To understand why there is so much "hate" for linear MMOs, you must first understand why there is so much love for non-linear MMOs.
I point you to Skyrim and it's rave success to get some idea as to why many gamers prefer open gameplay in an expansive game world.
Skyrim is not a MMO though and we already have many open world MMOS on market. For so much love for these type of games how come some of these MMOS have been resrructed twice and others are on life support with exception of EVE? i wouldn't make up my mind about hate or love on basis of these forums. What people say here and reality are completely opposite.
Things aren't that simple though. If darkfall and MO were run by capable developers like bethesda, they would be extremely more popular. Those two were some of the most hyped mmo's at one point, but when they came out, they were buggy and incomplete, and the companies developing them couldn't handle the game/ deliver expectations.
To say that they failed because they're open world and non-linear is silly, because thats the only reason those games got any attention in the first place.
I agree with your point about it not being quite that simple. However, if Darkfall were developed by a company like Bethesda, it wouldn't in any way resemble a game like Skyrim aside from the open world aspect. That kind of immersive experience cannot be duplicated in an mmorpg. Some aspects of it can, but for the most part the game wouldn't even remotely resemble Skyrim.
Sorry but you can not have your cake and eat it to. First people want an open world MMO when they are pointed to it well it isn't *AAA' enough for them. Like i said for so much love for open world MMO like previous poster mentioned few players actually put their money where their mouth is. In my opinion there isn't enough love after all for these kind of MMOS that is why companies are scared to make any investment.
When open world sandbox MMOS made by small companies are having such a hard time who is fool enough to sink millions into a AAA project?
Why would a company not risk it? Because they don't need to. They already have model that works, and that's wow. It's obvious that I'm not going to change your mind, but I'm not "having my cake and eating it too". It's common sense. If a game barely functions, people won't play it. It has nothign to do with open worldness.
I am using my common sense and told you clearly that unless there is demand for such MMOS no company will be foolish enough to sink millions into a AAA project. I played Darkfall and Fallen Earth, even though not a pure sandbox it is quite an open world game. Runs great and is polished and stable. Even that game had to find new company to support themselves as the old one ran out of money due to low player reponse.
So sorry i am not buying this lack of polish and barely function excuses.
Did you play them at release? Did you play darkfall for more than a month? Because if you did, you'd also found out that macroing and exploiting runs rampant in darkfall. And that it's also one of the grindiest games on the market. Or maybe that it's a ffa full loot mmo? None of those things could have effected it right?
Fallen earth is also not a sandbox, and it has terrible combat. The world isn't as simple as your painting it out to be, and theres really no point in trying to prove this to you.
There is a demand for sandbox mmo's, but theres such a thing as oppurtunity cost, and a business would rather invest in themepark games.
And themepark MMOS do not suffer from these problems? except for Lotro and Rift what other themepark MMOS had a great launch since WOW. Even though WOW's launch is also highly debatable. Macroing and exploiting is something which is not exclusive to sandbox games.
And yeah just like the response i was expecting from you regarding FE. The moment a stable open world MMO is mentioned it is shot down. Also please read i clearly mentioned that FE is not a sandbox but quite an open world MMO. it isnot linear or funnel you into specific path.
Sadly the only good open world MMO that exists is in your head so nothing ever is going to be good enough. The day demand for sandbox raches same heights of themepark MMOS we wouldn't even have to argue because an open world MMO would be ready to release.
To understand why there is so much "hate" for linear MMOs, you must first understand why there is so much love for non-linear MMOs.
I point you to Skyrim and it's rave success to get some idea as to why many gamers prefer open gameplay in an expansive game world.
Skyrim is not a MMO though and we already have many open world MMOS on market. For so much love for these type of games how come some of these MMOS have been resrructed twice and others are on life support with exception of EVE? i wouldn't make up my mind about hate or love on basis of these forums. What people say here and reality are completely opposite.
That's a very narrow minded way of thinking. I'd attribute a lack of quality and polish as the primordial reason of why most of those "open world MMOs" are not successful; not the fact that they are open. To say that being open is the cause of failure for those games is to not think things through and base your observation purely on speculation from your part.
Sorry dude but post to which i replied was also based on pure speculation. So i have all the right to base my reply on speculation too.
Well you are right about one thing.
"What people say here and reality are completely opposite."
After having just said, "... we already have many open world MMOS on market."
Woops.
Ryzom
Perpetum
Fallen Earth
Mortal Online
Darkfall
UO (still up and running)
Runescape
Eve Online
Xyson
Anarchy Online
Earthrise
Dawntide
All these just top of my head without thinking. Maybe you dislike these game for various reasons but don't tell m you don't have pool to choose from.
Craft of gods
Okay, now take away all the games on that list that aren't sandbox, weren't developed nearly a decade ago, are not in beta, have an actual active population, and are fully functional, and what choices do you have left? 5 or so games. Definitely not my definition of "many".
To understand why there is so much "hate" for linear MMOs, you must first understand why there is so much love for non-linear MMOs.
I point you to Skyrim and it's rave success to get some idea as to why many gamers prefer open gameplay in an expansive game world.
Skyrim is not a MMO though and we already have many open world MMOS on market. For so much love for these type of games how come some of these MMOS have been resrructed twice and others are on life support with exception of EVE? i wouldn't make up my mind about hate or love on basis of these forums. What people say here and reality are completely opposite.
That's a very narrow minded way of thinking. I'd attribute a lack of quality and polish as the primordial reason of why most of those "open world MMOs" are not successful; not the fact that they are open. To say that being open is the cause of failure for those games is to not think things through and base your observation purely on speculation from your part.
Sorry dude but post to which i replied was also based on pure speculation. So i have all the right to base my reply on speculation too.
Well you are right about one thing.
"What people say here and reality are completely opposite."
After having just said, "... we already have many open world MMOS on market."
Woops.
Ryzom
Perpetum
Fallen Earth
Mortal Online
Darkfall
UO (still up and running)
Runescape
Eve Online
Xyson
Anarchy Online
Earthrise
Dawntide
All these just top of my head without thinking. Maybe you dislike these game for various reasons but don't tell m you don't have pool to choose from.
Craft of gods
Okay, now take away all the games on that list that aren't sandbox, weren't developed nearly a decade ago, are not in beta, have an actual active population, and are fully functional, and what choices do you have left? 5 or so games. Definitely not my definition of "many".
Sorry it is getting hard to keep up with different stances in every reply. i thought we were talking about open world MMOS similar to Skyrim and not just typical Sandbox MMOS?
Sorry but you can not have your cake and eat it to. First people want an open world MMO when they are pointed to it well it isn't *AAA' enough for them. Like i said for so much love for open world MMO like previous poster mentioned few players actually put their money where their mouth is. In my opinion there isn't enough love after all for these kind of MMOS that is why companies are scared to make any investment.
When open world sandbox MMOS made by small companies are having such a hard time who is fool enough to sink millions into a AAA project?
Why would a company not risk it? Because they don't need to. They already have model that works, and that's wow. It's obvious that I'm not going to change your mind, but I'm not "having my cake and eating it too". It's common sense. If a game barely functions, people won't play it. It has nothign to do with open worldness.
I am using my common sense and told you clearly that unless there is demand for such MMOS no company will be foolish enough to sink millions into a AAA project. I played Darkfall and Fallen Earth, even though not a pure sandbox it is quite an open world game. Runs great and is polished and stable. Even that game had to find new company to support themselves as the old one ran out of money due to low player reponse.
So sorry i am not buying this lack of polish and barely function excuses.
Did you play them at release? Did you play darkfall for more than a month? Because if you did, you'd also found out that macroing and exploiting runs rampant in darkfall. And that it's also one of the grindiest games on the market. Or maybe that it's a ffa full loot mmo? None of those things could have effected it right?
Fallen earth is also not a sandbox, and it has terrible combat. The world isn't as simple as your painting it out to be, and theres really no point in trying to prove this to you.
There is a demand for sandbox mmo's, but theres such a thing as oppurtunity cost, and a business would rather invest in themepark games.
And themepark MMOS do not suffer from these problems? except for Lotro and Rift what other themepark MMOS had a great launch since WOW. Even though WOW's launch is also highly debatable. Macroing and exploiting is something which is not exclusive to sandbox games.
And yeah just like the response i was expecting from you regarding FE. The moment a stable open world MMO is mentioned it is shot down. Also please read i clearly mentioned that FE is not a sandbox but quite an open world MMO. it isnot linear or funnel you into specific path.
Sadly the only good open world MMO that exists is in your head so nothing ever is going to be good enough. The day demand for sandbox raches same heights of themepark MMOS we wouldn't even have to argue because an open world MMO would be ready to release.
You really don't understand. I'm trying to explain to you that the world isn't black and white. FE is open world, but the game also has a very bad combat system, and was one of the biggest complaints with the game. That effects a games success.
It's simple, these games aren't unpopular because they are open world. They have other problems. Read the post carefully.
8 different stories... only problem is you have to start all over again from the beginning in order to do it.. but wait.. 4 of those choices are just different flavours of jedi etc..
Of course you have to start all over to do it, but unlike other MMOs, the experience won't be the same exact experience every time due to the difference in class quests and the ability to choose the way your quests evolve in many cases. How can someone with an ounce of intelligence see this as a bad thing? Is it Single Player RPG replayability? No, of course not, but it's the best any mmorpg has to offer.
And your point about 4 of the 8 choices just being different flavors of jedi is absolutely, 100% incorrect in every way possible. All 8 class quest lines are different. All 8 classes will offer a different levelling experience. Not to mention the fact that once you are off the first couple of planets, there is a lot of overlap in terms of levels for the contested planets, meaning you don't have to always go to the same planets in the same order to level up in this game.
The misinformation that gets spouted about this game from people who have done a minimum of research on it is mind-numbing.
I have no problem with linear content but I don't like constricted playfields. It doesn't bother me if I am supposed to go to this zone after that zone but I would like those zones to be explorable and have secrets. SWTOR seemed a little tight but I hope it gets better past the newb zones. There was some exploring to be done in the beginning (hidden holocrons mostly) and I hope that eventually the planets are full sized explorable worlds. The thing that I really didn't like is that every square inch was used for some sort of quest mob. RIFT did this as well and I'm just not a fan of it.
My current toon is mid 30's republic and the maps open up some when you get to Tat and Alderan or however you spell it. The lower level planets have a more confined feel to them. But that being said it is stll all about following the line man.
Personally I prefer a less structured enviroment but that does not sell well with the masses.
This is a fallacy. The truth is, there haven't been any sandbox games with a big budget and high production values because the game developers have been focused on WoW's success as a theme park for the past 6 years or so. The few sandbox games that have come out, such as Xsyon failed because the indy developers just don't have the resources to build an MMO sandbox or themepark. Xsyon actually has a lot of interesting potential, but it lacks a much bigger and better budget to realize them. Developers are mostly owned by corporate suits now, and all they care about is the bottom line. Some of these new MMO's even seem to be designed to make a profit in box sales, and then screw the long term goals as long as they make a profit in the short term. That is corporate ideology.
Just because corporate suits have opted to take the seemingly safer route to profits does not mean no one wants a sandbox or a hybrid. EVE has been growing over the years, and has a solid, profitable niche. If it was a more traditional MMO (on the ground) it probably would be much larger.
I came to the MMO genre from years of hardcore FPS clan match games. I had no idea how much I would get sucked into the virtual world concept, flawed as it may have been, of Star Wars Galaxies. If you had told me while I was playing Quake and Tribes that I would LOVE running a weaponsmith shop, or becoming a contract resource game hunter for crafters, or contributing to politics in a player-city, or making virtual food and drugs to sell, I would have laughed at you while I fragged you 50 times in a row. I simply had no idea until I tried it.
This is why I believe there are more people out there who would enjoy an open world/virtual world MMO experience if they had a high quality game to try out. Those who say "no one wants them" or "they don't sell well" are simply wrong. There is no data to prove that statement. What we do know for a fact, is that a large percentage of the people who have played the older sandbox games such as SWG look back on it as their richest gaming experience to date. I think we should wait until someone has the balls to make one before we pass judgement on the design concept of a sandbox.
A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.
Okay, now take away all the games on that list that aren't sandbox, weren't developed nearly a decade ago, are not in beta, have an actual active population, and are fully functional, and what choices do you have left? 5 or so games. Definitely not my definition of "many".
Sorry it is getting hard to keep up with different stances in every reply. i thought we were talking about open world MMOS similar to Skyrim and not just typical Sandbox MMOS?
Okay keep them, does it really change the point at all? You gathered a list with half the games in beta, ten years old, or incomplete/barely working. It's no change in stance.
You really don't understand. I'm trying to explain to you that the world isn't black and white. FE is open world, but the game also has a very bad combat system, and was one of the biggest complaints with the game. That effects a games success.
It's simple, these games aren't unpopular because they are open world. They have other problems. Read the post carefully.
Sorry but every game is going to have some problem. Combat, UI, character models, graphics etc someone is to dislike something. That is why i said there is no guarantee that a AAA MMO will be able to make everyone happy. Waiting for that perfect sandbox MMO which is most likely never goign to exist. Even themepark MMOS suffer from same problems
SWTOR is a multi million project and still the character customization sucks. I can not give you a better example of how unrealistic your expectations really are for a problem free sanbox MMO.
"What people say here and reality are completely opposite."
Weelllll, perhaps that's a little bit of an exaggeration, but they are often at odds. I'm sure we've all seen some "previews" that are pretty wild distortions (plus or minus direction, we've had both).
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Okay, now take away all the games on that list that aren't sandbox, weren't developed nearly a decade ago, are not in beta, have an actual active population, and are fully functional, and what choices do you have left? 5 or so games. Definitely not my definition of "many".
Sorry it is getting hard to keep up with different stances in every reply. i thought we were talking about open world MMOS similar to Skyrim and not just typical Sandbox MMOS?
Okay keep them, does it really change the point at all? You gathered a list with half the games in beta, ten years old, or incomplete/barely working. It's no change in stance.
it is a change in stance when when topic started from 'open world games like Skyrim'. there was no talk of pure sandbox games so i offered the list which includes both sandbox and open world. if you want to make a list of themepark MMOS you will find plenty which are 10 years old, incomplete or in broken state. That all combined together will consitute a list of MANY themeaprk MMOS to support your argument that how poor sandbox players do not have enough games to choose from in comparison to themepark games but still somehow magically the demand is very high for them.
To understand why there is so much "hate" for linear MMOs, you must first understand why there is so much love for non-linear MMOs.
I point you to Skyrim and it's rave success to get some idea as to why many gamers prefer open gameplay in an expansive game world.
Skyrim is not a MMO though and we already have many open world MMOS on market. For so much love for these type of games how come some of these MMOS have been resrructed twice and others are on life support with exception of EVE? i wouldn't make up my mind about hate or love on basis of these forums. What people say here and reality are completely opposite.
That's a very narrow minded way of thinking. I'd attribute a lack of quality and polish as the primordial reason of why most of those "open world MMOs" are not successful; not the fact that they are open. To say that being open is the cause of failure for those games is to not think things through and base your observation purely on speculation from your part.
Sorry dude but post to which i replied was also based on pure speculation. So i have all the right to base my reply on speculation too.
Well you are right about one thing.
"What people say here and reality are completely opposite."
After having just said, "... we already have many open world MMOS on market."
Woops.
Ryzom
Perpetum
Fallen Earth
Mortal Online
Darkfall
UO (still up and running)
Runescape
Eve Online
Xyson
Anarchy Online
Earthrise
Dawntide
All these just top of my head without thinking. Maybe you dislike these game for various reasons but don't tell m you don't have pool to choose from.
Craft of gods
{mod edit}
My point is, sure it looks like a selection of games until you actually play them. Simply by listing what you have has lead me to believe you've never played them, because as somone who has tried all of the games on this list, I can tell you that all but four should either be shut down or return to development. They're unfinished, unsupported, hardly funded games that don't have the legs to stand on, and that's because companies with the resources to actually make good sandbox games have already discovered the cookie-cutter pattern they'd like to use for MMO's. Ultimately, that's the problem here. The people in control of the assests and revenue in this industry don't want to create fun game experiences, they don't really give a shit about that. What they want is to make money, and the easiest way to do that is build a template, and then use that template to recreate the same product over, and over, and over, ad nauseum. If you've been paying attention to the MMO market for the last five years, I'd say that's pretty damn obvious. Just look at the differences between popular themepark MMO's, like Rift, WoW, or Aion. Any differences those games have between eachother are hardly differences at all, and are almost entirely gimmick.
So, don't point to a large list of shitty, broken, old games and say, "Hey, you know what, those are all the sandboxes you get, stop asking for more," because we're going to continue looking for the sandbox game of the future (and we'll certainly let you know when your game of choice doesn't provide that for us, or if you're uninformed as usual).
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
You really don't understand. I'm trying to explain to you that the world isn't black and white. FE is open world, but the game also has a very bad combat system, and was one of the biggest complaints with the game. That effects a games success.
It's simple, these games aren't unpopular because they are open world. They have other problems. Read the post carefully.
Sorry but every game is going to have some problem. Combat, UI, character models, graphics etc someone is to dislike something. That is why i said there is no guarantee that a AAA MMO will be able to make everyone happy. Waiting for that perfect sandbox MMO which is most likely never goign to exist. Even themepark MMOS suffer from same problems
SWTOR is a multi million project and still the character customization sucks. I can not give you a better example of how unrealistic your expectations really are for a problem free sanbox MMO.
OMG. Are you really being this hard headed? I don't have high expectations, I play MO. But gamers in general have a certain expectation. And you obviously have no idea just have bad these problems are in these games. In wow, gold duping is not a major problem. In MO, hundreds of thousands of gold has been duped in the past couple weeks, and only a handful of trial accounts were banned.
It's not high expectations, but consumers have minimal expectations of quality, and these games don't meet them. I suggest you play some of these games that your saying are quality, then get back to me. Because the level of macroing and exploitation, and bugs in a lot of those game's is simply unacceptable. And your comparing there quality to wow is laughable.
And like I said. Theres different factors. Full loot, FFA, slow content updates, a lot of grind, no grind, no classes, leveless, anything can effect the sucess of a game. Correlation does not prove causation. And none of those game's would have had any attention or hype if they werne't open world. And they had a lot of it before they launched.
So, don't point to a large list of shitty, broken, old games and say, "Hey, you know what, those are all the sandboxes you get, stop asking for more," because we're going to continue looking for the sandbox game of the future (and we'll certainly let you know when your game of choice doesn't provide that for us, or if you're uninformed as usual).
Did i expect everyone to love every sandbox MMO on the list? go ahead and make a list of linear themepark MMOS and see how many enter the *shit* list for various reasons. By the way i never said those are all the sand box you get and don't ask for more. Don't try to put words into my mouth. i made that list only because someone said thaty there are not enough sandbox MMOS to choose from.
You really don't understand. I'm trying to explain to you that the world isn't black and white. FE is open world, but the game also has a very bad combat system, and was one of the biggest complaints with the game. That effects a games success.
It's simple, these games aren't unpopular because they are open world. They have other problems. Read the post carefully.
Sorry but every game is going to have some problem. Combat, UI, character models, graphics etc someone is to dislike something. That is why i said there is no guarantee that a AAA MMO will be able to make everyone happy. Waiting for that perfect sandbox MMO which is most likely never goign to exist. Even themepark MMOS suffer from same problems
SWTOR is a multi million project and still the character customization sucks. I can not give you a better example of how unrealistic your expectations really are for a problem free sanbox MMO.
{mod edit} I don't have high expectations, I play MO. But gamers in general have a certain expectation. And you obviously have no idea just have bad these problems are in these games. In wow, gold duping is not a major problem. In MO, hundreds of thousands of gold has been duped in the past couple weeks, and only a handful of trial accounts were banned.
It's not high expectations, but consumers have minimal expectations of quality, and these games don't meet them. I suggest you play some of these games that your saying are quality, then get back to me. Because the level of macroing and exploitation, and bugs in a lot of those game's is simply unacceptable. And your comparing there quality to wow is laughable.
And like I said. Theres different factors. Full loot, FFA, slow content updates, a lot of grind, no grind, no classes, leveless, anything can effect the sucess of a game. Correlation does not prove causation. And none of those game's would have had any attention or hype if they werne't open world. And they had a lot of it before they launched.
I have played every MMMO on that list except for Dawntide and Craft of Gods. You make it sound as if only sandbox players have high expectations lol. If only on the basis of expectations i start counting themepark MMOS my list well end with 3 at most.
To understand why there is so much "hate" for linear MMOs, you must first understand why there is so much love for non-linear MMOs.
I point you to Skyrim and it's rave success to get some idea as to why many gamers prefer open gameplay in an expansive game world.
Skyrim is not a MMO though and we already have many open world MMOS on market. For so much love for these type of games how come some of these MMOS have been resrructed twice and others are on life support with exception of EVE? i wouldn't make up my mind about hate or love on basis of these forums. What people say here and reality are completely opposite.
That's a very narrow minded way of thinking. I'd attribute a lack of quality and polish as the primordial reason of why most of those "open world MMOs" are not successful; not the fact that they are open. To say that being open is the cause of failure for those games is to not think things through and base your observation purely on speculation from your part.
Sorry dude but post to which i replied was also based on pure speculation. So i have all the right to base my reply on speculation too.
Well you are right about one thing.
"What people say here and reality are completely opposite."
After having just said, "... we already have many open world MMOS on market."
Woops.
Ryzom
Perpetum
Fallen Earth
Mortal Online
Darkfall
UO (still up and running)
Runescape
Eve Online
Xyson
Anarchy Online
Earthrise
Dawntide
All these just top of my head without thinking. Maybe you dislike these game for various reasons but don't tell m you don't have pool to choose from.
Craft of gods
Wow, what a selection of broken, buggy ass games to choose from, how will any sandbox player ever come to a conlusion on what to play? That's right, the selection is going to be extremely easy, because only four of those games actually function with some stability (EVE, UO, DF, Ryzom), and the rest aren't even anywhere near being finished products. When you look at that list of four games, only two of them are anywhere near being recent releases. I'm talking over five years since Ryzom hit, and over fifteen for UO - hell, EVE isn't that much further away from Ryzom. You even listed Runescape. Fucking Runescape? A browser MMO with subpar, substandard graphics that's most commonly played by tweens? How out of touch are you with the sandbox market?
My point is, sure it looks like a selection of games until you actually play them. Simply by listing what you have has lead me to believe you've never played them, because as somone who has tried all of the games on this list, I can tell you that all but four should either be shut down or return to development. They're unfinished, unsupported, hardly funded games that don't have the legs to stand on, and that's because companies with the resources to actually make good sandbox games have already discovered the cookie-cutter pattern they'd like to use for MMO's. Ultimately, that's the problem here. The people in control of the assests and revenue in this industry don't want to create fun game experiences, they don't really give a shit about that. What they want is to make money, and the easiest way to do that is build a template, and then use that template to recreate the same product over, and over, and over, ad nauseum. If you've been paying attention to the MMO market for the last five years, I'd say that's pretty damn obvious.
So, don't point to a large list of shitty, broken, old games and say, "Hey, you know what, those are all the sandboxes you get, stop asking for more," because we're going to continue looking for the sandbox game of the future (and we'll certainly let you know when your game of choice doesn't provide that for us, or if you're uninformed as usual).
Well it's hardly his fault that noone is willing to sink money into a sandbox except small indie devs that release buggy broken games. I've played a lot of those too and with the exception of EVE and a couple others, they are all broken buggy messes.
Doesn't that tell you something about the market for these games though? There simply isn't one.
My question for people that are complaining that SWTOR is not open enough is this: Did you really think it was going to be? Have you even played a Bioware game in the last decade? I mean you're comparing apples to oranges here people and Bioware does what they do and they do it very well.
And none of those game's would have had any attention or hype if they werne't open world. And they had a lot of it before they launched.
Are you sure the hype wasn't given to FFA PVP? I seem to remember a "ur hardc0re if you play this, else ur carebarez" attitude from some of these games early on.
Dicto simpliciter on both sides of this discussion, I think. :shrug:
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Originally posted by Dianic Is there even a popular MMO created after November 2004 that does NOT follow a "linear" quest model?
WoW -- RIFT -- LotRO -- EQ2 -- Warhammer (for a hot second)
Aren't all of these games linear? Why are people complaining again?
The thread has gone way off topic. The question was why do people always bag on new games for being linear? What is it about 'being linear' that brings out the haters?
I'm not sure what the thread is about now. It seems to be an argument about how there are open world games, yet people don't play them and why they don't play them.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
You really don't understand. I'm trying to explain to you that the world isn't black and white. FE is open world, but the game also has a very bad combat system, and was one of the biggest complaints with the game. That effects a games success.
It's simple, these games aren't unpopular because they are open world. They have other problems. Read the post carefully.
Sorry but every game is going to have some problem. Combat, UI, character models, graphics etc someone is to dislike something. That is why i said there is no guarantee that a AAA MMO will be able to make everyone happy. Waiting for that perfect sandbox MMO which is most likely never goign to exist. Even themepark MMOS suffer from same problems
SWTOR is a multi million project and still the character customization sucks. I can not give you a better example of how unrealistic your expectations really are for a problem free sanbox MMO.
OMG. Are you really being this hard headed? I don't have high expectations, I play MO. But gamers in general have a certain expectation. And you obviously have no idea just have bad these problems are in these games. In wow, gold duping is not a major problem. In MO, hundreds of thousands of gold has been duped in the past couple weeks, and only a handful of trial accounts were banned.
It's not high expectations, but consumers have minimal expectations of quality, and these games don't meet them. I suggest you play some of these games that your saying are quality, then get back to me. Because the level of macroing and exploitation, and bugs in a lot of those game's is simply unacceptable. And your comparing there quality to wow is laughable.
And like I said. Theres different factors. Full loot, FFA, slow content updates, a lot of grind, no grind, no classes, leveless, anything can effect the sucess of a game. Correlation does not prove causation. And none of those game's would have had any attention or hype if they werne't open world. And they had a lot of it before they launched.
I have played every MMMO on that list except for Dawntide and Craft of Gods. You make it sound as if only sandbox players have high expectations lol. If only on the basis of expectations i start counting themepark MMOS my list well end with 3 at most.
You mentioned something about strawman arguements? I said consumers have a minimal expecation of quality. Nothing about sandbox gamers or mmo gamers. There is many high quality themepark mmo's. But the open world mmo's you listed have very rampant bugs, exploits, and developer incompetence. And themepark games often do not have these problems to anywhere near the same extent.
I'm really getting no where argueing this with you because you just can't accept it.
Read this as to why open world mmo's suffer population wise:
The thread has gone way off topic. The question was why do people always bag on new games for being linear? What is it about 'being linear' that brings out the haters?
This is just an opinion. But I think people get into the habit of Shortcut Memes instead of serious arguments.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I do understand sandboxers are upset about this style of game, and it doesn't look like developers are investing time into that type of model; however...
As unfortunate as it may sound for many, I don't believe Sandboxers represent the majority of the MMO population. I have to believe from sheer success and #'s alone, most people prefer linear games.
Linear meaning = quest "Line" --- NPC A says go do this then go see NPC B who will eventually direct you to NPC C... etc...
If I'm in the business to make money... I'm going with the standard majority. Linear is king right now.
So, don't point to a large list of shitty, broken, old games and say, "Hey, you know what, those are all the sandboxes you get, stop asking for more," because we're going to continue looking for the sandbox game of the future (and we'll certainly let you know when your game of choice doesn't provide that for us, or if you're uninformed as usual).
Did i expect everyone to love every sandbox MMO on the list? go ahead and make a list of linear themepark MMOS and see how many enter the *shit* list for various reasons. By the way i never said those are all the sand box you get and don't ask for more. Don't try to put words into my mouth. i made that list only because someone said thaty there are not enough sandbox MMOS to choose from.
Talk about strawman argument and hyperbole.
No, I'm not talking about personal opinion, I'm talking bad on the scale of development. Bad as far as stability and bugs are concerned, bad as far as completion and finishing a product is concerned. This has nothing to do with what I like, but what is actually playable. Only four of those games play without considerable bugs, crashing, errors, etc, and I know this from personal experience and troubleshooting (most of these problems are client-wide). Again, just proves to me you've never tried a majority of what you've listed. Maybe you've tried one or two of them? That sure gives you the expertise to speak on the sandbox behalf, for certain.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
See, I remember what MMOs were like back in the day when there was no content.
No quests, no instances, no in-game lore or events...
Just some game mechanics, a bunch of numbers, and a fair number of players.
We found stuff to do, most of which was killing each other for various bits of this and that.
But in retrospect?
I could never go back.
I love Skyrim, but it's also got amazing storylines and characters to offset the fact most of the "quests" are really just travel, kill, collect types spiced up with various bits of dialogue and interesting settings.
But isn't that exactly what TOR offers?
There has never been a "true" sandbox MMORPG, because a true sandbox would have no levels or raising of skills or any type of grind for anything one way or another.
MMOs are by their very nature dependant upon the grind - be it story or levels or skills or money etc.
But how well is that grind hidden? How "fun" is the activities and systems and locations/characters etc. we interact with on our path from noob to veteran?
That is what I look for these days, that the journey is a fun one and there is enough content to keep me happily entertained for a good long while.
TOR from my experience has all of these things and has them presented in a format and with a variety and also sheer volume of content that is most, most pleasing.
I don't understand your comment about a "true sandbox would have no levels or raisking skills or any type of grind..." I would expect a lot of grind on a sandbox game. I would also expect something like what Skyrim has done with levels. Its really a per usage measure that does not tie into "classes" or specific niches. You can be whatever you want to be because you are performing actions not assining skill ponts to a skill tree.
I also think the fact that you can go anywhere from the get go in Skyrim makes it very different from TOR. In Skyrim it doesn't feel like you have a clear "goal" to accomplish, it feels like you are wondering around trying to carry on with life and bump into stories. Unlike the regular RPG approach of having goals put in front of you and clearly marked objectives. In classical RPGs side stories feel a bit fake after you play Skyrim. They feel like other objectives you can do because the game decides you are in the right place with the right level to do these.
Comments
I agree with your point about it not being quite that simple. However, if Darkfall were developed by a company like Bethesda, it wouldn't in any way resemble a game like Skyrim aside from the open world aspect. That kind of immersive experience cannot be duplicated in an mmorpg. Some aspects of it can, but for the most part the game wouldn't even remotely resemble Skyrim.
And themepark MMOS do not suffer from these problems? except for Lotro and Rift what other themepark MMOS had a great launch since WOW. Even though WOW's launch is also highly debatable. Macroing and exploiting is something which is not exclusive to sandbox games.
And yeah just like the response i was expecting from you regarding FE. The moment a stable open world MMO is mentioned it is shot down. Also please read i clearly mentioned that FE is not a sandbox but quite an open world MMO. it isnot linear or funnel you into specific path.
Sadly the only good open world MMO that exists is in your head so nothing ever is going to be good enough. The day demand for sandbox raches same heights of themepark MMOS we wouldn't even have to argue because an open world MMO would be ready to release.
Okay, now take away all the games on that list that aren't sandbox, weren't developed nearly a decade ago, are not in beta, have an actual active population, and are fully functional, and what choices do you have left? 5 or so games. Definitely not my definition of "many".
Sorry it is getting hard to keep up with different stances in every reply. i thought we were talking about open world MMOS similar to Skyrim and not just typical Sandbox MMOS?
You really don't understand. I'm trying to explain to you that the world isn't black and white. FE is open world, but the game also has a very bad combat system, and was one of the biggest complaints with the game. That effects a games success.
It's simple, these games aren't unpopular because they are open world. They have other problems. Read the post carefully.
Of course you have to start all over to do it, but unlike other MMOs, the experience won't be the same exact experience every time due to the difference in class quests and the ability to choose the way your quests evolve in many cases. How can someone with an ounce of intelligence see this as a bad thing? Is it Single Player RPG replayability? No, of course not, but it's the best any mmorpg has to offer.
And your point about 4 of the 8 choices just being different flavors of jedi is absolutely, 100% incorrect in every way possible. All 8 class quest lines are different. All 8 classes will offer a different levelling experience. Not to mention the fact that once you are off the first couple of planets, there is a lot of overlap in terms of levels for the contested planets, meaning you don't have to always go to the same planets in the same order to level up in this game.
The misinformation that gets spouted about this game from people who have done a minimum of research on it is mind-numbing.
This is a fallacy. The truth is, there haven't been any sandbox games with a big budget and high production values because the game developers have been focused on WoW's success as a theme park for the past 6 years or so. The few sandbox games that have come out, such as Xsyon failed because the indy developers just don't have the resources to build an MMO sandbox or themepark. Xsyon actually has a lot of interesting potential, but it lacks a much bigger and better budget to realize them. Developers are mostly owned by corporate suits now, and all they care about is the bottom line. Some of these new MMO's even seem to be designed to make a profit in box sales, and then screw the long term goals as long as they make a profit in the short term. That is corporate ideology.
Just because corporate suits have opted to take the seemingly safer route to profits does not mean no one wants a sandbox or a hybrid. EVE has been growing over the years, and has a solid, profitable niche. If it was a more traditional MMO (on the ground) it probably would be much larger.
I came to the MMO genre from years of hardcore FPS clan match games. I had no idea how much I would get sucked into the virtual world concept, flawed as it may have been, of Star Wars Galaxies. If you had told me while I was playing Quake and Tribes that I would LOVE running a weaponsmith shop, or becoming a contract resource game hunter for crafters, or contributing to politics in a player-city, or making virtual food and drugs to sell, I would have laughed at you while I fragged you 50 times in a row. I simply had no idea until I tried it.
This is why I believe there are more people out there who would enjoy an open world/virtual world MMO experience if they had a high quality game to try out. Those who say "no one wants them" or "they don't sell well" are simply wrong. There is no data to prove that statement. What we do know for a fact, is that a large percentage of the people who have played the older sandbox games such as SWG look back on it as their richest gaming experience to date. I think we should wait until someone has the balls to make one before we pass judgement on the design concept of a sandbox.
A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.
Okay keep them, does it really change the point at all? You gathered a list with half the games in beta, ten years old, or incomplete/barely working. It's no change in stance.
Sorry but every game is going to have some problem. Combat, UI, character models, graphics etc someone is to dislike something. That is why i said there is no guarantee that a AAA MMO will be able to make everyone happy. Waiting for that perfect sandbox MMO which is most likely never goign to exist. Even themepark MMOS suffer from same problems
SWTOR is a multi million project and still the character customization sucks. I can not give you a better example of how unrealistic your expectations really are for a problem free sanbox MMO.
Weelllll, perhaps that's a little bit of an exaggeration, but they are often at odds. I'm sure we've all seen some "previews" that are pretty wild distortions (plus or minus direction, we've had both).
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
it is a change in stance when when topic started from 'open world games like Skyrim'. there was no talk of pure sandbox games so i offered the list which includes both sandbox and open world. if you want to make a list of themepark MMOS you will find plenty which are 10 years old, incomplete or in broken state. That all combined together will consitute a list of MANY themeaprk MMOS to support your argument that how poor sandbox players do not have enough games to choose from in comparison to themepark games but still somehow magically the demand is very high for them.
{mod edit}
My point is, sure it looks like a selection of games until you actually play them. Simply by listing what you have has lead me to believe you've never played them, because as somone who has tried all of the games on this list, I can tell you that all but four should either be shut down or return to development. They're unfinished, unsupported, hardly funded games that don't have the legs to stand on, and that's because companies with the resources to actually make good sandbox games have already discovered the cookie-cutter pattern they'd like to use for MMO's. Ultimately, that's the problem here. The people in control of the assests and revenue in this industry don't want to create fun game experiences, they don't really give a shit about that. What they want is to make money, and the easiest way to do that is build a template, and then use that template to recreate the same product over, and over, and over, ad nauseum. If you've been paying attention to the MMO market for the last five years, I'd say that's pretty damn obvious. Just look at the differences between popular themepark MMO's, like Rift, WoW, or Aion. Any differences those games have between eachother are hardly differences at all, and are almost entirely gimmick.
So, don't point to a large list of shitty, broken, old games and say, "Hey, you know what, those are all the sandboxes you get, stop asking for more," because we're going to continue looking for the sandbox game of the future (and we'll certainly let you know when your game of choice doesn't provide that for us, or if you're uninformed as usual).
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
OMG. Are you really being this hard headed? I don't have high expectations, I play MO. But gamers in general have a certain expectation. And you obviously have no idea just have bad these problems are in these games. In wow, gold duping is not a major problem. In MO, hundreds of thousands of gold has been duped in the past couple weeks, and only a handful of trial accounts were banned.
It's not high expectations, but consumers have minimal expectations of quality, and these games don't meet them. I suggest you play some of these games that your saying are quality, then get back to me. Because the level of macroing and exploitation, and bugs in a lot of those game's is simply unacceptable. And your comparing there quality to wow is laughable.
And like I said. Theres different factors. Full loot, FFA, slow content updates, a lot of grind, no grind, no classes, leveless, anything can effect the sucess of a game. Correlation does not prove causation. And none of those game's would have had any attention or hype if they werne't open world. And they had a lot of it before they launched.
Did i expect everyone to love every sandbox MMO on the list? go ahead and make a list of linear themepark MMOS and see how many enter the *shit* list for various reasons. By the way i never said those are all the sand box you get and don't ask for more. Don't try to put words into my mouth. i made that list only because someone said thaty there are not enough sandbox MMOS to choose from.
Talk about strawman argument and hyperbole.
Is there even a popular MMO created after November 2004 that does NOT follow a "linear" quest model?
WoW -- RIFT -- LotRO -- EQ2 -- Warhammer (for a hot second)
Aren't all of these games linear? Why are people complaining again?
I have played every MMMO on that list except for Dawntide and Craft of Gods. You make it sound as if only sandbox players have high expectations lol. If only on the basis of expectations i start counting themepark MMOS my list well end with 3 at most.
Many people are sad/angry that there isn't a AAA sandbox MMO they can play. All AAA MMO's are basically linear/themepark style.
Well it's hardly his fault that noone is willing to sink money into a sandbox except small indie devs that release buggy broken games. I've played a lot of those too and with the exception of EVE and a couple others, they are all broken buggy messes.
Doesn't that tell you something about the market for these games though? There simply isn't one.
My question for people that are complaining that SWTOR is not open enough is this: Did you really think it was going to be? Have you even played a Bioware game in the last decade? I mean you're comparing apples to oranges here people and Bioware does what they do and they do it very well.
Shadow's Hand Guild
Open recruitment for
The Secret World - Dragons
Planetside 2 - Terran Republic
Tera - Dragonfall Server
http://www.shadowshand.com
Are you sure the hype wasn't given to FFA PVP? I seem to remember a "ur hardc0re if you play this, else ur carebarez" attitude from some of these games early on.
Dicto simpliciter on both sides of this discussion, I think. :shrug:
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
The thread has gone way off topic. The question was why do people always bag on new games for being linear? What is it about 'being linear' that brings out the haters?
I'm not sure what the thread is about now. It seems to be an argument about how there are open world games, yet people don't play them and why they don't play them.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
You mentioned something about strawman arguements? I said consumers have a minimal expecation of quality. Nothing about sandbox gamers or mmo gamers. There is many high quality themepark mmo's. But the open world mmo's you listed have very rampant bugs, exploits, and developer incompetence. And themepark games often do not have these problems to anywhere near the same extent.
I'm really getting no where argueing this with you because you just can't accept it.
Read this as to why open world mmo's suffer population wise:
Wiki
Then read this as to why a business wouldn't want to invest in sandbox even if there is a demand:
pedia
And yes that's wikipedia, but I'm done with this silly ass arguement.
This is just an opinion. But I think people get into the habit of Shortcut Memes instead of serious arguments.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I do understand sandboxers are upset about this style of game, and it doesn't look like developers are investing time into that type of model; however...
As unfortunate as it may sound for many, I don't believe Sandboxers represent the majority of the MMO population. I have to believe from sheer success and #'s alone, most people prefer linear games.
Linear meaning = quest "Line" --- NPC A says go do this then go see NPC B who will eventually direct you to NPC C... etc...
If I'm in the business to make money... I'm going with the standard majority. Linear is king right now.
No, I'm not talking about personal opinion, I'm talking bad on the scale of development. Bad as far as stability and bugs are concerned, bad as far as completion and finishing a product is concerned. This has nothing to do with what I like, but what is actually playable. Only four of those games play without considerable bugs, crashing, errors, etc, and I know this from personal experience and troubleshooting (most of these problems are client-wide). Again, just proves to me you've never tried a majority of what you've listed. Maybe you've tried one or two of them? That sure gives you the expertise to speak on the sandbox behalf, for certain.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
I don't understand your comment about a "true sandbox would have no levels or raisking skills or any type of grind..." I would expect a lot of grind on a sandbox game. I would also expect something like what Skyrim has done with levels. Its really a per usage measure that does not tie into "classes" or specific niches. You can be whatever you want to be because you are performing actions not assining skill ponts to a skill tree.
I also think the fact that you can go anywhere from the get go in Skyrim makes it very different from TOR. In Skyrim it doesn't feel like you have a clear "goal" to accomplish, it feels like you are wondering around trying to carry on with life and bump into stories. Unlike the regular RPG approach of having goals put in front of you and clearly marked objectives. In classical RPGs side stories feel a bit fake after you play Skyrim. They feel like other objectives you can do because the game decides you are in the right place with the right level to do these.