with a theme park, is going to be forced to have a smaller development team and a shorter development cycle. It's simple business. As a result, the games that they're working on are smaller in scope and generally more buggy. In turn, players won't support it and the cycle begins again.
Look, you can hate on me all you want for saying it, but that doesn't make it any less true. It's not like Activision or EA is suddenly going to wake up one morning and go: Let's dump a bunch of money into a huge risk. That's not how ig companies with a lot of money work.
I want a good sandbox as much as anybody. It's what attracted me to MMOs in the first place. That said, I don't have blinders on as to hw the industry works and moves. Sometimes the truth sucks.
The only problem with sandbox games is that they aren't developed with AAA budgets. If anything, sandbox games are far more fun to just start out in because they are ripe with untapped opportunity.
If, for instance, Blizzard developed a sandbox game and dumped hundred million into it, then that game would be extremely successful regardless of the fact that its a sandbox. It's all about the money Lebowski.
The only reason themepark titles are prevalent is because Blizzard created a highly polished, quality, theme-park MMO... and because everyone is trying to copy it.
It's all about the quality of the product, not whether its a themepark or a sandbox. And quality usually requires a lot of money.
Eve is successful... not because its some sort of crazy anomaly amongst sandbox MMOs, but because its a polished, deep, well thought out, well designed game.
Games like Darkfall, Mortal Online, etc are not doing exceptionally well because they are low budget products with lots of design flaws. That's all there is to it.
Read this, and read it again Jon Wood. Read it it so much that it shows up in your dreams at night. This is the reason why there aren't any QUALITY sandbox games about or in production these days. If a company sank $100 million into a sandbox effort and polished it to the "d" as Trion did with Rift, you'd have a game that would do just as well or better than 95% of the "efforts" being made today.
But, neither you nor anyone on this site can name a sandbox MMO that has seen HALF of that investment amount put into it and worked on by a veteran team after 2004. Sure, we've seen half-baked attempts by a few companies whose only reason for making a sanbox attempt was that none of the big, budget capable AAA companies is doing it.
It's not as though I'm ignorant of the argument. It's just way too simplistic an argument to make. Of course the games would be better if they were better funded.
Here's the tough reality though:
No one is going to put that much money into developing a sandbox when sandboxes have, on the whole, been unsuccessful and not supported even by the players who claim to want them. We can flail our arms and jump up and down all we want and say we want it, but the fact and the statistics (which are what game companies actually pay attention to).
The article makes two very specific points:
First: No major investment is going to be made into a sandbox MMO unless the folks with the cash see that people will actually play them. and support them.
Second: Sandboxes, by their nautre, have to start small in order to properly grow to fit their audience. They can't just "spring forth" completely "finished".
The vicious circle is that any studio looking to make a sandbox, because they aren't going to have the large investment that comes with a theme park, is going to be forced to have a smaller development team and a shorter development cycle. It's simple business. As a result, the games that they're working on are smaller in scope and generally more buggy. In turn, players won't support it and the cycle begins again.
Look, you can hate on me all you want for saying it, but that doesn't make it any less true. It's not like Activision or EA is suddenly going to wake up one morning and go: Let's dump a bunch of money into a huge risk. That's not how ig companies with a lot of money work.
I want a good sandbox as much as anybody. It's what attracted me to MMOs in the first place. That said, I don't have blinders on as to hw the industry works and moves. Sometimes the truth sucks.
Yes your "argument" is much more detailed and complex /rolleyes. All mmo's start small and grow to fit their audience, it isnt just sandbox games. Im sorry but it isnt too much to expect mmo's large or small to release cleanly, its been done before by companies large and small.
You're semi correct when you say there wont be a major investment into a sandbox mmo but it has nothing to do with the success or failure of swtor. There wont be a major investment into a sandbox game until the market proves there is a audience to support one.
The only problem with sandbox games is that they aren't developed with AAA budgets. If anything, sandbox games are far more fun to just start out in because they are ripe with untapped opportunity.
If, for instance, Blizzard developed a sandbox game and dumped hundred million into it, then that game would be extremely successful regardless of the fact that its a sandbox. It's all about the money Lebowski.
The only reason themepark titles are prevalent is because Blizzard created a highly polished, quality, theme-park MMO... and because everyone is trying to copy it.
It's all about the quality of the product, not whether its a themepark or a sandbox. And quality usually requires a lot of money.
Eve is successful... not because its some sort of crazy anomaly amongst sandbox MMOs, but because its a polished, deep, well thought out, well designed game.
Games like Darkfall, Mortal Online, etc are not doing exceptionally well because they are low budget products with lots of design flaws. That's all there is to it.
Read this, and read it again Jon Wood. Read it it so much that it shows up in your dreams at night. This is the reason why there aren't any QUALITY sandbox games about or in production these days. If a company sank $100 million into a sandbox effort and polished it to the "d" as Trion did with Rift, you'd have a game that would do just as well or better than 95% of the "efforts" being made today.
But, neither you nor anyone on this site can name a sandbox MMO that has seen HALF of that investment amount put into it and worked on by a veteran team after 2004. Sure, we've seen half-baked attempts by a few companies whose only reason for making a sanbox attempt was that none of the big, budget capable AAA companies is doing it.
It's not as though I'm ignorant of the argument. It's just way too simplistic an argument to make. Of course the games would be better if they were better funded.
Here's the tough reality though:
No one is going to put that much money into developing a sandbox when sandboxes have, on the whole, been unsuccessful and not supported even by the players who claim to want them. We can flail our arms and jump up and down all we want and say we want it, but the fact and the statistics (which are what game companies actually pay attention to).
The article makes two very specific points:
First: No major investment is going to be made into a sandbox MMO unless the folks with the cash see that people will actually play them. and support them.
Second: Sandboxes, by their nautre, have to start small in order to properly grow to fit their audience. They can't just "spring forth" completely "finished".
The vicious circle is that any studio looking to make a sandbox, because they aren't going to have the large investment that comes with a theme park, is going to be forced to have a smaller development team and a shorter development cycle. It's simple business. As a result, the games that they're working on are smaller in scope and generally more buggy. In turn, players won't support it and the cycle begins again.
Look, you can hate on me all you want for saying it, but that doesn't make it any less true. It's not like Activision or EA is suddenly going to wake up one morning and go: Let's dump a bunch of money into a huge risk. That's not how ig companies with a lot of money work.
I want a good sandbox as much as anybody. It's what attracted me to MMOs in the first place. That said, I don't have blinders on as to hw the industry works and moves. Sometimes the truth sucks.
Yes your "argument" is much more detailed and complex /rolleyes. All mmo's start small and grow to fit their audience, it isnt just sandbox games. Im sorry but it isnt too much to expect mmo's large or small to release cleanly, its been done before by companies large and small.
You're semi correct when you say there wont be a major investment into a sandbox mmo but it has nothing to do with the success or failure of swtor. There wont be a major investment into a sandbox game until the market proves there is a audience to support one.
Which has everthign to do with the success or failure of SWTOR. SWTOR, if it fails, will open the door to more investment in the smaller niche games, including sandboxes.
How many unpolished and half finished , theme park MMOs made it big ?
Answer:
None
Same as sandbox , theme park , or whatever else.
Game needs to be polished and finished to suceed.
Your theory fails
L O L...all I have to say.
You think WoW was polished and finished when it launched? Day 1 you couldnt play due to the horrible rubberbanding.. And end game wasnt even in the game untill a few months down the line...it took 6 years for that game to get where it is today....no one can farely expect ANY new mmo to have the sort of polish that comes 6 years after launch.'
THAT...is why the MMO market is failing.. Consumers are stupid and their launch expectations are too high. I'm not saying the game should be beta quality, but it shouldnt be years of development quality either.
More total nonsense. Issues at launch with wow were population related, they simply werent expecting the amount of interest in their game. I played a couple months after launch with zero bugs,rubberbanding, and little lag. That game was one of the most polished games ive ever played. Hate it for the graphics or the "easy mode" or the "welfare" epics, or anything remotely resembling reality but dont try to compare its launch to bug ridden,technical disaster, incomplete games released way too early.
Launch expectations are actually way too low atm. People are way too forgiving for companies pushing crap out the door before its ready. No one expects 100% bug free but there is no excuse for games being pushed out with game crashing major bugs and with the main core elements incomplete.
Lastly, mmo's are never "finished" and simply need to release with enough content to occupy the vast majority of players untill more content is added. There will always be those that race to the end and say 'what now'?
I disagree with this article saying that players are to blame for lack of sand-box games. The issue is that themepark MMOs are much easier to develop than a good sand-box. Furthermore, sand-box MMOs have failed because they usually have FFA PvP, which is a niche market. Other PvP games have failed because of imbalances in classes between factions and imbalances in population between factions. This has led to developers shifting towards PvE storytelling that is upcoming in Star Wars.
What people want is a sand-box game that isn't FFA PvP, has 3+ factions to balance out population issues in consentual PvP areas and nearly identical classes for each faction to eliminate class imbalances. The only company currently developing a game close to this is GW2, whereby 1 server fights 2 other servers in open-world PvP zones. I would suggest that the future of MMO development is either going to be if Star Wars can maintain a solid player population 1 year after launch or can Guild Wars 2. I'm sure Star Wars will sell a lot of boxes, but I question the replayability of a game that is story based. Furthermore, I have no idea how in the world PvP could possibly be balanced in Star Wars when you have force using players potentially fighting non-force using players. Finally, the scoundrel is the healing class in Star Wars???? Strange things going on at Bioware.
Story is an additional pillar. The story doesn't remove anything from a normal MMO. Replayability will be no less, if not more than current MMO's as well as upcoming MMO's. (I say it may have more simply due to the fact each class has an entirely different story and the amount of choices that can completely change the outcome)
World PvP can be easily balanced between force users and non-force users.
Scoundrel is not THE healing class, I believe Smuggler, Consular and maybe trooper have healing spec's (for the republic). I also don't understand why exactly the Scoundrel being a healer is something to complain about. Pretty sure medical supplies and equipment are often smuggled in Star Wars.
yea the smuggler, consular, and trooper will have a healing tree in one of their advanced classes. so even if you go scoundrel, you dont have to spec healing. You can spec in the scrapper tree for a stealthy rogue type and not spec in the bonesaw tree for healing(or you can do a mix of both if you so choose). The only reason they had healing smuggler shown off at pax is they wanted show the classes differently than have been. so the consular was dps and smuggler was healing(up to that point they had been shown in the other roles). its just like how they wanted to show their new guardian single saber dps spec.
Yes your "argument" is much more detailed and complex /rolleyes. All mmo's start small and grow to fit their audience, it isnt just sandbox games. Im sorry but it isnt too much to expect mmo's large or small to release cleanly, its been done before by companies large and small.
You're semi correct when you say there wont be a major investment into a sandbox mmo but it has nothing to do with the success or failure of swtor. There wont be a major investment into a sandbox game until the market proves there is a audience to support one.
Which has everthign to do with the success or failure of SWTOR. SWTOR, if it fails, will open the door to more investment in the smaller niche games, including sandboxes.
But hey, you're welcome to your own opinion.
Then we will have to agree to disagree. Wow has already proven there is a huge pc mmo market, there is no need for more proof through swtor. Nothing in your article provides the slightest hint of proof swtor failing will be boon to niche games, sandbox or otherwise.
Lol, i think that SWTOR will have an effect on the MMO market as big as the self made SWG debacle combined with the up to that date most polished release of the at that time most anticipated Newcomer MMO from Blizzard had delivering the death blow to ambitioned sandbox games.
And how hobbyist approaches of small developers for extreme niche sandbox mmos and the social hook off having friends holding you back to move from your current mmo has let the big picture look as if there is not the smallest market for a sandbox mmo or even only sandbox elements in a themepark hybrid.
Worth to write an article about that?
PS: For Arch Age i fear the window of oportunity with all the big or interesting releases of mmos in the next few or many months (SWTOR, The Secret World, GW2, Tera?) will close for quite a time and keep even the intentionally interested player occupied with something else.
If sandbox MMORPGs is your preference then SWTOR and all those other themeparks wont keep people from playing ArcheAge. I think a bigger concern is the Asian anime style with all the weird cuteness that will turn of alot of western players.
*look a cute panda/preteen girl wielding a 10 foot sword*
How many unpolished and half finished , theme park MMOs made it big ?
Answer:
None
Same as sandbox , theme park , or whatever else.
Game needs to be polished and finished to suceed.
Your theory fails
L O L...all I have to say.
You think WoW was polished and finished when it launched? Day 1 you couldnt play due to the horrible rubberbanding.. And end game wasnt even in the game untill a few months down the line...it took 6 years for that game to get where it is today....no one can farely expect ANY new mmo to have the sort of polish that comes 6 years after launch.'
THAT...is why the MMO market is failing.. Consumers are stupid and their launch expectations are too high. I'm not saying the game should be beta quality, but it shouldnt be years of development quality either.
More total nonsense. Issues at launch with wow were population related, they simply werent expecting the amount of interest in their game. I played a couple months after launch with zero bugs,rubberbanding, and little lag. That game was one of the most polished games ive ever played. Hate it for the graphics or the "easy mode" or the "welfare" epics, or anything remotely resembling reality but dont try to compare its launch to bug ridden,technical disaster, incomplete games released way too early.
Launch expectations are actually way too low atm. People are way too forgiving for companies pushing crap out the door before its ready. No one expects 100% bug free but there is no excuse for games being pushed out with game crashing major bugs and with the main core elements incomplete.
Lastly, mmo's are never "finished" and simply need to release with enough content to occupy the vast majority of players untill more content is added. There will always be those that race to the end and say 'what now'?
Say whatever you want of WoW, I personally hate it, but at launch it was probably the most polished MMORPG I had ever played to that date.
Sure there was lag but it was due to the unexpected extreme popularity of the game, there is no way to prepare for something like that except I guess massive queues which Blizzard opted not to use until later (I think).
Blizzard are notorious for releasing high quality, relatively bug free and feature complete games and WoW was no exception.
The game will be a failure if they expect to get their money back AND have a dedicated community. There is no place for 'cinematic gameplay' in mmos, mainly because they try to offer each player the illusion that they are the protagonist in an expanding world. This is impossible to achieve in a massive multiplayer driven game. 'Cinematic' is not the thing mmos should evolve into.
Someone didn't read the artical!
I agree with everything you wrtote Jon. There's a reason WoW is the huge mega-seller hit it is today: because that is obviously what the MMO market wants.
I shake my head in amusement when people on this site complain to high heavens that there are no good sandbox MMOs out there, and then the developers at Xsyon have to beg and plead for people to play their game so they can get game testing done.
People here talk big, they love batting around ideas for the best sandbox MMO ever, they love talking about the glory days of Star Wars Galaxies, but when it comes down to it, no one is at all willing to put their money where their nmouths are.
I completely agree with this article and I am going to bookmakr it for later use.
To everyone else that seems to think differently I have to provide my reasoning behind my opinion. Companies follow the money trail. They do their research and they want the biggest bang for their buck. We can sit here and compare Eve and WoW all we want, but in the end would you rather have 300k or 12 million? Let's put it this way. Would you rather have $300,000 or $12,000,000 in your bank?
*I'm not saying these games are wortht hat much, it's just a simple ratio example.
"If you're going to act like a noob, I'll treat you like one." -Caskio
Those who complain about wanting something different don't put there money nor their support where their mouth is
Nonsence, why should i put 50 euro's in a game like MO or DF at launch? im not a producer nor investor, i pay money as a consumer and expect to be treated like one, which means they need to provide me with a good product from the start and not 6 months to 1 year down the road.
they need to put their product where their mouth is and not release something else.
You obviously don't like sandbox MMOs enough to put your money where your mouth is then.
Yep gota agree, much as I hate wow, It was more polished at launch than just about any other mmo. LoTRo was right up there with it though. The simple fact is a mmo has to have polish, diversity, and something new to survive in this market. AoC proved that pretty ain't enough, the bugs and glitches in the game at launch + total lack of content that was promissed by Funcom killed the game. I tell anyone that has issues with ToR go read the what we know about ToR sticky in the forums over at swtor.com as well as go look up darthhater and askjedi for more information. There will be a lot more in game either at launch, or right after than has been suspected by the gaming public. Guild ships for one.
Is ToR a WoW clone, no and yes. It has cloned the spirit of WoW, taking the good from every current gen game and making it better. GW= companions, AoC=the advanced class idea (my opinion coulda come from elsewhere though.) CoX= action style skill clicky combat without auto attack. LoTRo=crafting. WoW= fast travel air mounts. EvE=space salvage to upgrade your ship. Hellgate London= color mapping across your armor, allowing all peices to have the same color scheme. GW2= World mobs that show up randomly and require multiple groups to kill them.
All of that stuff is, or will be in ToR according to PaX interveiws and currently known facts.
Then they added int their own stuff. Offline missions for your companions, an advanced cover system, everyone can res out of combat. Allignment system that effects companions, skills, and even what equipment you can and can't use. Ability to apprentice certain companions if your a jedi. Ability to fight whole groups of people instead of just 1's and 2's. 200+ hour personal story, not sure if I believe this one at least for lauch devs promiss to keep adding to your personal story constantly with every content update so it will eventually be there if they really don't get it there. Voices for the player character. There is a lot that is new, maybe it's not all that on the edge but it is new.
I have to disagree with the premise that a large investment is needed to make a successful game in this genre. Large teams like they have at Bioware for this game, tend to step on each others toes a lot, duplicating effort in many areas. A smaller, well organized team, IMO would do a better job. Executives get in the wrong mind set that throwing more people at a project get it done faster, in many cases it extends the project because the organization gets too unweildy.
Not to say this won't be a great game, I just think the Bioware and EA have spent far more than they really needed to.
Too many of these studios think a great team consists of great programmers, storytellers and graphics designers, when in reality, the most important person is the one who keeps the staff organized and focused on the important things, one who understands MMO's and what satisfies people who play them.
We don't have a good sandbox because sandbox fans don't want to put crappy sandbox games on some kind of welfare program? I don't think so, but I believe you believe that.
**sounding like Forrest Gump** Momma always said don't hate something till you tried it. LIke this one time I didnt wannt to try baked spinach. Momma told me cause its different it doesnt mean it isnt any good.**accents the OO**. So I tried it and , just like that, I found me a new food that I love. Now, I could guess that its the same way with an MMO. Sure it looks different and people talk alot about it even though they've never had a play yet. But I guess people are always ready to tell someone else that nothings no good when they are so use to the same old things **accents the INGs**. Just cause this new MMO looks like baked spinach to some, doesnt mean it wont be any good. ...And thats all I got to say about that.
I respectfully disagree. The type of games released to the market aren't driven by what the market wants... they are driven by what the big Publishers and thier investors (and market researchers) PERCIEVE the market wants.
That may sound similar but in reality there is a mile of difference between the two. If those decision makers really had thier fingers on the pulse of the market...there wouldn't be so many releases with lackluster returns... we'd have alot of products rivaling WOW for market share. The fact that we don't, should tell us that alot of the decision makers out there aren't very in touch with the market.
In general, Themeparks are the route of the big publishers because A) They are actualy easier to make and The one or two early examples of games that were big successes happaned to be theme-parks..... so the lemmings tended to pile on to follow that precedent.
Note that we really have no idea how well a sandbox that had access to a AAA budget right from the get go would faire...as there have been almost no examples as such.
We do know that Themeparks that have had to release on budgets like those of most indie sandboxes, haven't seemed to fair much better then those sandboxes in general.
Thus I don't think it's really as accurate to say that the market prefers "themepark" over "sandbox" as it is to say that the market prefers products that have had enough resources sunk into them to deliver a high quality product.
Comments
This is one of the few articles on this site that I have to agree with. TOR is the natural evolution of what the masses of todays MMORPG player wants. It might not be what I want or what you want but money is the key here.
WoW changed the industry to what it is today and I do believe that TOR will change the industry of tomorrow. For better or worse.
It really is simple to figure out. If it was a sandbox game that had 12 mil subs then TOR would have been a sandbox. The masses of mmo players just do not want to play a sandbox game. I dont really believe it would matter if the sandbox was polished or not.
The people who scream for sand box games on this forum and others are sadly the minority. Because of this there will probably never be a high budget AAA sandbox. It just isnt going to happen. Our only hope is that a competent small developer will be happy with much much smaller sub numbers and make something worth while and that the people who want this kind of game are patient enough to play and pay through the bugs, exploits, ..etc.
As far as TOR being a success or not only time will tell. I have to believe though being one of the most recognizable IP's in the world and having themepark game play pretty much secures this games spot as a heavy hitter with some crazy sub numbers. Just my opinion of course.
unless you wanted to be a hotshot fighter pilot or some badass smuggler who wanted to fly your own starship. The one glaring blemish on SWTOR's design is that *&(#@ing rail shooter.
But if you wanted to be a jedi (without being able to slice off people's limbs), you should be just fine in swtor.
A well deserved reply.
I think it is indeed ridiculous to be so suspecting. Still, if I am allowed: every time I use that kind of irony my posts are deleted and I get a warning for trolling. Just saying.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Those examples are IMVPO bad ones.
UO was an experimental game throughout the first years. If you listen to Lord British's interviews you know this. UO wasn't the result of genius planning, it was simply because back then they had no clue! They didn't know heck and more stumbled along the process. The deveoplers of UO admitted that themselves many times how much of a mess UO was for the first years.
SWG wasn't much different. Pre-CU combat was a disaster, totally imbalanced, and SWG was a shell of a game that only lived because it was STAR WARS and people used to be WAAAAY more generous and forgiving than these days. It took a year until most features were in the game, and NO ONE these days would wait that long!
Sorry but you just see the past through pink glasses.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
lol....Swtor!
I disagree with this article saying that players are to blame for lack of sand-box games. The issue is that themepark MMOs are much easier to develop than a good sand-box. Furthermore, sand-box MMOs have failed because they usually have FFA PvP, which is a niche market. Other PvP games have failed because of imbalances in classes between factions and imbalances in population between factions. This has led to developers shifting towards PvE storytelling that is upcoming in Star Wars.
What people want is a sand-box game that isn't FFA PvP, has 3+ factions to balance out population issues in consentual PvP areas and nearly identical classes for each faction to eliminate class imbalances. The only company currently developing a game close to this is GW2, whereby 1 server fights 2 other servers in open-world PvP zones. I would suggest that the future of MMO development is either going to be if Star Wars can maintain a solid player population 1 year after launch or can Guild Wars 2. I'm sure Star Wars will sell a lot of boxes, but I question the replayability of a game that is story based. Furthermore, I have no idea how in the world PvP could possibly be balanced in Star Wars when you have force using players potentially fighting non-force using players. Finally, the scoundrel is the healing class in Star Wars???? Strange things going on at Bioware.
I agree to some points and disagree to others bcs of the monolithic approach.
Anything right with saying that sandboxes do not fail bcs they be sandboxes but also heavily for other reasons.
Though the absence of any story doesnt make it a good game but a game that lacks history, reason, motivation, foundation of things as even in a sandbox you dont start as the first ever human beeing.
Imho a real virtual world approach offers many different experiences including a rich lore that is told by the game itself in form of epic storyarcs that offer quest adventures, be it pve or be it pvp.
The big fault is to force people to do something they do not like and therefor close out potential customers instead of enrich the game with all the different aspects.
Concentration on a single aspect only works if there be very limited ressources and the very niche for your new mmo is unoccupied.
Well its a big mountain of work but done right it will pay off to offer a good mmorpg that contains features of both worlds puzzled together into an appealing big picture.
But you have to hit the window of oportunity and it does not open every time but once on five years maybe.
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM
Story is an additional pillar. The story doesn't remove anything from a normal MMO. Replayability will be no less, if not more than current MMO's as well as upcoming MMO's. (I say it may have more simply due to the fact each class has an entirely different story and the amount of choices that can completely change the outcome)
World PvP can be easily balanced between force users and non-force users.
Scoundrel is not THE healing class, I believe Smuggler, Consular and maybe trooper have healing spec's (for the republic). I also don't understand why exactly the Scoundrel being a healer is something to complain about. Pretty sure medical supplies and equipment are often smuggled in Star Wars.
It's not as though I'm ignorant of the argument. It's just way too simplistic an argument to make. Of course the games would be better if they were better funded.
Here's the tough reality though:
No one is going to put that much money into developing a sandbox when sandboxes have, on the whole, been unsuccessful and not supported even by the players who claim to want them. We can flail our arms and jump up and down all we want and say we want it, but the fact and the statistics (which are what game companies actually pay attention to).
The article makes two very specific points:
First: No major investment is going to be made into a sandbox MMO unless the folks with the cash see that people will actually play them. and support them.
Second: Sandboxes, by their nautre, have to start small in order to properly grow to fit their audience. They can't just "spring forth" completely "finished".
The vicious circle is that any studio looking to make a sandbox, because they aren't going to have the large investment that comes with a theme park, is going to be forced to have a smaller development team and a shorter development cycle. It's simple business. As a result, the games that they're working on are smaller in scope and generally more buggy. In turn, players won't support it and the cycle begins again.
Look, you can hate on me all you want for saying it, but that doesn't make it any less true. It's not like Activision or EA is suddenly going to wake up one morning and go: Let's dump a bunch of money into a huge risk. That's not how ig companies with a lot of money work.
I want a good sandbox as much as anybody. It's what attracted me to MMOs in the first place. That said, I don't have blinders on as to hw the industry works and moves. Sometimes the truth sucks.
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Yes your "argument" is much more detailed and complex /rolleyes. All mmo's start small and grow to fit their audience, it isnt just sandbox games. Im sorry but it isnt too much to expect mmo's large or small to release cleanly, its been done before by companies large and small.
You're semi correct when you say there wont be a major investment into a sandbox mmo but it has nothing to do with the success or failure of swtor. There wont be a major investment into a sandbox game until the market proves there is a audience to support one.
Which has everthign to do with the success or failure of SWTOR. SWTOR, if it fails, will open the door to more investment in the smaller niche games, including sandboxes.
But hey, you're welcome to your own opinion.
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
hmmm, maybe mmorpg.com can pay "me" to write an article...
Though after a while I'll have enough posts that they will legally have to give me stock in the site.
in any case "thanks"
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
More total nonsense. Issues at launch with wow were population related, they simply werent expecting the amount of interest in their game. I played a couple months after launch with zero bugs,rubberbanding, and little lag. That game was one of the most polished games ive ever played. Hate it for the graphics or the "easy mode" or the "welfare" epics, or anything remotely resembling reality but dont try to compare its launch to bug ridden,technical disaster, incomplete games released way too early.
Launch expectations are actually way too low atm. People are way too forgiving for companies pushing crap out the door before its ready. No one expects 100% bug free but there is no excuse for games being pushed out with game crashing major bugs and with the main core elements incomplete.
Lastly, mmo's are never "finished" and simply need to release with enough content to occupy the vast majority of players untill more content is added. There will always be those that race to the end and say 'what now'?
yea the smuggler, consular, and trooper will have a healing tree in one of their advanced classes. so even if you go scoundrel, you dont have to spec healing. You can spec in the scrapper tree for a stealthy rogue type and not spec in the bonesaw tree for healing(or you can do a mix of both if you so choose). The only reason they had healing smuggler shown off at pax is they wanted show the classes differently than have been. so the consular was dps and smuggler was healing(up to that point they had been shown in the other roles). its just like how they wanted to show their new guardian single saber dps spec.
Then we will have to agree to disagree. Wow has already proven there is a huge pc mmo market, there is no need for more proof through swtor. Nothing in your article provides the slightest hint of proof swtor failing will be boon to niche games, sandbox or otherwise.
If sandbox MMORPGs is your preference then SWTOR and all those other themeparks wont keep people from playing ArcheAge. I think a bigger concern is the Asian anime style with all the weird cuteness that will turn of alot of western players.
*look a cute panda/preteen girl wielding a 10 foot sword*
My gaming blog
Say whatever you want of WoW, I personally hate it, but at launch it was probably the most polished MMORPG I had ever played to that date.
Sure there was lag but it was due to the unexpected extreme popularity of the game, there is no way to prepare for something like that except I guess massive queues which Blizzard opted not to use until later (I think).
Blizzard are notorious for releasing high quality, relatively bug free and feature complete games and WoW was no exception.
My gaming blog
Someone didn't read the artical!
I agree with everything you wrtote Jon. There's a reason WoW is the huge mega-seller hit it is today: because that is obviously what the MMO market wants.
I shake my head in amusement when people on this site complain to high heavens that there are no good sandbox MMOs out there, and then the developers at Xsyon have to beg and plead for people to play their game so they can get game testing done.
People here talk big, they love batting around ideas for the best sandbox MMO ever, they love talking about the glory days of Star Wars Galaxies, but when it comes down to it, no one is at all willing to put their money where their nmouths are.
I completely agree with this article and I am going to bookmakr it for later use.
To everyone else that seems to think differently I have to provide my reasoning behind my opinion. Companies follow the money trail. They do their research and they want the biggest bang for their buck. We can sit here and compare Eve and WoW all we want, but in the end would you rather have 300k or 12 million? Let's put it this way. Would you rather have $300,000 or $12,000,000 in your bank?
*I'm not saying these games are wortht hat much, it's just a simple ratio example.
"If you're going to act like a noob, I'll treat you like one." -Caskio
Adventurers wear fancy pants!!!
You obviously don't like sandbox MMOs enough to put your money where your mouth is then.
Yep gota agree, much as I hate wow, It was more polished at launch than just about any other mmo. LoTRo was right up there with it though. The simple fact is a mmo has to have polish, diversity, and something new to survive in this market. AoC proved that pretty ain't enough, the bugs and glitches in the game at launch + total lack of content that was promissed by Funcom killed the game. I tell anyone that has issues with ToR go read the what we know about ToR sticky in the forums over at swtor.com as well as go look up darthhater and askjedi for more information. There will be a lot more in game either at launch, or right after than has been suspected by the gaming public. Guild ships for one.
Is ToR a WoW clone, no and yes. It has cloned the spirit of WoW, taking the good from every current gen game and making it better. GW= companions, AoC=the advanced class idea (my opinion coulda come from elsewhere though.) CoX= action style skill clicky combat without auto attack. LoTRo=crafting. WoW= fast travel air mounts. EvE=space salvage to upgrade your ship. Hellgate London= color mapping across your armor, allowing all peices to have the same color scheme. GW2= World mobs that show up randomly and require multiple groups to kill them.
All of that stuff is, or will be in ToR according to PaX interveiws and currently known facts.
Then they added int their own stuff. Offline missions for your companions, an advanced cover system, everyone can res out of combat. Allignment system that effects companions, skills, and even what equipment you can and can't use. Ability to apprentice certain companions if your a jedi. Ability to fight whole groups of people instead of just 1's and 2's. 200+ hour personal story, not sure if I believe this one at least for lauch devs promiss to keep adding to your personal story constantly with every content update so it will eventually be there if they really don't get it there. Voices for the player character. There is a lot that is new, maybe it's not all that on the edge but it is new.
I have to disagree with the premise that a large investment is needed to make a successful game in this genre. Large teams like they have at Bioware for this game, tend to step on each others toes a lot, duplicating effort in many areas. A smaller, well organized team, IMO would do a better job. Executives get in the wrong mind set that throwing more people at a project get it done faster, in many cases it extends the project because the organization gets too unweildy.
Not to say this won't be a great game, I just think the Bioware and EA have spent far more than they really needed to.
Too many of these studios think a great team consists of great programmers, storytellers and graphics designers, when in reality, the most important person is the one who keeps the staff organized and focused on the important things, one who understands MMO's and what satisfies people who play them.
We don't have a good sandbox because sandbox fans don't want to put crappy sandbox games on some kind of welfare program? I don't think so, but I believe you believe that.
**sounding like Forrest Gump** Momma always said don't hate something till you tried it. LIke this one time I didnt wannt to try baked spinach. Momma told me cause its different it doesnt mean it isnt any good.**accents the OO**. So I tried it and , just like that, I found me a new food that I love. Now, I could guess that its the same way with an MMO. Sure it looks different and people talk alot about it even though they've never had a play yet. But I guess people are always ready to tell someone else that nothings no good when they are so use to the same old things **accents the INGs**. Just cause this new MMO looks like baked spinach to some, doesnt mean it wont be any good. ...And thats all I got to say about that.
I respectfully disagree. The type of games released to the market aren't driven by what the market wants... they are driven by what the big Publishers and thier investors (and market researchers) PERCIEVE the market wants.
That may sound similar but in reality there is a mile of difference between the two. If those decision makers really had thier fingers on the pulse of the market...there wouldn't be so many releases with lackluster returns... we'd have alot of products rivaling WOW for market share. The fact that we don't, should tell us that alot of the decision makers out there aren't very in touch with the market.
In general, Themeparks are the route of the big publishers because A) They are actualy easier to make and
The one or two early examples of games that were big successes happaned to be theme-parks..... so the lemmings tended to pile on to follow that precedent.
Note that we really have no idea how well a sandbox that had access to a AAA budget right from the get go would faire...as there have been almost no examples as such.
We do know that Themeparks that have had to release on budgets like those of most indie sandboxes, haven't seemed to fair much better then those sandboxes in general.
Thus I don't think it's really as accurate to say that the market prefers "themepark" over "sandbox" as it is to say that the market prefers products that have had enough resources sunk into them to deliver a high quality product.