Originally posted by SEANMCAD actually I believe the wiki says it allows the player to play creatively. Creating things is a simple way of playing creatively, whether that meanas building something, authoring books, stories, quests, or emergent gameplay (ie.e build a castle to block a mine, creating conflict.
Everyone does not agree that the experience and freedom is greatly different between WoW and skyrim, mainly people are like me and feel that skyrim is only a little more free. I can go almost everywhere, and almost build the character I want - but thats it.
@creslin. Your right the devs are the ones that ultimately control what goes in, however things can be coded in a way that does let the player create something unique. E.G. the devs give someone the abliity to create a quest, they don't determine which quest, they just let you make a quest, you decide what kind and what happens.
Or in EQ2, devs have let you creat houses, and not planned houses of 2-3 different styles like in VG. But truely unique houses, brick and board. Or you can make a dungeon, or you can create conflict by placement of a castle... these are all these that the player created through the tools the devleoper coded.
Yes the devs gave you the ability to do it, but you are the one that are responsible for the gameplay that arose from that.
1. 'playing creatively' can mean running down that path instead of another I dont think it has to mean affect the physical world but REGARDLES, its symantics anyway. The game you are describing is Xyson and Minecraft ONLY.
2. You might not agree that the experience is radically different between the two games but when people are being honest I wouldnt at all be shocked to learn that you are a minority. For me personally I dont like doing quests PEROID, so a game that allows me to go really anywhere at any time without doing any quests is RADICALLY different from a game that requires me to do quests in order for specific large regions of the map to allow me to even enter. if that is not quest dependency I dont know what is and to call you on it without even knowing you I think you know this.
1. Thats right, and that would be more creative control than only having one option. However there are significantly more games that allow you to do that. Heck even EQ2 lets you author books, build dungeons and build houses now - not sandbox but definately closer (still too restrictive in leveling). Istaria lets you build a great deal as well. Eve lets you build and attack. And as I stated it isn't always a physical structure. If the game lets you create a scenario that lets you enhance or perform a type of gameplay, that is creative control.
2. We allready covered that WoW doesn't require you to do quests ever and at all. And Skyrim does prohibt you from entering some areas until you do certain quest lines (see paarthurnax)
careful now you are starting to suggest the EQ2 is 'sandy' but that Skyrim is not a sandbox. Yes I understand the difference but you are framing yourself into a position that despite great efforts will not change reality.
keep that latter point in mind. No matter what we say here, no matter how clever we all think we are in saying it, no matter how we define words. reality will still be the same and that reality will leave me NOT paying for EQ2 and WILL pay for Skyrim
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Sandbox means that the player shares the creative role with the Developer. Skyrim very much conforms to that dynamic since the game allows the player to make meaningfull decisions which actualy CHANGE the game world and the narrative of the game world in a persistant fashion..... i.e. IF you choose to support the Stormblades and take that to the conclusion of the game, the capital of Skyrim WILL be controled by the Stormblades. If you decide to not kill the vampire in cave XYZ, he'll continue to be there. If you destroy the bandits in cave ABC, the cave WILL be empty when you return.
You are using an unrealistic standard to define "sandbox" since achieving your standard would actualy imply that the player be allowed to insert his own code into the game, which NO commercial (and most non-commercial games) would allow.
Heck by your defintion even PnP Role-Playing Campaigns wouldn't fit your standard of "Sandbox" since the GM is generaly the one who controls the environment and the NPC's and determines how they will react to the players actions.
Sandbox doesn't imply ZERO limitations or absolute freedom of the player to create ANYTHING. Not even a litteral sandbox fits that definition as there absolute limitations as to the scale and nature of how the player can manipulate the sand. Sandbox simply implies that the player has SOME ability to shape/effect the game environment...that they do have a creative role in the game.
Sandbox - Themepark is simply a spectrum that ANY game will fall somewhere upon. Even in WoW the player has some ability to change thier environment through thier actions (i.e. creative input) if only in a very transitory and superficial fashion. Simply telling a story that other players listen to within a pub, would qualify it for that. On the other hand, even a litteral sandbox imposes some limitations upon the options the player has for manipulating it....just due to pure physics.
Sure, but it's clear that there are very few elements of Skyrim which change according to the player's will. That's why it's predominantly a themepark game.
Halaa in WOW changes sides according to which faction controls it, but that solitary sandbox element (amongst few others) doesn't cause WOW to be a sandbox game.
Similarly, siding with a faction, deciding on your character's build, or decorating your home are the trickle of genuinely sandbox features in Skyrim -- the entire rest of the game is a themepark.
I never implied you need to insert your own code to have player authorship over the experience in a game. That's just silly.
What I have said is that the core experience of a game defines whether it's sandbox or themepark, and since 95% of skyrim is exploring the game world and dungeons (none of which involve substantial player authorship) that's why it's considered a themepark.
The ENTIRE Game-World changes according to the players will....nearly every single location and every single (non random encounter mob) changes permanently depending upon what the player decides to do. It's just that each of those individual changes provide a limited set of parameters. However within the context of the game as a whole, there are so many different bits and pieces that change that I doubt you'll find any two saves of Skyrim on different players machines where the world looks EXACTLY THE SAME. If that doesn't highlight a players ability to manipulate the environment/narrative and inject thier own creativity into the game....then I'm not sure what would be.
Granted, there are definately mechanisms that Skyrim could have introduced to inject more player creativity/manipulation into the World and push it even further into the "sandbox" spectrum....but I'd hazard for most of us who self describe as "sandbox fans" it qualifies.
Speaking personaly...if an MMO offered players as much ability to manipulate the environment, persistantly change the story/narrative, inject thier own creativity and freedom of approach as Skyrim does as a SPRPG, then I would be satisfied with it....and I would consider it a "sandbox MMO".....and I'm betting most of the folks here who are self-described "sandbox fans" would as well.
You can call it "Bug-ala-Boo" rather then "sandbox" if it makes you feel better.....but if you are looking for a common frame of reference in order to have a meaningful discussion about what we actualy want in a game we call "sandbox" then I would hazard that's it. Otherwise we are just arguing semantics and talking past each other.
For the folks carrying on about Skyrim relating to MMO sandboxes, I would like to see one that it does resemble.
The gameplay of Skyrim is basically the same as EQ(FPS vs tab isnt germaine to the point being made), or hell to piss folks off, it had more in common with TOR than it does any MMO sandbox.
It sure as hell doesnt play like SWG, UO, or EVE. Loot isnt predicated on crafting. The world isnt an open page, ready to be built open. The game actually has a very focused story line.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
For the folks carrying on about Skyrim relating to MMO sandboxes, I would like to see one that it does resemble.
The gameplay of Skyrim is basically the same as EQ(FPS vs tab isnt germaine to the point being made), or hell to piss folks off, it had more in common with TOR than it does any MMO sandbox.
It sure as hell doesnt play like SWG, UO, or EVE. Loot isnt predicated on crafting. The world isnt an open page, ready to be built open. The game actually has a very focused story line.
sandbox means non-lineral. Look it up in wikipedia.
Creative game play doesnt mean you have to affect the world directly.
but far more importantly NONE of it matters. Its all symantics.
Skyrim/Darkfall is not like EQ2...peroid and no amount of arguement or change of words will change that fundemental reality.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
For the folks carrying on about Skyrim relating to MMO sandboxes, I would like to see one that it does resemble.
The gameplay of Skyrim is basically the same as EQ(FPS vs tab isnt germaine to the point being made), or hell to piss folks off, it had more in common with TOR than it does any MMO sandbox.
It sure as hell doesnt play like SWG, UO, or EVE. Loot isnt predicated on crafting. The world isnt an open page, ready to be built open. The game actually has a very focused story line.
sandbox means non-lineral. Look it up in wikipedia.
Creative game play doesnt mean you have to affect the world directly.
but far more importantly NONE of it matters. Its all symantics.
Skyrim/Darkfall is not like EQ2...peroid and no amount of arguement or change of words will change that fundemental reality.
Your right it isn't like EQ2. Skyrim lets me go anwhere at any time, EQ2 doesn't. However EQ2 lets me build basically whatever I want, make dungeons and authorize books, and skyrim doesn't do that.
So which has more freedom? I guess it depends what parts of the game you are talking about.
See creatively right there in your wiki definition. It's impossible to be creative without creating.
objectives.[1] Video games that include such level design often are referred to as "free roam" games.
The term is sometimes used interchangeably with "sandbox" and "free-roaming";[2][3] however, the terms open world and free-roaming describe the game environment itself and allude more to the absence of artificial barriers,[4] in contrast to the invisible walls and loading screens that are common in linear level designs. The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by his ability to play creatively and with there being "no right way"[5] of playing the game.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
There are plenty of 'sandbox' fans but there are not many 'sandbox MMO buyers'.
That's just fact.
The original poster and the subsequent discussion is still around 'do they exists' and so far, we have no evidence that they do.
Plenty of people say 'they will buy' but not many actually do
well this is cause there are not many good sandbox MMOs cause its hard to create such a game ... f.e. Darkfall is great sandbox buts its graphic engine and the whole art style of the world was dated already from the release and thats cause this MMO was produced by a really tiny team ... if they had the resources they would make an awesome game !
For the folks carrying on about Skyrim relating to MMO sandboxes, I would like to see one that it does resemble.
The gameplay of Skyrim is basically the same as EQ(FPS vs tab isnt germaine to the point being made), or hell to piss folks off, it had more in common with TOR than it does any MMO sandbox.
It sure as hell doesnt play like SWG, UO, or EVE. Loot isnt predicated on crafting. The world isnt an open page, ready to be built open. The game actually has a very focused story line.
sandbox means non-lineral. Look it up in wikipedia.
Creative game play doesnt mean you have to affect the world directly.
but far more importantly NONE of it matters. Its all symantics.
Skyrim/Darkfall is not like EQ2...peroid and no amount of arguement or change of words will change that fundemental reality.
Your right it isn't like EQ2. Skyrim lets me go anwhere at any time, EQ2 doesn't. However EQ2 lets me build basically whatever I want, make dungeons and authorize books, and skyrim doesn't do that.
So which has more freedom? I guess it depends what parts of the game you are talking about.
See creatively right there in your wiki definition. It's impossible to be creative without creating.
objectives.[1] Video games that include such level design often are referred to as "free roam" games.
The term is sometimes used interchangeably with "sandbox" and "free-roaming";[2][3] however, the terms open world and free-roaming describe the game environment itself and allude more to the absence of artificial barriers,[4] in contrast to the invisible walls and loading screens that are common in linear level designs. The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by his ability to play creatively and with there being "no right way"[5] of playing the game.
ok you win.
Skyrim is not a sandbox and EQ2 is.
can we now move on with the point of this conversation?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
For the folks carrying on about Skyrim relating to MMO sandboxes, I would like to see one that it does resemble.
The gameplay of Skyrim is basically the same as EQ(FPS vs tab isnt germaine to the point being made), or hell to piss folks off, it had more in common with TOR than it does any MMO sandbox.
It sure as hell doesnt play like SWG, UO, or EVE. Loot isnt predicated on crafting. The world isnt an open page, ready to be built open. The game actually has a very focused story line.
sandbox means non-lineral. Look it up in wikipedia.
Creative game play doesnt mean you have to affect the world directly.
but far more importantly NONE of it matters. Its all symantics.
Skyrim/Darkfall is not like EQ2...peroid and no amount of arguement or change of words will change that fundemental reality.
Straw Man much?
I said EQ....not EQ2. And yes, Skyrim plays pretty much along the line of an EQ than it does SWG/EVE/UO.
So once again, show me a MMO sandbox game that plays like Skyrim.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Originally posted by SEANMCAD actually I believe the wiki says it allows the player to play creatively. Creating things is a simple way of playing creatively, whether that meanas building something, authoring books, stories, quests, or emergent gameplay (ie.e build a castle to block a mine, creating conflict.
Everyone does not agree that the experience and freedom is greatly different between WoW and skyrim, mainly people are like me and feel that skyrim is only a little more free. I can go almost everywhere, and almost build the character I want - but thats it.
@creslin. Your right the devs are the ones that ultimately control what goes in, however things can be coded in a way that does let the player create something unique. E.G. the devs give someone the abliity to create a quest, they don't determine which quest, they just let you make a quest, you decide what kind and what happens.
Or in EQ2, devs have let you creat houses, and not planned houses of 2-3 different styles like in VG. But truely unique houses, brick and board. Or you can make a dungeon, or you can create conflict by placement of a castle... these are all these that the player created through the tools the devleoper coded.
Yes the devs gave you the ability to do it, but you are the one that are responsible for the gameplay that arose from that.
1. 'playing creatively' can mean running down that path instead of another I dont think it has to mean affect the physical world but REGARDLES, its symantics anyway. The game you are describing is Xyson and Minecraft ONLY.
2. You might not agree that the experience is radically different between the two games but when people are being honest I wouldnt at all be shocked to learn that you are a minority. For me personally I dont like doing quests PEROID, so a game that allows me to go really anywhere at any time without doing any quests is RADICALLY different from a game that requires me to do quests in order for specific large regions of the map to allow me to even enter. if that is not quest dependency I dont know what is and to call you on it without even knowing you I think you know this.
1. Thats right, and that would be more creative control than only having one option. However there are significantly more games that allow you to do that. Heck even EQ2 lets you author books, build dungeons and build houses now - not sandbox but definately closer (still too restrictive in leveling). Istaria lets you build a great deal as well. Eve lets you build and attack. And as I stated it isn't always a physical structure. If the game lets you create a scenario that lets you enhance or perform a type of gameplay, that is creative control.
2. We allready covered that WoW doesn't require you to do quests ever and at all. And Skyrim does prohibt you from entering some areas until you do certain quest lines (see paarthurnax)
careful now you are starting to suggest the EQ2 is 'sandy' but that Skyrim is not a sandbox. Yes I understand the difference but you are framing yourself into a position that despite great efforts will not change reality.
keep that latter point in mind. No matter what we say here, no matter how clever we all think we are in saying it, no matter how we define words. reality will still be the same and that reality will leave me NOT paying for EQ2 and WILL pay for Skyrim
I'm not framing it at all. I'm outright stating it. With addition of player made dungeons, the able to build anything you want, and authored books EQ2 is definately more "sandy". While I've allready stated I don't think Skyrim is a sandbox, it is more themeparky, the degree to which it is when compared with EQ2 is arguable. IMO this is the reality.
I really don't care what you pay for or dont, that is completely irrelevant to the conversation.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
No it isn't that way at all. It is just as fast to gain levels in wow by dungeons and pvp as it is in through questings. So it's more do you want to take a car or a motorcycle. Not only that but there are definate advantages to not doing the quest chains - that is pvp gives you really good rewards, dungeons give you really good rewards and more coin.
You are not punished in any way shape or form by not doing the quests.
yes you are. this is silly. I dont know how many of the blindly obvious examples I can provide. are you SURE you want to take that position because I assure you its not making you look as clever as you think, in fact just the opposite
How? As I stated I get xp just as fast and I get better gear and rewards. So pleas explain how?
I don't need to do a single quest and I will get to the high levels just was fast and with just as good gear (actually I'll probably have better gear) and just as much coin (actually I'll probably have more coin).
This is only true for about a third of classes (and a third of those talent-specs), namely the ones that have access to low-lvl AOE spells and kiting potential (Frost mages, best grinding class. hunter/warlock, second best).
Rogues, warriors are horrible grinding classes, and you will die, a lot.
In order to effectively grind in WoW, ie. be as good as questing you need:
-An exceptionally good knowledge of the game-world (first-time players will not)
-A class that supports grinding/kiting (enemy encounters are not balanced 1v1+X, and thats what you need to do to effectively grind)
-Intimate knowledge of your class and synergies in talents (again first time players will not)
-A plan, or guide to show you optimal griding-routes and spots.
Doesn't sound like they are "equal".
Um no. Those classes are not soloing in the dungeons they are part of the group. Warriors, as a tank, get groups easier than any of the other classes (classes meaning tank, dps, healer...)
They are not soloing the dugneons. They are not kiting. They are running the dungeons and pvping. Every class gets the rewards, every class gets the xp, and the loot and coin at the same rate.
The only difference is healers and tanks get in faster, dps get in slower. So you warriors actually may do a bit better than the hunters and frost mages and rogues.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
No it isn't that way at all. It is just as fast to gain levels in wow by dungeons and pvp as it is in through questings. So it's more do you want to take a car or a motorcycle. Not only that but there are definate advantages to not doing the quest chains - that is pvp gives you really good rewards, dungeons give you really good rewards and more coin.
You are not punished in any way shape or form by not doing the quests.
yes you are. this is silly. I dont know how many of the blindly obvious examples I can provide. are you SURE you want to take that position because I assure you its not making you look as clever as you think, in fact just the opposite
How? As I stated I get xp just as fast and I get better gear and rewards. So pleas explain how?
I don't need to do a single quest and I will get to the high levels just was fast and with just as good gear (actually I'll probably have better gear) and just as much coin (actually I'll probably have more coin).
This is only true for about a third of classes (and a third of those talent-specs), namely the ones that have access to low-lvl AOE spells and kiting potential (Frost mages, best grinding class. hunter/warlock, second best).
Rogues, warriors are horrible grinding classes, and you will die, a lot.
In order to effectively grind in WoW, ie. be as good as questing you need:
-An exceptionally good knowledge of the game-world (first-time players will not)
-A class that supports grinding/kiting (enemy encounters are not balanced 1v1+X, and thats what you need to do to effectively grind)
-Intimate knowledge of your class and synergies in talents (again first time players will not)
-A plan, or guide to show you optimal griding-routes and spots.
Doesn't sound like they are "equal".
Um no. Those classes are not soloing in the dungeons they are part of the group. Warriors, as a tank, get groups easier than any of the other classes (classes meaning tank, dps, healer...)
They are not soloing the dugneons. They are not kiting. They are running the dungeons and pvping. Every class gets the rewards, every class gets the xp, and the loot and coin at the same rate.
The only difference is healers and tanks get in faster, dps get in slower. So you warriors actually may do a bit better than the hunters and frost mages and rogues.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
Getting to 15 (thats when LFD first is in) only takes a few hours on any class. Getting groups for dungeons is super easy, less than a minute for a tank, less than 5 for a healer, less than 15 for a dps.
Dungeons are the preferred method for leveling in WoW now vs quests because it's faster and there is better loot. Exclusively dungeons.
This is clearly the way it was designed.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
You can't get to max level in WoW by gathering/ exploring. You have to kill stuff because gather and exploring are tied to your charater level. You have to be a minimum level to gather specific stuff, and if you want to uncover parts of the map you need to be a specific level otherwise you're just running and dying repeatedly to get certian areas, and that's not really how exploring works, that's just exploiting the way dying works.
Not that this has anything to do with the thread, but I don't really think you can count leveling up solely by gathering as being anywhere near a viable way for a NORMAL person to play. I bring your attention to this quote...
Asked how long the achievement took, Everbloom added, "Oh I try not to look at days played. First rule about number of days played is we don't talk about number of days played! hehe."
No one says anything about "normal". Raiding hard mode is not "normal" since only like 1-2% ever done it.
But it is *an* option and there are proof points (no matter how rare) that people have done it.
No it isn't that way at all. It is just as fast to gain levels in wow by dungeons and pvp as it is in through questings. So it's more do you want to take a car or a motorcycle. Not only that but there are definate advantages to not doing the quest chains - that is pvp gives you really good rewards, dungeons give you really good rewards and more coin.
You are not punished in any way shape or form by not doing the quests.
yes you are. this is silly. I dont know how many of the blindly obvious examples I can provide. are you SURE you want to take that position because I assure you its not making you look as clever as you think, in fact just the opposite
How? As I stated I get xp just as fast and I get better gear and rewards. So pleas explain how?
I don't need to do a single quest and I will get to the high levels just was fast and with just as good gear (actually I'll probably have better gear) and just as much coin (actually I'll probably have more coin).
This is only true for about a third of classes (and a third of those talent-specs), namely the ones that have access to low-lvl AOE spells and kiting potential (Frost mages, best grinding class. hunter/warlock, second best).
Rogues, warriors are horrible grinding classes, and you will die, a lot.
In order to effectively grind in WoW, ie. be as good as questing you need:
-An exceptionally good knowledge of the game-world (first-time players will not)
-A class that supports grinding/kiting (enemy encounters are not balanced 1v1+X, and thats what you need to do to effectively grind)
-Intimate knowledge of your class and synergies in talents (again first time players will not)
-A plan, or guide to show you optimal griding-routes and spots.
Doesn't sound like they are "equal".
Um no. Those classes are not soloing in the dungeons they are part of the group. Warriors, as a tank, get groups easier than any of the other classes (classes meaning tank, dps, healer...)
They are not soloing the dugneons. They are not kiting. They are running the dungeons and pvping. Every class gets the rewards, every class gets the xp, and the loot and coin at the same rate.
The only difference is healers and tanks get in faster, dps get in slower. So you warriors actually may do a bit better than the hunters and frost mages and rogues.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
Gosh ... CLEARLY you have NOT played WOW for a LONG time. Don't spew out clearly inaccurate stuff. Go play a few hours. It take less than 2-3 hours to get to 14.
Low level dunegon wait .. less than 10 min.
Not viable? Have you level a toon in the last year? I have .. 100% in dungeons .. it is MUCH faster than doing quest. You get 1/3 needed to level in 1 run.
LFD clearly changed the leveling dynamics and you clearly are arguing based on ignorance.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
Gosh ... CLEARLY you have NOT played WOW for a LONG time. Don't spew out clearly inaccurate stuff. Go play a few hours. It take less than 2-3 hours to get to 14.
Low level dunegon wait .. less than 10 min.
Not viable? Have you level a toon in the last year? I have .. 100% in dungeons .. it is MUCH faster than doing quest. You get 1/3 needed to level in 1 run.
LFD clearly changed the leveling dynamics and you clearly are arguing based on ignorance.
This is 100% true.
I leveled my DK 60-85 100% dungeons (tanking) and leveled my shaman to 80 in WOTLK in dungeons 100% healing from like 14-80.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
Gosh ... CLEARLY you have NOT played WOW for a LONG time. Don't spew out clearly inaccurate stuff. Go play a few hours. It take less than 2-3 hours to get to 14.
Low level dunegon wait .. less than 10 min.
Not viable? Have you level a toon in the last year? I have .. 100% in dungeons .. it is MUCH faster than doing quest. You get 1/3 needed to level in 1 run.
LFD clearly changed the leveling dynamics and you clearly are arguing based on ignorance.
This is 100% true.
I leveled my DK 60-85 100% dungeons (tanking) and leveled my shaman to 80 in WOTLK in dungeons 100% healing from like 14-80.
In fact, if there is ANY complaints, it is the fact that dungeon levelings make the game too EASY. Most toons will be decked out in ALL BLUE ITEMS and mow through their level appropriate content.
If you are going through the game first time, you will be missing lots of content (like zones & stuff).
Everyone is so over-gear that bosses die in less than 10 sec.
For the folks carrying on about Skyrim relating to MMO sandboxes, I would like to see one that it does resemble.
The gameplay of Skyrim is basically the same as EQ(FPS vs tab isnt germaine to the point being made), or hell to piss folks off, it had more in common with TOR than it does any MMO sandbox.
It sure as hell doesnt play like SWG, UO, or EVE. Loot isnt predicated on crafting. The world isnt an open page, ready to be built open. The game actually has a very focused story line.
sandbox means non-lineral. Look it up in wikipedia.
Creative game play doesnt mean you have to affect the world directly.
but far more importantly NONE of it matters. Its all symantics.
Skyrim/Darkfall is not like EQ2...peroid and no amount of arguement or change of words will change that fundemental reality.
Straw Man much?
I said EQ....not EQ2. And yes, Skyrim plays pretty much along the line of an EQ than it does SWG/EVE/UO.
So once again, show me a MMO sandbox game that plays like Skyrim.
I was going to say that the entire conversation of sandbox is a strawman but I noticed I, yet again, am in the wrong string. But while we are on the subject let me lay it out why it is a strawman even in the context of a conversation such as this.
Skyrim has features that make up the overall game play, EQ has features that make up the overall game play.
You can call one a sandbox and the other not a sandbox or you can call one a purple elephant it doesnt matter because regardless of the name the feature list difference is still the same and THAT is what matters in these conversations.
saying that Skyrim/Darkfall is different from EQ2 (sorry for the mistake) is NOT a strawman. What IS a strawman is debating over what to call it.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
No it isn't that way at all. It is just as fast to gain levels in wow by dungeons and pvp as it is in through questings. So it's more do you want to take a car or a motorcycle. Not only that but there are definate advantages to not doing the quest chains - that is pvp gives you really good rewards, dungeons give you really good rewards and more coin.
You are not punished in any way shape or form by not doing the quests.
yes you are. this is silly. I dont know how many of the blindly obvious examples I can provide. are you SURE you want to take that position because I assure you its not making you look as clever as you think, in fact just the opposite
How? As I stated I get xp just as fast and I get better gear and rewards. So pleas explain how?
I don't need to do a single quest and I will get to the high levels just was fast and with just as good gear (actually I'll probably have better gear) and just as much coin (actually I'll probably have more coin).
This is only true for about a third of classes (and a third of those talent-specs), namely the ones that have access to low-lvl AOE spells and kiting potential (Frost mages, best grinding class. hunter/warlock, second best).
Rogues, warriors are horrible grinding classes, and you will die, a lot.
In order to effectively grind in WoW, ie. be as good as questing you need:
-An exceptionally good knowledge of the game-world (first-time players will not)
-A class that supports grinding/kiting (enemy encounters are not balanced 1v1+X, and thats what you need to do to effectively grind)
-Intimate knowledge of your class and synergies in talents (again first time players will not)
-A plan, or guide to show you optimal griding-routes and spots.
Doesn't sound like they are "equal".
Um no. Those classes are not soloing in the dungeons they are part of the group. Warriors, as a tank, get groups easier than any of the other classes (classes meaning tank, dps, healer...)
They are not soloing the dugneons. They are not kiting. They are running the dungeons and pvping. Every class gets the rewards, every class gets the xp, and the loot and coin at the same rate.
The only difference is healers and tanks get in faster, dps get in slower. So you warriors actually may do a bit better than the hunters and frost mages and rogues.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
Gosh ... CLEARLY you have NOT played WOW for a LONG time. Don't spew out clearly inaccurate stuff. Go play a few hours. It take less than 2-3 hours to get to 14.
Low level dunegon wait .. less than 10 min.
Not viable? Have you level a toon in the last year? I have .. 100% in dungeons .. it is MUCH faster than doing quest. You get 1/3 needed to level in 1 run.
LFD clearly changed the leveling dynamics and you clearly are arguing based on ignorance.
hold on a second.
answer us this riddle. Is there or is there not zones that can not be entered at all without doing a quest line? That alone trumps the main core point with the phrase 'quest dependent game'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
For the folks carrying on about Skyrim relating to MMO sandboxes, I would like to see one that it does resemble.
The gameplay of Skyrim is basically the same as EQ(FPS vs tab isnt germaine to the point being made), or hell to piss folks off, it had more in common with TOR than it does any MMO sandbox.
It sure as hell doesnt play like SWG, UO, or EVE. Loot isnt predicated on crafting. The world isnt an open page, ready to be built open. The game actually has a very focused story line.
sandbox means non-lineral. Look it up in wikipedia.
Creative game play doesnt mean you have to affect the world directly.
but far more importantly NONE of it matters. Its all symantics.
Skyrim/Darkfall is not like EQ2...peroid and no amount of arguement or change of words will change that fundemental reality.
Straw Man much?
I said EQ....not EQ2. And yes, Skyrim plays pretty much along the line of an EQ than it does SWG/EVE/UO.
So once again, show me a MMO sandbox game that plays like Skyrim.
I was going to say that the entire conversation of sandbox is a strawman but I noticed I, yet again, am in the wrong string. But while we are on the subject let me lay it out why it is a strawman even in the context of a conversation such as this.
Skyrim has features that make up the overall game play, EQ has features that make up the overall game play.
You can call one a sandbox and the other not a sandbox or you can call one a purple elephant it doesnt matter because regardless of the name the feature list difference is still the same and THAT is what matters in these conversations.
saying that Skyrim/Darkfall is different from EQ2 (sorry for the mistake) is NOT a strawman. What IS a strawman is debating over what to call it.
Ok maybe I am typing too fast, cause you just dont seem to be catching the quetion. Thus I will repeat it for you one more time.
Name me a sandbox MMO that basically plays like Skyrim. Like I said, arguing about FPS vs tab target is semantics. I am talking about gaming systems.
Skyrim doesnt match up to the known MMO sandboxes such as EVE, SWG, UO, Mortal Online, Darkfall, or any other PB Cruncher MMO sandbox. Like I have stated several times, it is the FPS shooter version of a game like EQ....ya know, a MMO themepark.
Now can you point out a reason this assertion is wrong, or is it finally dawning on you that Skyrim is an open world PVE directed game? One which has jack n shit for mechanics that mimic MMo sandboxes.
People on average are not looking to these games for Uncle Owen economic sims, which is why MMO sandboxes will always remain such a small draw. Sp sandboxes play pretty much like MMO themeparks, which is why both are popular with the average gamer. They have a fuck ton of dev directed PVE to keep folks entertained....something which MMO sandboxes screw the pooch on.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
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.
I would argue that its not that the sandbox crowd doesn't exist. Its that the crowd doesn't want sandbox as the loudest members picture it. For example, the Grand Theft Auto games are huge franchises that sell ton's of copies. Red Dead Redemption sold a massive amount and was praised for all the freedom it allowed people. The Elder Scroll series is a large franchise.
The problem is, that the "Sandbox Purists" see these games as "Themeparks" even though they lack the structure that games like WoW have. Compared to WoW and other extreme themepark games these sorts of games ARE "sandbox".
The problem, as I see it, is that the games that are made are "extreme", they don't fall into the middle. It is in that "Middle" where I think the massive Sandbox crowd really is.
No it isn't that way at all. It is just as fast to gain levels in wow by dungeons and pvp as it is in through questings. So it's more do you want to take a car or a motorcycle. Not only that but there are definate advantages to not doing the quest chains - that is pvp gives you really good rewards, dungeons give you really good rewards and more coin.
You are not punished in any way shape or form by not doing the quests.
yes you are. this is silly. I dont know how many of the blindly obvious examples I can provide. are you SURE you want to take that position because I assure you its not making you look as clever as you think, in fact just the opposite
How? As I stated I get xp just as fast and I get better gear and rewards. So pleas explain how?
I don't need to do a single quest and I will get to the high levels just was fast and with just as good gear (actually I'll probably have better gear) and just as much coin (actually I'll probably have more coin).
This is only true for about a third of classes (and a third of those talent-specs), namely the ones that have access to low-lvl AOE spells and kiting potential (Frost mages, best grinding class. hunter/warlock, second best).
Rogues, warriors are horrible grinding classes, and you will die, a lot.
In order to effectively grind in WoW, ie. be as good as questing you need:
-An exceptionally good knowledge of the game-world (first-time players will not)
-A class that supports grinding/kiting (enemy encounters are not balanced 1v1+X, and thats what you need to do to effectively grind)
-Intimate knowledge of your class and synergies in talents (again first time players will not)
-A plan, or guide to show you optimal griding-routes and spots.
Doesn't sound like they are "equal".
Um no. Those classes are not soloing in the dungeons they are part of the group. Warriors, as a tank, get groups easier than any of the other classes (classes meaning tank, dps, healer...)
They are not soloing the dugneons. They are not kiting. They are running the dungeons and pvping. Every class gets the rewards, every class gets the xp, and the loot and coin at the same rate.
The only difference is healers and tanks get in faster, dps get in slower. So you warriors actually may do a bit better than the hunters and frost mages and rogues.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
Gosh ... CLEARLY you have NOT played WOW for a LONG time. Don't spew out clearly inaccurate stuff. Go play a few hours. It take less than 2-3 hours to get to 14.
Low level dunegon wait .. less than 10 min.
Not viable? Have you level a toon in the last year? I have .. 100% in dungeons .. it is MUCH faster than doing quest. You get 1/3 needed to level in 1 run.
LFD clearly changed the leveling dynamics and you clearly are arguing based on ignorance.
hold on a second.
answer us this riddle. Is there or is there not zones that can not be entered at all without doing a quest line? That alone trumps the main core point with the phrase 'quest dependent game'
Not that I"ve seen, but there might be. I know there are instances created for quests - like molten front, and you cant' do these quests without doing other quests.
However that is no different than Skyrim. Can't get to paarthurax (sp) area till you do the quests before it.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Ok maybe I am typing too fast, cause you just dont seem to be catching the quetion. Thus I will repeat it for you one more time.
Name me a sandbox MMO that basically plays like Skyrim. Like I said, arguing about FPS vs tab target is semantics. I am talking about gaming systems.
Skyrim doesnt match up to the known MMO sandboxes such as EVE, SWG, UO, Mortal Online, Darkfall, or any other PB Cruncher MMO sandbox. Like I have stated several times, it is the FPS shooter version of a game like EQ....ya know, a MMO themepark.
Now can you point out a reason this assertion is wrong, or is it finally dawning on you that Skyrim is an open world PVE directed game? One which has jack n shit for mechanics that mimic MMo sandboxes.
People on average are not looking to these games for Uncle Owen economic sims, which is why MMO sandboxes will always remain such a small draw. Sp sandboxes play pretty much like MMO themeparks, which is why both are popular with the average gamer. They have a fuck ton of dev directed PVE to keep folks entertained....something which MMO sandboxes screw the pooch on.
1. Tab targeting is far from symantics. Not only is it using the word wrong but its also implying that tab vs FPS is not a HUGE deal which for me and many other games it is. In fact for me its often a deal breaker. The only reason I play 3rd games is because there is almost no other options at the time and I am extreemly bored.
2. I am not going to 'name a sandbox MMO' during a debate over what the word even means.
3. I will say however that Darkfall is EXTREEMLY close to what I would expect from a TES MMO. I am not stupid I know things like 'moving objects all over the place' is going to be hard in an MMO . I also know that changing NPC story and response based on a player interaction is also not realtistic but to be frank that is not why I like TES in the first place. MOST of what I do like in TES can and IS in current MMOs
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Ok maybe I am typing too fast, cause you just dont seem to be catching the quetion. Thus I will repeat it for you one more time.
Name me a sandbox MMO that basically plays like Skyrim. Like I said, arguing about FPS vs tab target is semantics. I am talking about gaming systems.
Skyrim doesnt match up to the known MMO sandboxes such as EVE, SWG, UO, Mortal Online, Darkfall, or any other PB Cruncher MMO sandbox. Like I have stated several times, it is the FPS shooter version of a game like EQ....ya know, a MMO themepark.
Now can you point out a reason this assertion is wrong, or is it finally dawning on you that Skyrim is an open world PVE directed game? One which has jack n shit for mechanics that mimic MMo sandboxes.
People on average are not looking to these games for Uncle Owen economic sims, which is why MMO sandboxes will always remain such a small draw. Sp sandboxes play pretty much like MMO themeparks, which is why both are popular with the average gamer. They have a fuck ton of dev directed PVE to keep folks entertained....something which MMO sandboxes screw the pooch on.
1. Tab targeting is far from symantics. Not only is it using the word wrong but its also implying that tab vs FPS is not a HUGE deal which for me and many other games it is. In fact for me its often a deal breaker. The only reason I play 3rd games is because there is almost no other options at the time and I am extreemly bored.
2. I am not going to 'name a sandbox MMO' during a debate over what the word even means.
3. I will say however that Darkfall is EXTREEMLY close to what I would expect from a TES MMO. I am not stupid I know things like 'moving objects all over the place' is going to be hard in an MMO . I also know that changing NPC story and response based on a player interaction is also not realtistic but to be frank that is not why I like TES in the first place. MOST of what I do like in TES can and IS in current MMOs
Shaking my fucking head.
You cant be serious....you wanna argue definitions from a wiki vs real life examples?
Until you can produce one, let alone several sandbox MMOs that have similar set ups to Skyrim, I am gonna have to throw a huge BULLSHIT flag on your comments.
EQ/WOW/LoTRO/TOR/EQ2/FF XI/etc etc all have more in common with Skyrim gameplay mechanics than any available sandbox MMO. Hell ME 3 even has more in common with Skyrim than SWG/EVE does. SP sandboxes like GTA, RDR, and FO also match up with MMO themeparks.
The most focal aspect of any of these so call Sp sandboxes is the plethora of DEV created PVE content. Not tools to make ones own fun, but pre-made dungeons/NPCs/vehicles for folks to pass the time with. Not a single one of them reserves the land for folks to alter as they please. They sure do have a directed path for gameplay though.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Originally posted by AdamTM Originally posted by VengeSunsoar Originally posted by SEANMCAD Originally posted by VengeSunsoar No it isn't that way at all. It is just as fast to gain levels in wow by dungeons and pvp as it is in through questings. So it's more do you want to take a car or a motorcycle. Not only that but there are definate advantages to not doing the quest chains - that is pvp gives you really good rewards, dungeons give you really good rewards and more coin.You are not punished in any way shape or form by not doing the quests.
yes you are. this is silly. I dont know how many of the blindly obvious examples I can provide. are you SURE you want to take that position because I assure you its not making you look as clever as you think, in fact just the opposite
How? As I stated I get xp just as fast and I get better gear and rewards. So pleas explain how?
I don't need to do a single quest and I will get to the high levels just was fast and with just as good gear (actually I'll probably have better gear) and just as much coin (actually I'll probably have more coin).
This is only true for about a third of classes (and a third of those talent-specs), namely the ones that have access to low-lvl AOE spells and kiting potential (Frost mages, best grinding class. hunter/warlock, second best).
Rogues, warriors are horrible grinding classes, and you will die, a lot.
In order to effectively grind in WoW, ie. be as good as questing you need:
-An exceptionally good knowledge of the game-world (first-time players will not)
-A class that supports grinding/kiting (enemy encounters are not balanced 1v1+X, and thats what you need to do to effectively grind)
-Intimate knowledge of your class and synergies in talents (again first time players will not)
-A plan, or guide to show you optimal griding-routes and spots.
Doesn't sound like they are "equal".
Um no. Those classes are not soloing in the dungeons they are part of the group. Warriors, as a tank, get groups easier than any of the other classes (classes meaning tank, dps, healer...)
They are not soloing the dugneons. They are not kiting. They are running the dungeons and pvping. Every class gets the rewards, every class gets the xp, and the loot and coin at the same rate.
The only difference is healers and tanks get in faster, dps get in slower. So you warriors actually may do a bit better than the hunters and frost mages and rogues.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
You couldn't be more incorrect. I started playing again about a week ago. I've gotten 15 levels on my lock and havent done 1 quest outside of a dungeon. And I'm certainly not soloing dungeons. I'm using the dungeon finder and haven't waited more then 10 mins for a group, and I'm dps. It's a totally viable option to level... As a matter if fact, the world is dead due to dungeon grinding.
You cant be serious....you wanna argue definitions from a wiki vs real life examples?
Until you can produce one, let alone several sandbox MMOs that have similar set ups to Skyrim, I am gonna have to throw a huge BULLSHIT flag on your comments.
EQ/WOW/LoTRO/TOR/EQ2/FF XI/etc etc all have more in common with Skyrim gameplay mechanics than any available sandbox MMO. Hell ME 3 even has more in common with Skyrim than SWG/EVE does. SP sandboxes like GTA, RDR, and FO also match up with MMO themeparks.
The most focal aspect of any of these so call Sp sandboxes is the plethora of DEV created PVE content. Not tools to make ones own fun, but pre-made dungeons/NPCs/vehicles for folks to pass the time with. Not a single one of them reserves the land for folks to alter as they please. They sure do have a directed path for gameplay though.
It really isn't that complicated...
WoW, Rift, and Aion all break their content up into leveled tiers. You can only do certain content at certain levels...thus you have a more guided experience. This is why they are themeparks.
Skyrim does not break its content up this way. You can do just about any content in Skyrim at any time...thus it is more unguided, thus it is a sandbox.
You cant be serious....you wanna argue definitions from a wiki vs real life examples?
Until you can produce one, let alone several sandbox MMOs that have similar set ups to Skyrim, I am gonna have to throw a huge BULLSHIT flag on your comments.
EQ/WOW/LoTRO/TOR/EQ2/FF XI/etc etc all have more in common with Skyrim gameplay mechanics than any available sandbox MMO. Hell ME 3 even has more in common with Skyrim than SWG/EVE does. SP sandboxes like GTA, RDR, and FO also match up with MMO themeparks.
The most focal aspect of any of these so call Sp sandboxes is the plethora of DEV created PVE content. Not tools to make ones own fun, but pre-made dungeons/NPCs/vehicles for folks to pass the time with. Not a single one of them reserves the land for folks to alter as they please. They sure do have a directed path for gameplay though.
It really isn't that complicated...
WoW, Rift, and Aion all break their content up into leveled tiers. You can only do certain content at certain levels...thus you have a more guided experience. This is why they are themeparks.
Skyrim does not break its content up this way. You can do just about any content in Skyrim at any time...thus it is more unguided, thus it is a sandbox.
That's really it, it's pretty simple.
Cres....please take reply to seperate thread I started.
That said, the level you mention I can see for a countering view. To that I say games like EQ/WOW/TOR have high level areas you can go to whenever as well.
Like I said though....the gameplay is dev directed PVE to advance....something MMO sandboxes do not engage in.
Anyways last response in this thread....will be in seperate thread.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Comments
careful now you are starting to suggest the EQ2 is 'sandy' but that Skyrim is not a sandbox. Yes I understand the difference but you are framing yourself into a position that despite great efforts will not change reality.
keep that latter point in mind. No matter what we say here, no matter how clever we all think we are in saying it, no matter how we define words. reality will still be the same and that reality will leave me NOT paying for EQ2 and WILL pay for Skyrim
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
The ENTIRE Game-World changes according to the players will....nearly every single location and every single (non random encounter mob) changes permanently depending upon what the player decides to do. It's just that each of those individual changes provide a limited set of parameters. However within the context of the game as a whole, there are so many different bits and pieces that change that I doubt you'll find any two saves of Skyrim on different players machines where the world looks EXACTLY THE SAME. If that doesn't highlight a players ability to manipulate the environment/narrative and inject thier own creativity into the game....then I'm not sure what would be.
Granted, there are definately mechanisms that Skyrim could have introduced to inject more player creativity/manipulation into the World and push it even further into the "sandbox" spectrum....but I'd hazard for most of us who self describe as "sandbox fans" it qualifies.
Speaking personaly...if an MMO offered players as much ability to manipulate the environment, persistantly change the story/narrative, inject thier own creativity and freedom of approach as Skyrim does as a SPRPG, then I would be satisfied with it....and I would consider it a "sandbox MMO".....and I'm betting most of the folks here who are self-described "sandbox fans" would as well.
You can call it "Bug-ala-Boo" rather then "sandbox" if it makes you feel better.....but if you are looking for a common frame of reference in order to have a meaningful discussion about what we actualy want in a game we call "sandbox" then I would hazard that's it. Otherwise we are just arguing semantics and talking past each other.
For the folks carrying on about Skyrim relating to MMO sandboxes, I would like to see one that it does resemble.
The gameplay of Skyrim is basically the same as EQ(FPS vs tab isnt germaine to the point being made), or hell to piss folks off, it had more in common with TOR than it does any MMO sandbox.
It sure as hell doesnt play like SWG, UO, or EVE. Loot isnt predicated on crafting. The world isnt an open page, ready to be built open. The game actually has a very focused story line.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
sandbox means non-lineral. Look it up in wikipedia.
Creative game play doesnt mean you have to affect the world directly.
but far more importantly NONE of it matters. Its all symantics.
Skyrim/Darkfall is not like EQ2...peroid and no amount of arguement or change of words will change that fundemental reality.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Your right it isn't like EQ2. Skyrim lets me go anwhere at any time, EQ2 doesn't. However EQ2 lets me build basically whatever I want, make dungeons and authorize books, and skyrim doesn't do that.
So which has more freedom? I guess it depends what parts of the game you are talking about.
See creatively right there in your wiki definition. It's impossible to be creative without creating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandbox_(video_games)
objectives.[1] Video games that include such level design often are referred to as "free roam" games.
The term is sometimes used interchangeably with "sandbox" and "free-roaming";[2][3] however, the terms open world and free-roaming describe the game environment itself and allude more to the absence of artificial barriers,[4] in contrast to the invisible walls and loading screens that are common in linear level designs. The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by his ability to play creatively and with there being "no right way"[5] of playing the game.
well this is cause there are not many good sandbox MMOs cause its hard to create such a game ... f.e. Darkfall is great sandbox buts its graphic engine and the whole art style of the world was dated already from the release and thats cause this MMO was produced by a really tiny team ... if they had the resources they would make an awesome game !
ok you win.
Skyrim is not a sandbox and EQ2 is.
can we now move on with the point of this conversation?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Straw Man much?
I said EQ....not EQ2. And yes, Skyrim plays pretty much along the line of an EQ than it does SWG/EVE/UO.
So once again, show me a MMO sandbox game that plays like Skyrim.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
I'm not framing it at all. I'm outright stating it. With addition of player made dungeons, the able to build anything you want, and authored books EQ2 is definately more "sandy". While I've allready stated I don't think Skyrim is a sandbox, it is more themeparky, the degree to which it is when compared with EQ2 is arguable. IMO this is the reality.
I really don't care what you pay for or dont, that is completely irrelevant to the conversation.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
Getting to 15 (thats when LFD first is in) only takes a few hours on any class. Getting groups for dungeons is super easy, less than a minute for a tank, less than 5 for a healer, less than 15 for a dps.
Dungeons are the preferred method for leveling in WoW now vs quests because it's faster and there is better loot. Exclusively dungeons.
This is clearly the way it was designed.
No one says anything about "normal". Raiding hard mode is not "normal" since only like 1-2% ever done it.
But it is *an* option and there are proof points (no matter how rare) that people have done it.
Gosh ... CLEARLY you have NOT played WOW for a LONG time. Don't spew out clearly inaccurate stuff. Go play a few hours. It take less than 2-3 hours to get to 14.
Low level dunegon wait .. less than 10 min.
Not viable? Have you level a toon in the last year? I have .. 100% in dungeons .. it is MUCH faster than doing quest. You get 1/3 needed to level in 1 run.
LFD clearly changed the leveling dynamics and you clearly are arguing based on ignorance.
This is 100% true.
I leveled my DK 60-85 100% dungeons (tanking) and leveled my shaman to 80 in WOTLK in dungeons 100% healing from like 14-80.
In fact, if there is ANY complaints, it is the fact that dungeon levelings make the game too EASY. Most toons will be decked out in ALL BLUE ITEMS and mow through their level appropriate content.
If you are going through the game first time, you will be missing lots of content (like zones & stuff).
Everyone is so over-gear that bosses die in less than 10 sec.
I was going to say that the entire conversation of sandbox is a strawman but I noticed I, yet again, am in the wrong string. But while we are on the subject let me lay it out why it is a strawman even in the context of a conversation such as this.
Skyrim has features that make up the overall game play, EQ has features that make up the overall game play.
You can call one a sandbox and the other not a sandbox or you can call one a purple elephant it doesnt matter because regardless of the name the feature list difference is still the same and THAT is what matters in these conversations.
saying that Skyrim/Darkfall is different from EQ2 (sorry for the mistake) is NOT a strawman. What IS a strawman is debating over what to call it.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
hold on a second.
answer us this riddle. Is there or is there not zones that can not be entered at all without doing a quest line? That alone trumps the main core point with the phrase 'quest dependent game'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Ok maybe I am typing too fast, cause you just dont seem to be catching the quetion. Thus I will repeat it for you one more time.
Name me a sandbox MMO that basically plays like Skyrim. Like I said, arguing about FPS vs tab target is semantics. I am talking about gaming systems.
Skyrim doesnt match up to the known MMO sandboxes such as EVE, SWG, UO, Mortal Online, Darkfall, or any other PB Cruncher MMO sandbox. Like I have stated several times, it is the FPS shooter version of a game like EQ....ya know, a MMO themepark.
Now can you point out a reason this assertion is wrong, or is it finally dawning on you that Skyrim is an open world PVE directed game? One which has jack n shit for mechanics that mimic MMo sandboxes.
People on average are not looking to these games for Uncle Owen economic sims, which is why MMO sandboxes will always remain such a small draw. Sp sandboxes play pretty much like MMO themeparks, which is why both are popular with the average gamer. They have a fuck ton of dev directed PVE to keep folks entertained....something which MMO sandboxes screw the pooch on.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
I would argue that its not that the sandbox crowd doesn't exist. Its that the crowd doesn't want sandbox as the loudest members picture it. For example, the Grand Theft Auto games are huge franchises that sell ton's of copies. Red Dead Redemption sold a massive amount and was praised for all the freedom it allowed people. The Elder Scroll series is a large franchise.
The problem is, that the "Sandbox Purists" see these games as "Themeparks" even though they lack the structure that games like WoW have. Compared to WoW and other extreme themepark games these sorts of games ARE "sandbox".
The problem, as I see it, is that the games that are made are "extreme", they don't fall into the middle. It is in that "Middle" where I think the massive Sandbox crowd really is.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
Not that I"ve seen, but there might be. I know there are instances created for quests - like molten front, and you cant' do these quests without doing other quests.
However that is no different than Skyrim. Can't get to paarthurax (sp) area till you do the quests before it.
1. Tab targeting is far from symantics. Not only is it using the word wrong but its also implying that tab vs FPS is not a HUGE deal which for me and many other games it is. In fact for me its often a deal breaker. The only reason I play 3rd games is because there is almost no other options at the time and I am extreemly bored.
2. I am not going to 'name a sandbox MMO' during a debate over what the word even means.
3. I will say however that Darkfall is EXTREEMLY close to what I would expect from a TES MMO. I am not stupid I know things like 'moving objects all over the place' is going to be hard in an MMO . I also know that changing NPC story and response based on a player interaction is also not realtistic but to be frank that is not why I like TES in the first place. MOST of what I do like in TES can and IS in current MMOs
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Shaking my fucking head.
You cant be serious....you wanna argue definitions from a wiki vs real life examples?
Until you can produce one, let alone several sandbox MMOs that have similar set ups to Skyrim, I am gonna have to throw a huge BULLSHIT flag on your comments.
EQ/WOW/LoTRO/TOR/EQ2/FF XI/etc etc all have more in common with Skyrim gameplay mechanics than any available sandbox MMO. Hell ME 3 even has more in common with Skyrim than SWG/EVE does. SP sandboxes like GTA, RDR, and FO also match up with MMO themeparks.
The most focal aspect of any of these so call Sp sandboxes is the plethora of DEV created PVE content. Not tools to make ones own fun, but pre-made dungeons/NPCs/vehicles for folks to pass the time with. Not a single one of them reserves the land for folks to alter as they please. They sure do have a directed path for gameplay though.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
yes you are. this is silly. I dont know how many of the blindly obvious examples I can provide. are you SURE you want to take that position because I assure you its not making you look as clever as you think, in fact just the opposite
How? As I stated I get xp just as fast and I get better gear and rewards. So pleas explain how?
I don't need to do a single quest and I will get to the high levels just was fast and with just as good gear (actually I'll probably have better gear) and just as much coin (actually I'll probably have more coin).
This is only true for about a third of classes (and a third of those talent-specs), namely the ones that have access to low-lvl AOE spells and kiting potential (Frost mages, best grinding class. hunter/warlock, second best).
Rogues, warriors are horrible grinding classes, and you will die, a lot.
In order to effectively grind in WoW, ie. be as good as questing you need:
-An exceptionally good knowledge of the game-world (first-time players will not)
-A class that supports grinding/kiting (enemy encounters are not balanced 1v1+X, and thats what you need to do to effectively grind)
-Intimate knowledge of your class and synergies in talents (again first time players will not)
-A plan, or guide to show you optimal griding-routes and spots.
Doesn't sound like they are "equal".
Um no. Those classes are not soloing in the dungeons they are part of the group. Warriors, as a tank, get groups easier than any of the other classes (classes meaning tank, dps, healer...)
They are not soloing the dugneons. They are not kiting. They are running the dungeons and pvping. Every class gets the rewards, every class gets the xp, and the loot and coin at the same rate.
The only difference is healers and tanks get in faster, dps get in slower. So you warriors actually may do a bit better than the hunters and frost mages and rogues.
Mate, the first dungeon is Ragefire Chasm, its lvl 14 (as far as i remember)
You have to get to lvl 14 somehow first.
Also good luck finding groups for low lvl content dungeons, i hope you like waiting.
Don't present dungeon grinding as a viable way to level in WoW (compared to questing), because it just isn't.
In combination with regular grinding, yes, it might be, but exclusively dungeons? Balls-crazy.
At the end of the day Its still bending over backwards to achieve something that is clearly not intentional by design.
You couldn't be more incorrect. I started playing again about a week ago. I've gotten 15 levels on my lock and havent done 1 quest outside of a dungeon. And I'm certainly not soloing dungeons. I'm using the dungeon finder and haven't waited more then 10 mins for a group, and I'm dps. It's a totally viable option to level... As a matter if fact, the world is dead due to dungeon grinding.
It really isn't that complicated...
WoW, Rift, and Aion all break their content up into leveled tiers. You can only do certain content at certain levels...thus you have a more guided experience. This is why they are themeparks.
Skyrim does not break its content up this way. You can do just about any content in Skyrim at any time...thus it is more unguided, thus it is a sandbox.
That's really it, it's pretty simple.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Cres....please take reply to seperate thread I started.
That said, the level you mention I can see for a countering view. To that I say games like EQ/WOW/TOR have high level areas you can go to whenever as well.
Like I said though....the gameplay is dev directed PVE to advance....something MMO sandboxes do not engage in.
Anyways last response in this thread....will be in seperate thread.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.