This is a quote from the 2010 MMO Business Report: "Around 47.5 million Americans play MMOs and although 90% of these play free-to-play games, more money is spent in total on pay-to-play than free-to-play MMOs."
This in its very essence is telling us that the majority of income is made in P2P MMOs and not in F2P MMOs where the majority of players seem to play Browser and Flash games and overall there is no difference made between Themepark/Sandbox so the numbers at all be no helpfull. It could even be that the F2P Browser/Flash market is a much stronger sandbox market and WOW aside would beat the Themepark p2p market on the income side.
EVE had trouble bcs of decisions that alienated significant parts of the playerbase and bcs they developed 3 major MMOs at the same time with full stuffed teams: EVE + Dust 514 + WoD.
AoC does not funding the development of TSW nor any other Funcom mmo, Funcom is burning cash reserves they had build up in the past b4 the launch of AoC and recently has aquired access to 22 million funds more that have to be repaid if used. Every month Funcom is makling a few million deficit!
Rift is not funding the development of 2 other MMOs, they got fundings of 85 million in 2012 (they also got in 2007/8 fundings of around 100 million). I dont see why they would need 85 million in 2012 if Rift is making enough money to pay for the development of 2 mmos. http://www.crunchbase.com/company/trion-world-network
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
When you ignore reality yeah, what you wrote would make sense.
Funding problems? You mean like the rest of the world? Or was it because they're also developing two other MMO's along with maintaning EVE? Oh, they actually addressed that and said that like the rest of the world they weren't immune to the recession.
Years of neglect of EVE? You mean that every year they put out 2 expansions?
Or are you trying to use partial truths and out of context examples, yet again, to make it look like you have facts and evidence. Didn't I mention I've been playing EVE for many, many years now?
If you're going to point something out then use real facts. It was the NeX shop, a leaked memo that was supposed to be a what if scenario of developers playing devils advocate that combined gave the impression that CCP was abandoning the FiS part of the game in favor of developing a MT system that would offer more then just commetic features.
But this isn't about EVE. EVE is just my example of a very nich game that has a sub, and continues to see overal growth every year.
You can ignore everything I've written in favor of twisting fact and taking things out of context, your're still wrong.
Show us the themepark MMO's that use a sub based model and continually grow each year. There's hundreds of themeparks, and you insinuate that that's the only style that works, so surely there must be dozens of them operating under a sub based model and growing year in and year out. Which ones are they?
Ship balance has been off for years throughout all ship classes. They said so themselves. It is incredible that when I point that out, the fans will fall on me like a pack of rapid dogs. But when CCP says it, fans say "uhm, well maybe it is off a little". Not to mention the numerous bugs, broken mechanics and poor UI which have been the bane of the game for years. They've only recently started adressing those. Walking on stations, PI-minigames, avatar outfits... You should be happy they are focusing on the stuff that actually matters for a change - spaceships shooting other spaceships.
Once a year they ban botters so they can say to fans that they are working on the issue. Rest of the year they couldn't care less. Again, its been like this for years. Interviewed botters have said so themselves.
Have you even played the game?
Let me break a couple other illusions too: There is no santa and girls fart too. Do yourself a favor. Take off your rose-tinted glasses and stomp on them.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
EVE is doing what all these themeparks have been incapable of doing. GROWING. You can combine all the themeparks together all you want, you can not ignore the one fact that remains, EVE CONTINUES TO GROW WHILE EACH THEMEPARK THAT RELEASES CONTINUALLY LOSES SUBSCRIBERS AND THEN SWITCHES TO FREE TO PLAY.
List the subscription based themepark mmo's that continually grow, year after year. WoW is NOT on that list today. Name them!
So what if Eve is growing? A small game growing is still a small game.
And themepark has hit a saturation point. If Eve has 10M players (which it probably will not forever), it will stop growing too. There are more than 47M MMO players in just the US, of course the grow-rate has slowed or stopped.
Lastly, if you like themepark, there are many to choose from. There are no need to be loyal. So even if the market is growing, given so much competition, individual games may not. And competition is a GOOD thing.
If you are in favor of competition, then you should be in favor of an AAA sandbox games being developed so that we can get more diverse gameplay in an MMO market currently saturated with themepark clones of a certain game that shall remain unnamed. Competition is good. I agree with that statement. I hope ArcheAge kicks everyone in the ass so that we can spark some kind of innovation in an otherwise stagnant genre.
Oh i am in favor of more diverse game-type being developed. I am just not in favor of playing sandbox myself.
And, independent of my personal preference, my point still stands.
This is a quote from the 2010 MMO Business Report: "Around 47.5 million Americans play MMOs and although 90% of these play free-to-play games, more money is spent in total on pay-to-play than free-to-play MMOs."
This in its very essence is telling us that the majority of income is made in P2P MMOs and not in F2P MMOs where the majority of players seem to play Browser and Flash games and overall there is no difference made between Themepark/Sandbox so the numbers at all be no helpfull. It could even be that the F2P Browser/Flash market is a much stronger sandbox market and WOW aside would beat the Themepark p2p market on the income side.
In 2011, F2P MMOs are generating 47% of the revenue, and P2P 53%. The share of F2P increases from 39% to 47% from 2010 to 2011.
While you are technically correct that the majority of income in made in P2P, the ratio is pretty close to 50-50 in 2011. Given the trend, F2P is probably going to over-take P2P in 2012.
Indeed! I'm calling BS on the notion that there is this mythical mass of players that want a sandbox virtual world MMO. If there was one, I would hear about it, devs would see it, and there would be games for that crowd. As it stands, there's hardly one, and it has been like that for so long that merely saying there hasn't been the right one yet is not going to cut it. Many have tried, many have failed and even if these games were any good they would've showed much more interest from the public, don't you think?
How can you have a "massive" virtual world when you only have a handful of players to fill it. And how can you get funding to something that has such a small audience. You are doomed to wander from indie game to indie game...
Admit it. You are to rest of the MMORPG players what LARPers are to P&P role players. "Regular people" snicker at people who play D&D but everyone laughs at LARPers (no offense meant - but they do).
Ben "Yahtzee" Crosshaw hit the nail in the head: -"Eve players are to nerds what nerds are to normal people."
Even if some recent themeparks have failed or will fail in your eyes, I'm quite confident in saying that there will be no major shift towards sandboxes of any sort. People still love themeparks - they just don't like shitty games, thats all.
So now that you are done belittling everyone and their opinion and taste, do you have any arguments besides your "feeling" and the absence of evidence.
Because the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The market will move to where the business exists. Like survival of the fittest, if sandbox games attracted the largest share, the style the UO presented (aka sandbox) would have continued to dominate in other games rather than EQ style (aka themepark) which dominates today. [mod edit]
LOL did you really just call EQ1 a themepark?? You just lost all credibility there..
When you ignore reality yeah, what you wrote would make sense.
Funding problems? You mean like the rest of the world? Or was it because they're also developing two other MMO's along with maintaning EVE? Oh, they actually addressed that and said that like the rest of the world they weren't immune to the recession.
Years of neglect of EVE? You mean that every year they put out 2 expansions?
Or are you trying to use partial truths and out of context examples, yet again, to make it look like you have facts and evidence. Didn't I mention I've been playing EVE for many, many years now?
If you're going to point something out then use real facts. It was the NeX shop, a leaked memo that was supposed to be a what if scenario of developers playing devils advocate that combined gave the impression that CCP was abandoning the FiS part of the game in favor of developing a MT system that would offer more then just commetic features.
But this isn't about EVE. EVE is just my example of a very nich game that has a sub, and continues to see overal growth every year.
You can ignore everything I've written in favor of twisting fact and taking things out of context, your're still wrong.
Show us the themepark MMO's that use a sub based model and continually grow each year. There's hundreds of themeparks, and you insinuate that that's the only style that works, so surely there must be dozens of them operating under a sub based model and growing year in and year out. Which ones are they?
Ship balance has been off for years throughout all ship classes. They said so themselves. It is incredible that when I point that out, the fans will fall on me like a pack of rapid dogs. But when CCP says it, fans say "uhm, well maybe it is off a little". Not to mention the numerous bugs, broken mechanics and poor UI which have been the bane of the game for years. They've only recently started adressing those. Walking on stations, PI-minigames, avatar outfits... You should be happy they are focusing on the stuff that actually matters for a change - spaceships shooting other spaceships.
Once a year they ban botters so they can say to fans that they are working on the issue. Rest of the year they couldn't care less. Again, its been like this for years. Interviewed botters have said so themselves.
Have you even played the game?
Let me break a couple other illusions too: There is no santa and girls fart too. Do yourself a favor. Take off your rose-tinted glasses and stomp on them.
My goodness, you wrote a bunch of stuff.
None of it having anything to do with anything I wrote or even relevant to the very topic you started.
Please, provide us a list of themepark MMO's that uses a subscription model, and shows continued growth every year. This should be easier then directing us to the AAA sandbox MMO that didn't work to support your claim that there's no market for that style of game; that other thing you couldn't do.
I'm glad the thread is still going, I would have missed it. I rarely post on here, more of lurker but I do have an opinion on this subject.
I think there's plenty of people who would love to play a sandbox game. I think most "Themeparkers" would love it as well.
EvE does a lot of things well. As a matter of fact, it's almost perfect... except it's boring as hell for some people to play. I am dying for an Open World game so I forced myself to play EvE for a few months and every so often I force myself to restart my sub and try it again.
But the combat is boring, mining is boring, building ships and componants is boring, every aspect of the game I've tried has been boring... to me anyway. To those 400k that play it religiously, obviously it isn't boring to them... but I suspect more people share my opinion or they'd have way more than 400k subs worldwide.
Darkness Falls does have fun combat, but there's a major problem with noob ganking. There are some people that actually camp the starter towns and relentlessly kill people and nothing can be done about it. It is also not really a true "open world" because only one clan can be at war with another clan at a time and the gaming pop has figured out that if they make a splinter clan they can continously declare war on each other incessantly and never have to worry about losing any cities or land.
DF also started with a lot of bugs that could be taken advantage of, and people gained craploads of combat skills while offline and when those bugs were fixed, the people still had that "skill" but the new players never had access to those exploits. This created a huge divide which makes it even harder to combat that noob ganking I mentioned earlier.
EvE combats this with it's "security" system and how skills are learned over time through study and not simply mouse/keyboard clicks. Everyone learns at basically the same rate and as you and your friends get better and have better ships you can venture closer and closer to nulsec.
I think if someone could combine DF with EvE, it would be a huge success. Have "Kingdoms" that are like 1.0 sec space and the farther you get from those, the less security you have. Using an Elder Scrolls type combat system with a EvE type skill system and having clans/guilds/corps fighting for resources the farther out you get from those kingdoms and it being a free for all instead of "only one organization vs one organization" at a time with a pre-CU SWG crafting system... heaven, for me anyway.
Please, provide us a list of themepark MMO's that uses a subscription model, and shows continued growth every year.
Is there some reason you're applying to standard the themeparks that you aren't applying to sandboxes?
Does any game, either sandbox or themepark, qualify at all? Both CCP and Blizzard reported some reduction in their sub counts for last year?
Why are we even trying to split this hair?
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.
Odd this thread when Embers and now The Repopulation are proveing that people want a sandbox, Kickstarter is governed by the people if not the devs get no cash,so there has to be a want and desire by a player base,otherwise SWTOR would now have 10 million subs.
It's like everything comes in cycles and 2012/13 seems to be the year of indies and true innovation returning to games,38 studios crashed and burned,Bioware squandered an IP and can only send it F2P with a redface so public funded games devs can afford to take thier time and get it right, unlike big studios who follow the trend and squander millions even if that trend is now obselete.
Please, provide us a list of themepark MMO's that uses a subscription model, and shows continued growth every year.
Is there some reason you're applying to standard the themeparks that you aren't applying to sandboxes?
Does any game, either sandbox or themepark, qualify at all? Both CCP and Blizzard reported some reduction in their sub counts for last year?
Why are we even trying to split this hair?
The OP based an assumption off of what the industry does, that's not evidence that something wont work. Ok, if we're looking at what the industry does to make an assumption then lets also look at how people are spending their money on these games. Why are more and more people choosing not pay subs in an industry that's dominated with themepark mmos?
Do people really think that blizzard knew 11m people would play WoW? No they didn't. They probably figured something around the order of what EQ managed, maybe a little more. No one anticipated that millions upon millions of people would pay a subscription to play a game each month.
Blizzard took a chance, they made WoW, WoW was a huge hit, other studios looked at "what was possible" based on what they saw. WoW with millions of subscribers. Ever since then studios of been churning out themepark after themepark trying to get in on the action. It had NOTHING to do with themepark vs sandbox, it's business emulating businesses in an effort to achieve success; which is exactly what business do.
Millions of people, thanks to Blizzard, are familliar with a particullar style of game. It's EASIER to appeal to the familliar, then it is to create something new, even if it has a market. Business have been doing this forever, just ask kellog. It's simply EASIER to convince consumers to purchase a product that is familliar to them.
People will keep playing mediocre themeparks as long as that's what's offered to them, especially when they're free. The moment someone offers a good sandbox, in a fantasy setting, the industry will see a change.
If WoW had been a sandbox, we'd be having a different conversation.
And EVE had a dip last year because of an internal memo that leaked and alienated a lot of people, and they unsubbed. It's the only reason they saw a dip.
I don't even understand why anyone would be against sandbox gameplay, which the OP seems to be. EVERYTHING you can do in a themepark MMO you would be able to do in a good sandbox MMO. MO and DF do not represent what a good sandbox would be, something more like EVE in a fantasy setting with GW2 or even WoW combat would be a better idea. If you like themepark MMO's there's no reason you wouldn't like a well done sandbox one.
Odd this thread when Embers and now The Repopulation are proveing that people want a sandbox, Kickstarter is governed by the people if not the devs get no cash,so there has to be a want and desire by a player base,otherwise SWTOR would now have 10 million subs.
It's like everything comes in cycles and 2012/13 seems to be the year of indies and true innovation returning to games,38 studios crashed and burned,Bioware squandered an IP and can only send it F2P with a redface so public funded games devs can afford to take thier time and get it right, unlike big studios who follow the trend and squander millions even if that trend is now obselete.
I have to disagree with this.
#1. Embers has a whole 261 backers... and The Repopulation has 96 so far. Not what I would consider "Desire by a player base"
#2. Bioware created a perfectly fine game. They don't have 10 million subs because of one reason only, and that's WoW. That's the reason why a lot of decent to good games don't last or don't have "10 Million" subs.
WoW is a huge problem for the MMO Community, while it acts like a gateway for players into MMOs it also acts like a wall. WoW was made for the lowest common denominator, it's extremely easy. So easy that my son started playing it at 8 years old and he was successful at the game. It's hard for people to give up that kind of success(and eventually longevity) to go into a game that is just starting, even if it's the best game ever made.
So if you want to blame something, blame the WoW community for not branching out and trying something new. It isn't Bioware, it wasn't 38 studios (their game doesn't even have a name yet, how can you blame any lack of success on a game when it isn't even out yet?), it isn't even trends... it's the unwillingness of gamers to give new games a shot.
Don't you just hate know it alls !!! I cane name a few sandbox games which are packed with players ! Perpetual! Second life! Eve ! Europa! Mortal online ! Dark fall! Daoc! And I know of a few more of which I've forgotten the names ! My point is ! Is that the crowed for sandbox is indeed a massive one! The problem is the crowed has seperate ideas of what they concider to be sand box and that is what is holding the genre back! Ya see eve is a true form sandbox! But its just got too steep a learning curve and it puts off a lot of sanbox loving players! Take swg for example! It is a sandbox! But you can also play it as a themepark! And the players from that game think swg is a true sandbox when it is not!! Swg has a sandbox base and later was upgraded with an oh so bleak themepark aspect! So no!! The op is not correct and the op hasn't really got an oddle about what he/she speaks.
There is a massive player base for sanbox games! And I'm one of those gameless players and I know about 20 other sandboxless gamers. We need a good qaulity sandbox to play!
Wrong you certainly can. You can sit in station in EvE and make trillions of isk in various ways. In EvE Isk is power, it can fund ships, wars, hire other players to fight for you, whatever you want it to do. With ISK, all those things could be accomplished by a person sitting in station and never undocking.
Your second sentence makes no sense.
No, in WoW XP is a critical resource you must have to advance your character so that you can acquire wealth (gold and gear) at a reasonable rate for your character.
SP is as critical resource in Eve. There's no difference. Can you get skillbooks by not leaving the newbie station. Can you engage trade in other systems? Will any rational player listen to a guy who sits in newbie station for goodness sake.
Also!!! Eve is over 9 years old !! And its got more. Players now than. It had when it launched !! No other game ever made can claim that ! Sandbox does indeed rule not even wow can have that claim ! Wows pop is dwindling ! Swtor won't live to see its 3rd birthday and lotros pop is dwindling !! Any other game that comes close to eve is a sandbox
Originally posted by Adamai Don't you just hate know it alls !!! I cane name a few sandbox games which are packed with players ! Perpetual! Second life! Eve ! Europa! Mortal online ! Dark fall! Daoc! And I know of a few more of which I've forgotten the names ! My point is ! Is that the crowed for sandbox is indeed a massive one! The problem is the crowed has seperate ideas of what they concider to be sand box and that is what is holding the genre back! Ya see eve is a true form sandbox! But its just got too steep a learning curve and it puts off a lot of sanbox loving players! Take swg for example! It is a sandbox! But you can also play it as a themepark! And the players from that game think swg is a true sandbox when it is not!! Swg has a sandbox base and later was upgraded with an oh so bleak themepark aspect! So no!! The op is not correct and the op hasn't really got an oddle about what he/she speaks.
There is a massive player base for sanbox games! And I'm one of those gameless players and I know about 20 other sandboxless gamers. We need a good qaulity sandbox to play!
23, 24, 25...sorry, just counting the exclamation points...
A good sandbox is measured by its interact ability with the actual game world! An example would be- the crafting system as in everything in the game world can be recreated ! An extension on that would be combining of said items into another item! Or! Can a player build his own house anywhere he wants, can a guild construct its own guild base and adjacent buildings and is the resource system for the game deep enough to warrant a crafter class ! Is resource aquisition complex enough to warrant trader type players !! The sandbox crowed are not healers dps and tanks!! They are are fighters, builders, farmers, leaders, prospectors, brigands, pirates, mercs, transporters, bankers , loaners, developers, planners, these are just some of the types of charecters can be and play in mmos! Not because they are the class choices! But because there isn't any class choice and is actual defined by the limits of the players imagination and not the games template content and mechanics. A lot of you have a lot to learn about what a sandbox actual is.
Indeed! I'm calling BS on the notion that there is this mythical mass of players that want a sandbox virtual world MMO. If there was one, I would hear about it, devs would see it, and there would be games for that crowd. As it stands, there's hardly one, and it has been like that for so long that merely saying there hasn't been the right one yet is not going to cut it. Many have tried, many have failed and even if these games were any good they would've showed much more interest from the public, don't you think?
How can you have a "massive" virtual world when you only have a handful of players to fill it. And how can you get funding to something that has such a small audience. You are doomed to wander from indie game to indie game...
Admit it. You are to rest of the MMORPG players what LARPers are to P&P role players. "Regular people" snicker at people who play D&D but everyone laughs at LARPers (no offense meant - but they do).
Ben "Yahtzee" Crosshaw hit the nail in the head: -"Eve players are to nerds what nerds are to normal people."
Even if some recent themeparks have failed or will fail in your eyes, I'm quite confident in saying that there will be no major shift towards sandboxes of any sort. People still love themeparks - they just don't like shitty games, thats all.
So now that you are done belittling everyone and their opinion and taste, do you have any arguments besides your "feeling" and the absence of evidence.
Because the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The market will move to where the business exists. Like survival of the fittest, if sandbox games attracted the largest share, the style the UO presented (aka sandbox) would have continued to dominate in other games rather than EQ style (aka themepark) which dominates today. [mod edit]
LOL did you really just call EQ1 a themepark?? You just lost all credibility there..
EQ was a sandbox eh?
I dont remember Owen controlling the loot distribution in game.
I dont remember being forced to PVP.
I dont remember having housing available. Quite the contrary, dev created content controlled the game.
EQ had sandboxy features, but in no way shape or form was it the focus of game play. The PVE content was. That is read Dev created.
EQ is the Grand dad of themepark MMOs. It showed devs folks prefer PVE, and not PVP as the focus in their MMOs, which is what a themepark excels in.
Next time you seek to insult someone, it would be nice if you had a damn clue of what you are talking about.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
The keyword you used was many have "tried".Not imo they have not tried very hard at all,all i have seen is generic efforts that cut tons of corners or just leave content out and make an excuse as to why.
I don't like to LABEL any game at all.All i want is a Theme,character depth and combat depth.I want players to be playing a role after all it is a ROLE playing game.
I don't care how a developer achieves what i ask for,if they deliver i am happy.However please don't try to sell me any kind of PVP.i knwo the effort it takes to do it right and there is no way anyone will deliver it.Release me a good solid PVE game then work on pvp IF they want it.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I dont remember Owen controlling the loot distribution in game.
I dont remember being forced to PVP.
I dont remember having housing available. Quite the contrary, dev created content controlled the game.
EQ had sandboxy features, but in no way shape or form was it the focus of game play. The PVE content was. That is read Dev created.
EQ is the Grand dad of themepark MMOs. It showed devs folks prefer PVE, and not PVP as the focus in their MMOs, which is what a themepark excels in.
Next time you seek to insult someone, it would be nice if you had a damn clue of what you are talking about.
Why does PVP have to define what a sandbox game is. Cant a PVE game be a sandbox type game? And not for nothing but your hate for sandbox type games almost makes your thoughts on the subject moot. With what your quote and sig says, we know what side of the fence you sit on.
My idea of what a sandbox game embodies is the freedom to go in whatever direction you choose. Not being shuffeled off to the next quest hub. Doesent mean FFA pvp lootz or putting a home at the bottom of a lake. There should be some rules. People are taking these 2 words way to seriously.
Just for fun i looked up "sandbox (video games)" on Wiki and this is what came up
Comments
This is a quote from the 2010 MMO Business Report:
"Around 47.5 million Americans play MMOs and although 90% of these play free-to-play games, more money is spent in total on pay-to-play than free-to-play MMOs."
This in its very essence is telling us that the majority of income is made in P2P MMOs and not in F2P MMOs where the majority of players seem to play Browser and Flash games and overall there is no difference made between Themepark/Sandbox so the numbers at all be no helpfull.
It could even be that the F2P Browser/Flash market is a much stronger sandbox market and WOW aside would beat the Themepark p2p market on the income side.
EVE had trouble bcs of decisions that alienated significant parts of the playerbase and bcs they developed 3 major MMOs at the same time with full stuffed teams:
EVE + Dust 514 + WoD.
AoC does not funding the development of TSW nor any other Funcom mmo, Funcom is burning cash reserves they had build up in the past b4 the launch of AoC and recently has aquired access to 22 million funds more that have to be repaid if used.
Every month Funcom is makling a few million deficit!
Rift is not funding the development of 2 other MMOs, they got fundings of 85 million in 2012 (they also got in 2007/8 fundings of around 100 million).
I dont see why they would need 85 million in 2012 if Rift is making enough money to pay for the development of 2 mmos.
http://www.crunchbase.com/company/trion-world-network
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM
Ship balance has been off for years throughout all ship classes. They said so themselves. It is incredible that when I point that out, the fans will fall on me like a pack of rapid dogs. But when CCP says it, fans say "uhm, well maybe it is off a little". Not to mention the numerous bugs, broken mechanics and poor UI which have been the bane of the game for years. They've only recently started adressing those. Walking on stations, PI-minigames, avatar outfits... You should be happy they are focusing on the stuff that actually matters for a change - spaceships shooting other spaceships.
Once a year they ban botters so they can say to fans that they are working on the issue. Rest of the year they couldn't care less. Again, its been like this for years. Interviewed botters have said so themselves.
Have you even played the game?
Let me break a couple other illusions too: There is no santa and girls fart too. Do yourself a favor. Take off your rose-tinted glasses and stomp on them.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Oh i am in favor of more diverse game-type being developed. I am just not in favor of playing sandbox myself.
And, independent of my personal preference, my point still stands.
More information.
http://www.slideshare.net/Newzoo/newzoo-trend-report-mmo-games-november-2011
In 2011, F2P MMOs are generating 47% of the revenue, and P2P 53%. The share of F2P increases from 39% to 47% from 2010 to 2011.
While you are technically correct that the majority of income in made in P2P, the ratio is pretty close to 50-50 in 2011. Given the trend, F2P is probably going to over-take P2P in 2012.
i cant believe this stupid ass thread is still going.
Your opinion is much appreciated.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
ill bet
I think it is a myth given that most people would just play a good game and could care less about this sandbox/themepark bullcrap.
Most people could go either way.
LOL did you really just call EQ1 a themepark?? You just lost all credibility there..
My goodness, you wrote a bunch of stuff.
None of it having anything to do with anything I wrote or even relevant to the very topic you started.
Please, provide us a list of themepark MMO's that uses a subscription model, and shows continued growth every year. This should be easier then directing us to the AAA sandbox MMO that didn't work to support your claim that there's no market for that style of game; that other thing you couldn't do.
I'm glad the thread is still going, I would have missed it. I rarely post on here, more of lurker but I do have an opinion on this subject.
I think there's plenty of people who would love to play a sandbox game. I think most "Themeparkers" would love it as well.
EvE does a lot of things well. As a matter of fact, it's almost perfect... except it's boring as hell for some people to play. I am dying for an Open World game so I forced myself to play EvE for a few months and every so often I force myself to restart my sub and try it again.
But the combat is boring, mining is boring, building ships and componants is boring, every aspect of the game I've tried has been boring... to me anyway. To those 400k that play it religiously, obviously it isn't boring to them... but I suspect more people share my opinion or they'd have way more than 400k subs worldwide.
Darkness Falls does have fun combat, but there's a major problem with noob ganking. There are some people that actually camp the starter towns and relentlessly kill people and nothing can be done about it. It is also not really a true "open world" because only one clan can be at war with another clan at a time and the gaming pop has figured out that if they make a splinter clan they can continously declare war on each other incessantly and never have to worry about losing any cities or land.
DF also started with a lot of bugs that could be taken advantage of, and people gained craploads of combat skills while offline and when those bugs were fixed, the people still had that "skill" but the new players never had access to those exploits. This created a huge divide which makes it even harder to combat that noob ganking I mentioned earlier.
EvE combats this with it's "security" system and how skills are learned over time through study and not simply mouse/keyboard clicks. Everyone learns at basically the same rate and as you and your friends get better and have better ships you can venture closer and closer to nulsec.
I think if someone could combine DF with EvE, it would be a huge success. Have "Kingdoms" that are like 1.0 sec space and the farther you get from those, the less security you have. Using an Elder Scrolls type combat system with a EvE type skill system and having clans/guilds/corps fighting for resources the farther out you get from those kingdoms and it being a free for all instead of "only one organization vs one organization" at a time with a pre-CU SWG crafting system... heaven, for me anyway.
Is there some reason you're applying to standard the themeparks that you aren't applying to sandboxes?
Does any game, either sandbox or themepark, qualify at all? Both CCP and Blizzard reported some reduction in their sub counts for last year?
Why are we even trying to split this hair?
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.
Odd this thread when Embers and now The Repopulation are proveing that people want a sandbox, Kickstarter is governed by the people if not the devs get no cash,so there has to be a want and desire by a player base,otherwise SWTOR would now have 10 million subs.
It's like everything comes in cycles and 2012/13 seems to be the year of indies and true innovation returning to games,38 studios crashed and burned,Bioware squandered an IP and can only send it F2P with a redface so public funded games devs can afford to take thier time and get it right, unlike big studios who follow the trend and squander millions even if that trend is now obselete.
The OP based an assumption off of what the industry does, that's not evidence that something wont work. Ok, if we're looking at what the industry does to make an assumption then lets also look at how people are spending their money on these games. Why are more and more people choosing not pay subs in an industry that's dominated with themepark mmos?
Do people really think that blizzard knew 11m people would play WoW? No they didn't. They probably figured something around the order of what EQ managed, maybe a little more. No one anticipated that millions upon millions of people would pay a subscription to play a game each month.
Blizzard took a chance, they made WoW, WoW was a huge hit, other studios looked at "what was possible" based on what they saw. WoW with millions of subscribers. Ever since then studios of been churning out themepark after themepark trying to get in on the action. It had NOTHING to do with themepark vs sandbox, it's business emulating businesses in an effort to achieve success; which is exactly what business do.
Millions of people, thanks to Blizzard, are familliar with a particullar style of game. It's EASIER to appeal to the familliar, then it is to create something new, even if it has a market. Business have been doing this forever, just ask kellog. It's simply EASIER to convince consumers to purchase a product that is familliar to them.
People will keep playing mediocre themeparks as long as that's what's offered to them, especially when they're free. The moment someone offers a good sandbox, in a fantasy setting, the industry will see a change.
If WoW had been a sandbox, we'd be having a different conversation.
And EVE had a dip last year because of an internal memo that leaked and alienated a lot of people, and they unsubbed. It's the only reason they saw a dip.
I don't even understand why anyone would be against sandbox gameplay, which the OP seems to be. EVERYTHING you can do in a themepark MMO you would be able to do in a good sandbox MMO. MO and DF do not represent what a good sandbox would be, something more like EVE in a fantasy setting with GW2 or even WoW combat would be a better idea. If you like themepark MMO's there's no reason you wouldn't like a well done sandbox one.
I have to disagree with this.
#1. Embers has a whole 261 backers... and The Repopulation has 96 so far. Not what I would consider "Desire by a player base"
#2. Bioware created a perfectly fine game. They don't have 10 million subs because of one reason only, and that's WoW. That's the reason why a lot of decent to good games don't last or don't have "10 Million" subs.
WoW is a huge problem for the MMO Community, while it acts like a gateway for players into MMOs it also acts like a wall. WoW was made for the lowest common denominator, it's extremely easy. So easy that my son started playing it at 8 years old and he was successful at the game. It's hard for people to give up that kind of success(and eventually longevity) to go into a game that is just starting, even if it's the best game ever made.
So if you want to blame something, blame the WoW community for not branching out and trying something new. It isn't Bioware, it wasn't 38 studios (their game doesn't even have a name yet, how can you blame any lack of success on a game when it isn't even out yet?), it isn't even trends... it's the unwillingness of gamers to give new games a shot.
I cane name a few sandbox games which are packed with players ! Perpetual! Second life! Eve ! Europa! Mortal online ! Dark fall! Daoc! And I know of a few more of which I've forgotten the names ! My point is ! Is that the crowed for sandbox is indeed a massive one! The problem is the crowed has seperate ideas of what they concider to be sand box and that is what is holding the genre back! Ya see eve is a true form sandbox! But its just got too steep a learning curve and it puts off a lot of sanbox loving players!
Take swg for example! It is a sandbox! But you can also play it as a themepark! And the players from that game think swg is a true sandbox when it is not!! Swg has a sandbox base and later was upgraded with an oh so bleak themepark aspect! So no!! The op is not correct and the op hasn't really got an oddle about what he/she speaks.
There is a massive player base for sanbox games! And I'm one of those gameless players and I know about 20 other sandboxless gamers. We need a good qaulity sandbox to play!
Um, yes? Through trade contracts and buy orders?
Where's the any key?
23, 24, 25...sorry, just counting the exclamation points...
Where's the any key?
EQ was a sandbox eh?
I dont remember Owen controlling the loot distribution in game.
I dont remember being forced to PVP.
I dont remember having housing available. Quite the contrary, dev created content controlled the game.
EQ had sandboxy features, but in no way shape or form was it the focus of game play. The PVE content was. That is read Dev created.
EQ is the Grand dad of themepark MMOs. It showed devs folks prefer PVE, and not PVP as the focus in their MMOs, which is what a themepark excels in.
Next time you seek to insult someone, it would be nice if you had a damn clue of what you are talking about.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Of my previous list the only 1 or 2 aspects of a sandbox EQ had were.
1) no quests
2) half skill based system(they were capped by levels though)
So while it had only 1 sandbox element the other themepark stuff and later updates made it mostly a themepark. Today its completely themepark.
@ the OP...
The keyword you used was many have "tried".Not imo they have not tried very hard at all,all i have seen is generic efforts that cut tons of corners or just leave content out and make an excuse as to why.
I don't like to LABEL any game at all.All i want is a Theme,character depth and combat depth.I want players to be playing a role after all it is a ROLE playing game.
I don't care how a developer achieves what i ask for,if they deliver i am happy.However please don't try to sell me any kind of PVP.i knwo the effort it takes to do it right and there is no way anyone will deliver it.Release me a good solid PVE game then work on pvp IF they want it.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Why does PVP have to define what a sandbox game is. Cant a PVE game be a sandbox type game? And not for nothing but your hate for sandbox type games almost makes your thoughts on the subject moot. With what your quote and sig says, we know what side of the fence you sit on.
My idea of what a sandbox game embodies is the freedom to go in whatever direction you choose. Not being shuffeled off to the next quest hub. Doesent mean FFA pvp lootz or putting a home at the bottom of a lake. There should be some rules. People are taking these 2 words way to seriously.
Just for fun i looked up "sandbox (video games)" on Wiki and this is what came up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandbox_%28video_games%29
Didnt see anything about PVP on there but its all in how you wanna look at it i guess.
But if were ganna go on this meaning of the word sandbox then yes, EQ was a sandbox.