I think to be successful(i.e. rolling in enough money to cover development, maintenance and growth of the game) in the MMO industry going forward, you will need to think outside the box. Whether that is with your revenue model, development process or gameplay designs -- something will need to change.
With its budget, SWTOR has no choice but to be grossly successful. If it doesn't hook gamers, it'll be just another MMO to throw on the shelf next to WAR, AoC, Vanguard, Aion... Some of these games had technical issues, some had design issues, and some were fairly polished with the exception of content that got old quick. Gamers would have put Rift on the chopping block if it wasn't for Trion's ability to churn out content at an extremely quick pace. SWTOR's failure (knock on wood) would be a huge blow to both MMO devs and gamers alike.
I was just reading an article about Minecraft and utilizing this development approach may be just what a smaller developer has to do to produce a winner. While the devs of Minecraft didn't utilize a more contained release plan, they did release the game when it was in an alpha state. Players got to jump in at a earlier than usual point (at a cheaper price) while being able to enjoy the game it was even so early in its development.
To some degree, Square Enix has taken this approach with FF14. When the realized they made a huge mistake, they quickly changed development plans and temporarily canceled subscriptions until the game was "back on track".
Once you accept they aren't making a themepark game and give up the belief that they "need" to produce content like a regualr themepark, then we can go from there.
I would be foolish to accept such nonsense.
There is no difference between themepark or sandbox development. Both games will die if they are lacking content - EVE survived just because of CCP ability to add content rapidly.
Only difference between sandbox and themepark is that sandbox design allows for small amount of content to be highly repetitive. Something that does not work in linear themepark progression.
However, it it will not the game grow. To grow, you need content addition.
You've espoused a ton of other nonsense, why so adverse to adding more?
Anyway, to say there is no difference between themepark and sandbox development is foolishness enough. More than I want to deal with for that matter.
Aside from that I have no interest in multiple posts back and forth with you over stuff I talked about time and time again over the 7+ years I've been around this site. I can understand the direction they are taking, and it sounds like they have a solid plan. Pathfinder players will generate tons of "content" with the tools Goblinworks puts into this game. They won't need the directed content that a typical themepark does.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Goblinworks released their first blog just. Seems like their lead designer is a vet fron Cryptic and CCP.
It was rather interesting, but I am not 100% sure how good it all sounds, they seems to think that it is faster and easier to make a sandbox than a themepark, and I am not so sure about that myself.
Anyways, worth reading, particularly if you are a fan of sandboxes of the Pathfinder P&P RPG.
Thank you so much for that. Completely went under my radar.
I personally think this is a very wise plan. We need more game developers thinking small but focusing on long term growth. If your product is quality, like EVE is, you will get that growth organically. EVE has the potential to continue expanding as long as they want. It doesn't have to be tied to the typical MMO lifespan of 5 years or so.
As I was reading this, I couldn't help but think of Xsyon. That game had a lot of potential, but just didn't have the resources. I also feel the developer should have spent much more time on the combat aspect. The crafting and resource part of it is very interesting and I had fun playing with it. When you talk to most people you hear the same thing: Once you built what you needed, there was nothing else to do. That is a huge problem. There must be good combat, and some kind of objective.
Another game that was taking a similar 'start out small' approach was SEED. I don't know how many of you remember that game (it failed miserably), but the idea and the story behind it is still a fantastic one in my opinion. The trouble was, the devs just couldn't pull it off, probably due to budget issues. I loved SEED's story and plan. It was open ended, and player driven. If someone ever took that idea and made it work, I would love to play it.
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.
Once you accept they aren't making a themepark game and give up the belief that they "need" to produce content like a regualr themepark, then we can go from there.
I would be foolish to accept such nonsense.
There is no difference between themepark or sandbox development. Both games will die if they are lacking content - EVE survived just because of CCP ability to add content rapidly.
Only difference between sandbox and themepark is that sandbox design allows for small amount of content to be highly repetitive. Something that does not work in linear themepark progression.
However, it it will not the game grow. To grow, you need content addition.
You've espoused a ton of other nonsense, why so adverse to adding more?
Anyway, to say there is no difference between themepark and sandbox development is foolishness enough. More than I want to deal with for that matter.
Aside from that I have no interest in multiple posts back and forth with you over stuff I talked about time and time again over the 7+ years I've been around this site. I can understand the direction they are taking, and it sounds like they have a solid plan. Pathfinder players will generate tons of "content" with the tools Goblinworks puts into this game. They won't need the directed content that a typical themepark does.
This is something a themepark-only player will never get their heads around. They don't understand that the players and community ARE the content. If you give them the right tools and an interesting/rich world to play with, they will do things the developers never dreamed of. SOE ended up adding the ability for players to build quests, complete with rewards, because the players were basically doing this on their own anyway. It was a very much loved part of the game when they finally added it. Goblinworks can put something like this in immediately.
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.
Originally posted by ArEf I just pooped a little bit in my pants. Pathfinder setting and mechanics in a sandbox? HELL YES.
That's my big question! Will it be Pathfinder mechanics, or will it be the usual MMO fare? Combat being the number one thing I'm looking at. Character development with abilities and skills being another area.
DDO failed miserably at bringing DnD online for me. DDO is nothing like DnD in gameplay mechanics. That's my worry for Pathfinder Online.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
"Making a game that starts with 4,500 players and grows to 16,500 players is much, much easier and vastly less expensive than making a game designed to accommodate a million players on day one."
Apparently, you're wrong.
Apparently, this does not change anything about what I said nor it in any way invalidates anything I said.
4.5k subscribers still does not pay off for content provided by 1M subscribers.
I am not wrong, you just fail to provide valid argument.
To me it sounds more like a paid beta, and with that those 4500 only gets written off as developmental costs. Its obvious they are not trying to sustain the game with this model.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
I personally think this is a very wise plan. We need more game developers thinking small but focusing on long term growth. If your product is quality, like EVE is, you will get that growth organically. EVE has the potential to continue expanding as long as they want. It doesn't have to be tied to the typical MMO lifespan of 5 years or so.
As I was reading this, I couldn't help but think of Xsyon. That game had a lot of potential, but just didn't have the resources. I also feel the developer should have spent much more time on the combat aspect. The crafting and resource part of it is very interesting and I had fun playing with it. When you talk to most people you hear the same thing: Once you built what you needed, there was nothing else to do. That is a huge problem. There must be good combat, and some kind of objective.
Another game that was taking a similar 'start out small' approach was SEED. I don't know how many of you remember that game (it failed miserably), but the idea and the story behind it is still a fantastic one in my opinion. The trouble was, the devs just couldn't pull it off, probably due to budget issues. I loved SEED's story and plan. It was open ended, and player driven. If someone ever took that idea and made it work, I would love to play it.
For a quality sandbox game to happen this is exactly what needs to happen. Thankfully there are people on this mmo who have done this, like this, before.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
I personally think this is a very wise plan. We need more game developers thinking small but focusing on long term growth. If your product is quality, like EVE is, you will get that growth organically. EVE has the potential to continue expanding as long as they want. It doesn't have to be tied to the typical MMO lifespan of 5 years or so.
As I was reading this, I couldn't help but think of Xsyon. That game had a lot of potential, but just didn't have the resources. I also feel the developer should have spent much more time on the combat aspect. The crafting and resource part of it is very interesting and I had fun playing with it. When you talk to most people you hear the same thing: Once you built what you needed, there was nothing else to do. That is a huge problem. There must be good combat, and some kind of objective.
Another game that was taking a similar 'start out small' approach was SEED. I don't know how many of you remember that game (it failed miserably), but the idea and the story behind it is still a fantastic one in my opinion. The trouble was, the devs just couldn't pull it off, probably due to budget issues. I loved SEED's story and plan. It was open ended, and player driven. If someone ever took that idea and made it work, I would love to play it.
For a quality sandbox game to happen this is exactly what needs to happen. Thankfully there are people on this mmo who have done this, like this, before.
The blog post is as much a call to action from us as it is an intro to the game from Goblinworks. I intend to get involved with the community and help drive the development with feedback.
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.
I personally think this is a very wise plan. We need more game developers thinking small but focusing on long term growth. If your product is quality, like EVE is, you will get that growth organically. EVE has the potential to continue expanding as long as they want. It doesn't have to be tied to the typical MMO lifespan of 5 years or so.
As I was reading this, I couldn't help but think of Xsyon. That game had a lot of potential, but just didn't have the resources. I also feel the developer should have spent much more time on the combat aspect. The crafting and resource part of it is very interesting and I had fun playing with it. When you talk to most people you hear the same thing: Once you built what you needed, there was nothing else to do. That is a huge problem. There must be good combat, and some kind of objective.
Another game that was taking a similar 'start out small' approach was SEED. I don't know how many of you remember that game (it failed miserably), but the idea and the story behind it is still a fantastic one in my opinion. The trouble was, the devs just couldn't pull it off, probably due to budget issues. I loved SEED's story and plan. It was open ended, and player driven. If someone ever took that idea and made it work, I would love to play it.
For a quality sandbox game to happen this is exactly what needs to happen. Thankfully there are people on this mmo who have done this, like this, before.
The blog post is as much a call to action from us as it is an intro to the game from Goblinworks. I intend to get involved with the community and help drive the development with feedback.
Same here. My table-top gaming group is currently running a game in Pathfinder using the Kingmaker rules. Each of us is taking on a role and buillding up a fledgling human kingdom on a new, unexplored continent.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Originally posted by MindTrigger This is something a themepark-only player will never get their heads around.
Yes, because when you have no arguments, you turn the discussion to personal level...that always work, right?
'Player and community' are not a content. The 'tools' you speak of are though. Without tools aka content, the game won't last long.
Just because there are no quests and story does not mean the game needs no content. You know - POSes, exploration, corporations, sovereignty, contracts, market interface, production system, conquerable stations, etc. is also content that cost money to develop.
I want a quality Sandbox MMO as much as anyone who does. But saying they don't need to focus on content development simply because Sandbox players can provide their own is a bit wonky to me.
This was the biggest issue many had with SWG as an example there was no forward growth when the game was a sandbox, none. Base content (non-expansion) growth didn't begin until after the game had already faced it's final nail (NGE). Things may have been far different (pre-cu) if this were not the case.
Sandbox games need content, without it the game becomes nothing but a PVP play-ground with crafter support. Which is fine for some I'm sure, myself included. We're hardly enough to sustain a game and company though, content addition will be the difference between the game becoming another MO or Darkfall, regardless of the SB tools available to us.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
This is something a themepark-only player will never get their heads around.
Yes, because when you have no arguments, you turn the discussion to personal level...that always work, right?
'Player and community' are not a content. The 'tools' you speak of are though. Without tools aka content, the game won't last long.
Just because there are no quests and story does not mean the game needs no content. You know - POSes, exploration, corporations, sovereignty, contracts, market interface, production system, conquerable stations, etc. is also content that cost money to develop.
That has nothing to do with it. If you have never played a sandbox game, you have no context. Want to know how I know that? Because I have played both types of games extensively and have been discussing on this site since 2007, and others much longer. I have found that when I try to explain certain elements of why sandbox games work to people who have never played one, they just can't wrap their minds around it because they only know themepark games and they see MMOs in those terms. You are welcome to disagree with me, and obviously I am generalizing, but that has been my experience.
The two mindsets are as different as can be. As a broad-sweeping example think about open-ended (sandbox) vs. end game (theme-park) approaches. Those different design philosophies alone change everything. This is to say nothing about truly player-driven content and community in sandboxes rather than content that is shoved down your throat and barely any community to speak of in themeparks.
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.
Originally posted by Distopia I want a quality Sandbox MMO as much as anyone who does. But saying they don't need to focus on content development simply because Sandbox players can provide their own is a bit wonky to me. This was the biggest issue many had with SWG as an example there was no forward growth when the game was a sandbox, none. Base content (non-expansion) growth didn't begin until after the game had already faced it's final nail (NGE). Things may have been far different (pre-cu) if this were not the case. Sandbox games need content, without it the game becomes nothing but a PVP play-ground with crafter support. Which is fine for some I'm sure, myself included. We're hardly enough to sustain a game and company though, content addition will be the difference between the game becoming another MO or Darkfall, regardless of the SB tools available to us.
Originally posted by Khalathwyr Clearly...you are not the target audience for this game.
This is something a themepark-only player will never get their heads around. They don't understand that the players and community ARE the content. If you give them the right tools and an interesting/rich world to play with, they will do things the developers never dreamed of. SOE ended up adding the ability for players to build quests, complete with rewards, because the players were basically doing this on their own anyway. It was a very much loved part of the game when they finally added it. Goblinworks can put something like this in immediately.
Oh come on man get off your sand box high horse. I bet there are lots of things you can not get your head around when it comes to themepark MMOS. And i have seen this excuse many times, what you call content is what i call easy way out of development. Looking at the current state of sand box MMO genre devs need to add a lot of varied content other than just FFA PVP and crafting. Give players tools too but atleast do your own part in developing content first.
How many servers SWTOR will launch with on release?
ShredderSE - Umm how many do they need? Maybe 6. US, EU, Asian, France, German and Russian. Subs will be so low there is no need for more Snoocky-How many servers? The first 3 months a lot...after that 2 i guess, one for PVE and 1 for PVP...
Thorbrand - SWTOR doesn't have longevity at all. Might be one of the shortest lived MMOs.
Originally posted by MindTrigger That has nothing to do with it. If you have never played a sandbox game, you have no context. Want to know how I know that? Because I have played both types of games extensively and have been discussing on this site since 2007, and others much longer. I have found that when I try to explain certain elements of why sandbox games work to people who have never played one, they just can't wrap their minds around it because they only know themepark games and they see MMOs in those terms. You are welcome to disagree with me, and obviously I am generalizing, but that has been my experience. The two mindsets are as different as can be. As a broad-sweeping example think about open-ended (sandbox) vs. end game (theme-park) approaches. Those different design philosophies alone change everything. This is to say nothing about truly player-driven content and community in sandboxes rather than content that is shoved down your throat and barely any community to speak of in themeparks.
tldr: I am self-proclaimed expert. I need no arguments because I am expert and I am always right.
Looks very promising. One I will be following with interest but warily. Been burned to many times by the "sounds great in paper but the implementation" hype of recent sandbox titles...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
I want a quality Sandbox MMO as much as anyone who does. But saying they don't need to focus on content development simply because Sandbox players can provide their own is a bit wonky to me.
This was the biggest issue many had with SWG as an example there was no forward growth when the game was a sandbox, none. Base content (non-expansion) growth didn't begin until after the game had already faced it's final nail (NGE). Things may have been far different (pre-cu) if this were not the case.
Sandbox games need content, without it the game becomes nothing but a PVP play-ground with crafter support. Which is fine for some I'm sure, myself included. We're hardly enough to sustain a game and company though, content addition will be the difference between the game becoming another MO or Darkfall, regardless of the SB tools available to us.
Look at EVE. It's doing quiet well, and continuing to grow and expand. We are talking about a niche game here, and while it will be including some themepark elements (probably quests and some raids I would imagine), it's not going to be a game for everyone. I'm more than fine with that.
I love the latest ads for EVE because they demonstrate how one person's actions could change the paths of tens of thousands of players in their stock market, or by accidentally or purposefully starting an epic battle. It could effect politics in the game for months or years. If EVE was a ground-based game, you wouldn't be able to tear me away from it. I suspect this is true for a lot more people than anyone really knows. After all, EVE is the only successful sandbox out there now, and the game's style (ship-based) does not appeal to everyone.
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.
What a sandbox needs is the tools to allow players to create that content. I'm not talking about no silly questdesign feature. Im talking about crafting, building, exploring, combat etc. All of it. Not just just 1 or 2.
Let me build a world, provide my peers with things and then worry about keeping it all safe from other people that would do harm to it and me. Let me forge friendships, group up with people, build a camp, a town, a village, a city, a fortress. Let me worry about other groups drawing near to my resource sites, to my home. Let me organize a warband to face those enemies.
That's sandbox to me right there.
In my opinion, a sandbox world needs to be built first, before it can be destroyed. Games in the last years have been the other way around. Might as well have been Arena style games.
We're also going to be actively reaching out to organized guilds and inviting them in as groups to pre-seed our sandbox with organizations that will help create the political, economic, military and territorial structure that Pathfinder Online will need to be successful. And of course, there will be ways for folks who want to get in without a lot of hassle to do so as well.
And thought, eh, no thanks. I have yet to run into a cross-game guild that I even like. Especially the ones that tend to get into these betas.
Let this one be for the sociopathic butterflies, I'll look elsewhere.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
From the sound of it, I think in cutting that budget they have pretty much thought that "oh lets make a sandbox, then we don't need any content!" From my point of view, not a wise decision and like you said if they honestly think a sandbox is easier to make they're in for a surprise. I can't remember if it was Bethesda or Rockstar, but one of the devs on there was commenting about the subject saying its a lot harder to build tools for players than it is to make content.
Why do you need static quests in a sandbox game?
I'd prefer if they'd work on more believable NPCs (e.g. NPCs walking through towns, doing some business, having conversations, gathering in social hubs like inns/taverns/market places, predators in the wilderness hunting down other animals, etc.). NPCs could join you as hirelings/companions and could be tasked with different errands (e.g. guarding your guild house/home while you're offline, working in a mine, etc.).
Especially if you want to offer players some meaningful crafting there's no point in having static quests/quest rewards.
The rest should be up to the players. Nnobody prevents players from sending other players on quests to earn guild membership and stuff, though.
What a sandbox needs is the tools to allow players to create that content. I'm not talking about no silly questdesign feature. Im talking about crafting, building, exploring, combat etc. All of it. Not just just 1 or 2.
Let me build a world, provide my peers with things and then worry about keeping it all safe from other people that would do harm to it and me. Let me forge friendships, group up with people, build a camp, a town, a village, a city, a fortress. Let me worry about other groups drawing near to my resource sites, to my home. Let me organize a warband to face those enemies.
That's sandbox to me right there.
In my opinion, a sandbox world needs to be built first, before it can be destroyed. Games in the last years have been the other way around. Might as well have been Arena style games.
This right here is what I keep pining for in MMOs. While I enjoy a well made themepark game as much as the next gamer, I can only stay interested for a few months at best. After that, I get bored of doing the same thing over and over routine. Maybe this is because my first MMO experience was Shadowbane. Lords know I will be the first to say SB was not a perfect game (far from it), it did provide me with the things Bitz alludes to here. That aspect of bulding relationships and having a stake in the game world makes for a longer commitment to the game from players.
Hell, I still remember defending our hard built city during a siege and the great political intrigue the game generated. My fondest memories were of being a double agent between to rival factions and making a ton of money at it... Enough nostalgia, you get the idea. Now ask me anything memorable about my six months playing Rift...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Pathfinder setting and mechanics in a sandbox? HELL YES.
That's my big question! Will it be Pathfinder mechanics, or will it be the usual MMO fare? Combat being the number one thing I'm looking at. Character development with abilities and skills being another area.
DDO failed miserably at bringing DnD online for me. DDO is nothing like DnD in gameplay mechanics. That's my worry for Pathfinder Online.
it's not going to be d20. read FAQ for more information.
Comments
Right.
When StarVault do it, it's begging, when Goblinworks do exactly same thing, it's smart
Call it as you want, it is the same thing.
Interesting...
I think to be successful(i.e. rolling in enough money to cover development, maintenance and growth of the game) in the MMO industry going forward, you will need to think outside the box. Whether that is with your revenue model, development process or gameplay designs -- something will need to change.
With its budget, SWTOR has no choice but to be grossly successful. If it doesn't hook gamers, it'll be just another MMO to throw on the shelf next to WAR, AoC, Vanguard, Aion... Some of these games had technical issues, some had design issues, and some were fairly polished with the exception of content that got old quick. Gamers would have put Rift on the chopping block if it wasn't for Trion's ability to churn out content at an extremely quick pace. SWTOR's failure (knock on wood) would be a huge blow to both MMO devs and gamers alike.
I was just reading an article about Minecraft and utilizing this development approach may be just what a smaller developer has to do to produce a winner. While the devs of Minecraft didn't utilize a more contained release plan, they did release the game when it was in an alpha state. Players got to jump in at a earlier than usual point (at a cheaper price) while being able to enjoy the game it was even so early in its development.
To some degree, Square Enix has taken this approach with FF14. When the realized they made a huge mistake, they quickly changed development plans and temporarily canceled subscriptions until the game was "back on track".
You've espoused a ton of other nonsense, why so adverse to adding more?
Anyway, to say there is no difference between themepark and sandbox development is foolishness enough. More than I want to deal with for that matter.
Aside from that I have no interest in multiple posts back and forth with you over stuff I talked about time and time again over the 7+ years I've been around this site. I can understand the direction they are taking, and it sounds like they have a solid plan. Pathfinder players will generate tons of "content" with the tools Goblinworks puts into this game. They won't need the directed content that a typical themepark does.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Thank you so much for that. Completely went under my radar.
I personally think this is a very wise plan. We need more game developers thinking small but focusing on long term growth. If your product is quality, like EVE is, you will get that growth organically. EVE has the potential to continue expanding as long as they want. It doesn't have to be tied to the typical MMO lifespan of 5 years or so.
As I was reading this, I couldn't help but think of Xsyon. That game had a lot of potential, but just didn't have the resources. I also feel the developer should have spent much more time on the combat aspect. The crafting and resource part of it is very interesting and I had fun playing with it. When you talk to most people you hear the same thing: Once you built what you needed, there was nothing else to do. That is a huge problem. There must be good combat, and some kind of objective.
Another game that was taking a similar 'start out small' approach was SEED. I don't know how many of you remember that game (it failed miserably), but the idea and the story behind it is still a fantastic one in my opinion. The trouble was, the devs just couldn't pull it off, probably due to budget issues. I loved SEED's story and plan. It was open ended, and player driven. If someone ever took that idea and made it work, I would love to play it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_(video_game)
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.
Such nonsense and you are still not able bring up a single argument to counter it...so sad.
Fly safe.
This is something a themepark-only player will never get their heads around. They don't understand that the players and community ARE the content. If you give them the right tools and an interesting/rich world to play with, they will do things the developers never dreamed of. SOE ended up adding the ability for players to build quests, complete with rewards, because the players were basically doing this on their own anyway. It was a very much loved part of the game when they finally added it. Goblinworks can put something like this in immediately.
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.
DDO failed miserably at bringing DnD online for me. DDO is nothing like DnD in gameplay mechanics. That's my worry for Pathfinder Online.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
To me it sounds more like a paid beta, and with that those 4500 only gets written off as developmental costs. Its obvious they are not trying to sustain the game with this model.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
For a quality sandbox game to happen this is exactly what needs to happen. Thankfully there are people on this mmo who have done this, like this, before.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
The blog post is as much a call to action from us as it is an intro to the game from Goblinworks. I intend to get involved with the community and help drive the development with feedback.
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.
Same here. My table-top gaming group is currently running a game in Pathfinder using the Kingmaker rules. Each of us is taking on a role and buillding up a fledgling human kingdom on a new, unexplored continent.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Yes, because when you have no arguments, you turn the discussion to personal level...that always work, right?
'Player and community' are not a content. The 'tools' you speak of are though. Without tools aka content, the game won't last long.
Just because there are no quests and story does not mean the game needs no content. You know - POSes, exploration, corporations, sovereignty, contracts, market interface, production system, conquerable stations, etc. is also content that cost money to develop.
I want a quality Sandbox MMO as much as anyone who does. But saying they don't need to focus on content development simply because Sandbox players can provide their own is a bit wonky to me.
This was the biggest issue many had with SWG as an example there was no forward growth when the game was a sandbox, none. Base content (non-expansion) growth didn't begin until after the game had already faced it's final nail (NGE). Things may have been far different (pre-cu) if this were not the case.
Sandbox games need content, without it the game becomes nothing but a PVP play-ground with crafter support. Which is fine for some I'm sure, myself included. We're hardly enough to sustain a game and company though, content addition will be the difference between the game becoming another MO or Darkfall, regardless of the SB tools available to us.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
That has nothing to do with it. If you have never played a sandbox game, you have no context. Want to know how I know that? Because I have played both types of games extensively and have been discussing on this site since 2007, and others much longer. I have found that when I try to explain certain elements of why sandbox games work to people who have never played one, they just can't wrap their minds around it because they only know themepark games and they see MMOs in those terms. You are welcome to disagree with me, and obviously I am generalizing, but that has been my experience.
The two mindsets are as different as can be. As a broad-sweeping example think about open-ended (sandbox) vs. end game (theme-park) approaches. Those different design philosophies alone change everything. This is to say nothing about truly player-driven content and community in sandboxes rather than content that is shoved down your throat and barely any community to speak of in themeparks.
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.
Oh come on man get off your sand box high horse. I bet there are lots of things you can not get your head around when it comes to themepark MMOS. And i have seen this excuse many times, what you call content is what i call easy way out of development. Looking at the current state of sand box MMO genre devs need to add a lot of varied content other than just FFA PVP and crafting. Give players tools too but atleast do your own part in developing content first.
How many servers SWTOR will launch with on release?
ShredderSE - Umm how many do they need? Maybe 6.
US, EU, Asian, France, German and Russian.
Subs will be so low there is no need for more
Snoocky-How many servers?
The first 3 months a lot...after that 2 i guess, one for PVE and 1 for PVP...
Thorbrand - SWTOR doesn't have longevity at all. Might be one of the shortest lived MMOs.
tldr: I am self-proclaimed expert. I need no arguments because I am expert and I am always right.
Cool story...
Looks very promising. One I will be following with interest but warily. Been burned to many times by the "sounds great in paper but the implementation" hype of recent sandbox titles...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Look at EVE. It's doing quiet well, and continuing to grow and expand. We are talking about a niche game here, and while it will be including some themepark elements (probably quests and some raids I would imagine), it's not going to be a game for everyone. I'm more than fine with that.
I love the latest ads for EVE because they demonstrate how one person's actions could change the paths of tens of thousands of players in their stock market, or by accidentally or purposefully starting an epic battle. It could effect politics in the game for months or years. If EVE was a ground-based game, you wouldn't be able to tear me away from it. I suspect this is true for a lot more people than anyone really knows. After all, EVE is the only successful sandbox out there now, and the game's style (ship-based) does not appeal to everyone.
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.
What a sandbox needs is the tools to allow players to create that content. I'm not talking about no silly questdesign feature. Im talking about crafting, building, exploring, combat etc. All of it. Not just just 1 or 2.
Let me build a world, provide my peers with things and then worry about keeping it all safe from other people that would do harm to it and me. Let me forge friendships, group up with people, build a camp, a town, a village, a city, a fortress. Let me worry about other groups drawing near to my resource sites, to my home. Let me organize a warband to face those enemies.
That's sandbox to me right there.
In my opinion, a sandbox world needs to be built first, before it can be destroyed. Games in the last years have been the other way around. Might as well have been Arena style games.
I got to this bit here:
We're also going to be actively reaching out to organized guilds and inviting them in as groups to pre-seed our sandbox with organizations that will help create the political, economic, military and territorial structure that Pathfinder Online will need to be successful. And of course, there will be ways for folks who want to get in without a lot of hassle to do so as well.
And thought, eh, no thanks. I have yet to run into a cross-game guild that I even like. Especially the ones that tend to get into these betas.
Let this one be for the sociopathic butterflies, I'll look elsewhere.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
Why do you need static quests in a sandbox game?
I'd prefer if they'd work on more believable NPCs (e.g. NPCs walking through towns, doing some business, having conversations, gathering in social hubs like inns/taverns/market places, predators in the wilderness hunting down other animals, etc.). NPCs could join you as hirelings/companions and could be tasked with different errands (e.g. guarding your guild house/home while you're offline, working in a mine, etc.).
Especially if you want to offer players some meaningful crafting there's no point in having static quests/quest rewards.
The rest should be up to the players. Nnobody prevents players from sending other players on quests to earn guild membership and stuff, though.
This right here is what I keep pining for in MMOs. While I enjoy a well made themepark game as much as the next gamer, I can only stay interested for a few months at best. After that, I get bored of doing the same thing over and over routine. Maybe this is because my first MMO experience was Shadowbane. Lords know I will be the first to say SB was not a perfect game (far from it), it did provide me with the things Bitz alludes to here. That aspect of bulding relationships and having a stake in the game world makes for a longer commitment to the game from players.
Hell, I still remember defending our hard built city during a siege and the great political intrigue the game generated. My fondest memories were of being a double agent between to rival factions and making a ton of money at it... Enough nostalgia, you get the idea. Now ask me anything memorable about my six months playing Rift...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
it's not going to be d20. read FAQ for more information.