The guys run from booth to booth, looking at the new games.
They see copy after copy after copy of the same old stuff, over and over again.
And then they arrive at the SoE booth, and they see this.
EQN got "best of the show" simply because an AAA developer had the balls to create something that isn't the 100th copy of EQ or WoW. And in this stagnating market, I think they fully deserve it.
So they decided to copy GW2, still not worthy of BIS.
But I agree, the quality at the show must have been pretty uninspiring for this to win, but that's just me.
It simply got best of show because of the MANY various great concepts and features that are going into this amazing game. That's it, you need specifics I'll only tell you a few, immergent A.I, full destructibility, minecraft-esque EQ Next Landmark program, 40 classes and many other awesome things.
I'm totally in agreement with the OP. It appears that 2 semi-prestigious media outlets were wine-and-dined, shown the videos of things happening (not exactly the same as demonstrating the technology), told about some interesting concepts / ideas / plans, and the media outlets declared this presentation best game of E3.
I am skeptical, but I still haven't seen anything that convinces me this is a functional game at this point. For all I know, the video evidence we've seen could have been generated with traditional 3D modelling tools -- the Final Fantasy movie of several years back was amazing too, but only demonstrated the technology of movie-making, not a game. The planned release of a key development tool, Landmark, is scheduled for this winter, not now. Are the developers using something different to develop the landscapes, character models and other in-game art assets? I have yet to see any indication of a UI, only been told more ideas.
Even the verbal / conceptual evidence is incomplete. How do the actual classes work? Where is any kind of detail about in-game crafting (non-Landmark) or resource gathering? Who has seen other playable race models? What about character creation -- what will it be like? Even though I'm not particularly interested in PvP, there's been nothing but vague hints about how these might work. There's no combat system, no weapon stats, no details about class spells, and nothing about the mysterious spell-weaving. How are Rally Point events initiated? Player creation? Developer creations with player discovery? Developer creation with public notice?
Hints, rumors, conceptual art, and some videos aren't evidence of an actual product ready to be tested and played by the public. I am beginning to wonder exactly how much of this game is actually coded. There hasn't even been a ballpark release date released. Can we expect anyone to get some kind of hands-on before Summer 2015? Even the Beta registration doesn't hint at any date other than 'Soon'. Is that 'Clock soon' or 'Geologic time soon'?
Now, what do we do about getting some answers from this site and TenTonHammer? I think their feet need to be held to the fire and they need to explain how and why they honored this 'marketing campaign' with Game of E3. If SOE's E3 presentation was anything but a dog-and-pony show and these sites have actually seen and had some hands-on with a playable version, let's hear the details of that, not the SOE-made demonstration videos we've been shown.
I'd challenge the MMORPG.com editorial staff to show their credibility in this matter.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Originally posted by KyleranSo they decided to copy GW2, still not worthy of BIS.
You too jumped on that Bandwagon? I'm a "known" GW2 fan around here, and EQN has very little in common with GW2.
- EQN: sandbox. GW2: theme park.
- EQN : no levels. GW2: levels.
- EQN: 40 classes you can multi too. GW2: 8 classes.
- EQN: You discover more classes as you play. GW2: Want a new class? Reroll.
- EQN: Destructible voxel world. GW2: Still the good old fixed world, even if some parts can change.
- EQN: Design your own house/tower/whatever. GW2: Nope.
Shall I continue?
This reminds me the people who were saying GW2 was a WoW clone. Same nonsense.
yes but the combat and the way they handle skills and abilities is very similar, is it not?
ask yourself this, is EQN going to be more familiar to EQ players or GW2 players? this is supposed to be an everquest game and they took more features from other games than they did everquest it seems.
that's not to say this is a GW2 clone but it does have some similar core systems. too bad it didn't have some similar core systems to everquest.
Originally posted by Thebrave246 It simply got best of show because of the MANY various great concepts and features that are going into this amazing game. That's it, you need specifics I'll only tell you a few, immergent A.I, full destructibility, minecraft-esque EQ Next Landmark program, 40 classes and many other awesome things.
So if I created a awesome sounding game with a little tech demo for E3 next year I should be able to win Best of show too?
Get out of here with that SOE man love. They did not deserve Best of Show period. All these games out there that have so much to show that have awesome graphics, gameplay and concepts that they could actually SHOW PEOPLE and this won?
This demo of 2 maps beat out WIldstar, ESO, Destiny, Final Fantasy and The Division?
------------------------------ You see, every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with their surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You spread to an area, and you multiply, and you multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet.-Mr.Smith
If you read Bill Murphy's article, then look at the limited amount of footage, you'll realize that amost everything he is talking about that is so amazing is not really in the game or at least not shown. It was al stuff that he was told would be in it. I mean, I can spin a pretty graphic tale of the perfect mmorpg too. Will that garner me game of the year?
So what gives, mmorpg.com?
Then why complain? They have more to reveal. Judge it then. This has been a dream of game devs for quite a long time.
Originally posted by Thebrave246 It simply got best of show because of the MANY various great concepts and features that are going into this amazing game. That's it, you need specifics I'll only tell you a few, immergent A.I, full destructibility, minecraft-esque EQ Next Landmark program, 40 classes and many other awesome things.
So if I created a awesome sounding game with a little tech demo for E3 next year I should be able to win Best of show too?
Get out of here with that SOE man love. They did not deserve Best of Show period. All these games out there that have so much to show that have awesome graphics, gameplay and concepts that they could actually SHOW PEOPLE and this won?
This demo of 2 maps beat out WIldstar, ESO, Destiny, Final Fantasy and The Division?
I don't think it should of one Best of Show but because there was nothing they could show us to back it up at the time and let us judge for ourselves.
As to your tirade I don't believe Destiny or The Division was actually playable at E3 either except by the demonstrating Devs at best.ESO,Final Fantasy and Wildstar were playable to everyone there however and I would of given the MMORPG of show to one of them probably.
I do agree with the person you lambast that EQN stated goals are far more ambitious than the MMORPGs you mentioned though whether any of them actually pan out is a different question.
However in the end it is the MMORPG.com staff's opinion and you or I or anyone doesn't have the right to tell them what their opinion should be,we can disagree with their choices though.
Now that we have seen the same stuff as the staff here and at Ten Ton Hammer, I am a bit confused as to how this nabbed best in show at E3. Mainly because none of the footage was actual gameplay. We saw tech demos of the voxel layered world (which is amazing). We saw two players on the screen fighting, jumping, hopping over rocks, falling down holes. We saw some world building tools ala minecraft which is pretty cool too.
However, we did not see the following:
Zero crafting. No raids, no actual quests or objectives, no rallies, no groups to speak of other than two players. No trade functions, chat functions, no character creation videos. We didnt see 40 classes. We didnt see any dynamic AI.
But you were told these things would be in game. You weren't actually shown them. So how exactly did it get best in show? We have not even seen this game working in real time.
I actually got too watch people play Assassin's Creed 4, Destiny, and Watch Dogs. Those games I would qualify as being shown. EQNext was 5% substance and 95% concept. I will agree that what we saw was a cool tech demo of the engine. But that was not a game yet. let alone an mmo and even further from what I would even consider a nominee for best in show at E3.
If you read Bill Murphy's article, then look at the limited amount of footage, you'll realize that amost everything he is talking about that is so amazing is not really in the game or at least not shown. It was al stuff that he was told would be in it. I mean, I can spin a pretty graphic tale of the perfect mmorpg too. Will that garner me game of the year?
So what gives, mmorpg.com?
What should of won best in show for a MMORPG?
ArcheAge: Eastern game that appeals to a particular crowd and when it eventually makes it to the rest of the world, won't have much of an impact.
WAR 40k: Little known beyond everyone loves the IP, from what we do know, doesn't sound mind blowing, just hopefully a good use of the IP for once.
Destiny: Appeals to the FPS crowd and isn't going to change the world of mmorpg gaming.
Wildstar: Great looking game if you are into WoW in space and themeparks (millions upon millions are). Will be successful, but not reinventing the wheel, just putting nice rims on it.
Elder Scrolls Online: Skyrim meets DAoC RVR and PVP. Two clones must be better then one? If you like these two elements, you're in luck. But again, it isn't going to change anything.
Everquest Next: To me, it is unfair to put it in the same genre as these games (maybe AA) but to say EQN is on par with Wildstar or EQ itself is just inaccurate.
Yes it has elements from other games. EQ (sorry UO) started something that most games now follow. I think EQN is less copying Minecraft, GW2, and other games and instead is just a product of this time. We will see the same game mechanics in many to come. The traditional elements from 10 years ago are running there course and its time for what's "Next."
Action based combat, classes with freedom, huge open world, player created content taking the first seat, etc.
Out of the games listed, EQN is the only one either promising or delivering anything new and groundbreaking to the genre.
It is the total package. There is lots of work to be done, but it is leaps ahead of the competition.
Again, not 100% original, but it is taking the best of several modern games and adding a heck of a lot of new elements on top of what they have done in previous SOE games.
I feel the same about EQ and WoW.
EQ started it, WoW perfected and then ruined what many people wanted in a game, at the time. Neither was perfect, but they had strong appeal and were the total package in their own right.
The times are changing and old veterans (like myself) need to either stay on the train or get off at the next stop. We aren't in control of the landscape around us and if you can't handle what's to come, you are missing out.
-----------
tl;dr
It is all subjective.
There was enough to see for them to form an educated opinion compared to what was available at the time.
EQN is not 100% original, but it is the most "groundbreaking" or outside the box thinking game from the list available. Even if that means using other elements that are becoming more and more common in today's games.
Basing the winner off of "completed" status is silly as there is a wide range and makes judging meaningless as obviously the game closest to launch would win, regardless if it is a piece of poo compared to those still in alpha/beta.
So if I created a awesome sounding game with a little tech demo for E3 next year I should be able to win Best of show too?
Get out of here with that SOE man love. They did not deserve Best of Show period. All these games out there that have so much to show that have awesome graphics, gameplay and concepts that they could actually SHOW PEOPLE and this won?
This demo of 2 maps beat out WIldstar, ESO, Destiny, Final Fantasy and The Division?
If you came up with something amazing then sure you could.
Division is good but it isn't an MMO really, more an FPS from what I could tell but vs the others you mention....yes, head and shoulders above them.
So they decided to copy GW2, still not worthy of BIS.
You too jumped on that Bandwagon? I'm a "known" GW2 fan around here, and EQN has very little in common with GW2.
- EQN: sandbox. GW2: theme park. Until they show and prove to us that it's a sandbox the game will remain a themepark.
- EQN : no levels. GW2: levels. Irrelevent
- EQN: 40 classes you can multi too. GW2: 8 classes. And yet those 40 classes how many will be completely inferior? What about balance? How many will mirror each other to the point that the only difference might be minor flavor?
- EQN: You discover more classes as you play. GW2: Want a new class? Reroll. And yet there is a skill hunt coming out for GW2 so in essence they do have more classes as that can drastically change up a playstyle. Both grant new abiltiies.
- EQN: Destructible voxel world. GW2: Still the good old fixed world, even if some parts can change. Which SOE has to prove. We have heard this promise time n time again and it never being fulfilled. And what of the quality? It might be a mere shadow of what sandbox games already exist or some future games coming out like PFO or CU.
- EQN: Design your own house/tower/whatever. GW2: Nope.
Shall I continue?
This reminds me the people who were saying GW2 was a WoW clone. Same nonsense.
All your points you bring up are very moot and ignore all the other facts that make it feel like GW2. Combat where you have the telegraphed circle, skill usage limitations being the big things that jump out.
The game certainly has a feel or elements of GW2 and I strongly have a feeling that people are going to be massively dissapointed in EQN. My money is on PFO or CU for a real sandbox fantasy MMO.
Originally posted by wizardanim Originally posted by FoomerangIf you read Bill Murphy's article, then look at the limited amount of footage, you'll realize that amost everything he is talking about that is so amazing is not really in the game or at least not shown. It was al stuff that he was told would be in it. I mean, I can spin a pretty graphic tale of the perfect mmorpg too. Will that garner me game of the year?So what gives, mmorpg.com?
Then why complain? They have more to reveal. Judge it then. This has been a dream of game devs for quite a long time. You dont think that the developers at E3 who worked hard to put together playable hands on demos of their game are being slighted? I think its a little insulting to all the other devs who put forth the effort to let their products be judged on their own merit.
Originally posted by FoomerangIf you read Bill Murphy's article, then look at the limited amount of footage, you'll realize that amost everything he is talking about that is so amazing is not really in the game or at least not shown. It was al stuff that he was told would be in it. I mean, I can spin a pretty graphic tale of the perfect mmorpg too. Will that garner me game of the year?So what gives, mmorpg.com?
Then why complain? They have more to reveal. Judge it then. This has been a dream of game devs for quite a long time.
You dont think that the developers at E3 who worked hard to put together playable hands on demos of their game are being slighted? I think its a little insulting to all the other devs who put forth the effort to let their products be judged on their own merit.
Honestly why do you care? mmorpg.com saw something that they extremely liked and deemed it worthy of best in show. Honestly they could have given it to MLP online and I wouldnt give a rats ass.
Playing: FFXIV, DnL, and World of Warships Waiting on: Ashes of Creation
Simple answer: They shouldn't have won best of show.
Best of show should go to a game that has great ideas that were actually made into a functioning game. Until it's an actual product (or close to it) it should not win best in show.
What happened was like me getting a bunch of truly great ideas for a game, making some powerpoints and making some videos to present what the game is gonna be without having even close to an actual game done (where you REALLY can know if those ideas work out or not). Without an actual game you can't say it works or it is fun. Such a presentation should never win best of show no matter how great the plans are.
So they decided to copy GW2, still not worthy of BIS.
You too jumped on that Bandwagon? I'm a "known" GW2 fan around here, and EQN has very little in common with GW2.
- EQN: sandbox. GW2: theme park. Until they show and prove to us that it's a sandbox the game will remain a themepark.
- EQN : no levels. GW2: levels. Irrelevent
- EQN: 40 classes you can multi too. GW2: 8 classes. And yet those 40 classes how many will be completely inferior? What about balance? How many will mirror each other to the point that the only difference might be minor flavor?
- EQN: You discover more classes as you play. GW2: Want a new class? Reroll. And yet there is a skill hunt coming out for GW2 so in essence they do have more classes as that can drastically change up a playstyle. Both grant new abiltiies.
- EQN: Destructible voxel world. GW2: Still the good old fixed world, even if some parts can change. Which SOE has to prove. We have heard this promise time n time again and it never being fulfilled. And what of the quality? It might be a mere shadow of what sandbox games already exist or some future games coming out like PFO or CU.
- EQN: Design your own house/tower/whatever. GW2: Nope.
Shall I continue?
This reminds me the people who were saying GW2 was a WoW clone. Same nonsense.
All your points you bring up are very moot and ignore all the other facts that make it feel like GW2. Combat where you have the telegraphed circle, skill usage limitations being the big things that jump out.
The game certainly has a feel or elements of GW2 and I strongly have a feeling that people are going to be massively dissapointed in EQN. My money is on PFO or CU for a real sandbox fantasy MMO.
I mostly made the comment in reference to the 8 skill combat bar tied to your class which seems very much like GW2 to me, and since combat is such a big part of a MMORPG experience (for me anyways) it's very important.
GW2 combat model is one very big reason why I didn't care for it (or its predecessor) so I'm viewing this with some concern.
The rest of the stuff mentioned sounds pretty cool and hopefully they'll make me overlook a combat model that I don't care for.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Simple answer: They shouldn't have won best of show.
Best of show should go to a game that has great ideas that were actually made into a functioning game. Until it's an actual product (or close to it) it should not win best in show.
What happened was like me getting a bunch of truly great ideas for a game, making some powerpoints and making some videos to present what the game is gonna be without having even close to an actual game done (where you REALLY can know if those ideas work out or not). Without an actual game you can't say it works or it is fun. Such a presentation should never win best of show no matter how great the plans are.
Most games at every E3 would not meet your criteria then.Most games shown are only demos or very focused and very limited playable demos at best.By your criteria there would be no game of Show winners for any category any year unless a game was shown that happened to be close to release,which is not the purpose of E3.
Where I think MMORPG.com erred was you should cater to your audience and giving an award to a game your audience can't also see is not catering to them.
Lots of game have started by spouting "We will have this and this and that and this other stuff" and all they received from gaming sights was "mehh" or "We'll see"
I really wish that Horizons had delivered on the game that they were spouting about .... but they didn't/couldn't for various reasons.
SoE the evil empire spouts their drivel and gets the hype/marketing machine going and sites/comsumers eat it up like a hobo on a ham sammich.
We will see SoE dev's/marketing start to peel back layers of promises and time goes on with the:
"it's wont make launch but we will and it later" .... then
"well we had to drop this and have to lower this, but, we will still have this" ....
"Ok, so this didn't make it, but, we are really trying to get this kept because we love you the players"
"Well due to Board (not our fault) decisions we will have to drop XXOXX because it wont make the time table they have set"
Simply put it got it because of the game changing 'WORLD' design ethos.
No longer will the world be a backdrop but now becomes a very integral part of the living and breathing virtual world the genre has long promised but never delivered. The potential for an MMO to actually have true Z access play on top of all that too.
That single design feature for me is the most exciting development in MMO design since 3D.
I played games that had this feature 10 years ago...........
I saw nothing new happening in any of their presentations.
Fat envelope plus exclusive press material deals can do miracles. Although I am/was an EQ fan it was still way too shady and weird when they came out with that award here. SOE people know which buttons to press it seems.
I remember hearing about the voxel engine they're using here on mmorpg.com funnily enough and tbh did not think it would be in an mmo engine anytime soon!
From that pov: Yes. And now there's one...............
Simply put it got it because of the game changing 'WORLD' design ethos.
No longer will the world be a backdrop but now becomes a very integral part of the living and breathing virtual world the genre has long promised but never delivered. The potential for an MMO to actually have true Z access play on top of all that too.
That single design feature for me is the most exciting development in MMO design since 3D.
I played games that had this feature 10 years ago...........
I saw nothing new happening in any of their presentations.
Which games had a totally destructible environment?
Comments
GW2 is a sandbox?
nodes shared in GW2 -- wont be in EQN
no direct heals allowed in GW2 - unknown healing mechanics in EQN
EQ2 fan sites
I'm totally in agreement with the OP. It appears that 2 semi-prestigious media outlets were wine-and-dined, shown the videos of things happening (not exactly the same as demonstrating the technology), told about some interesting concepts / ideas / plans, and the media outlets declared this presentation best game of E3.
I am skeptical, but I still haven't seen anything that convinces me this is a functional game at this point. For all I know, the video evidence we've seen could have been generated with traditional 3D modelling tools -- the Final Fantasy movie of several years back was amazing too, but only demonstrated the technology of movie-making, not a game. The planned release of a key development tool, Landmark, is scheduled for this winter, not now. Are the developers using something different to develop the landscapes, character models and other in-game art assets? I have yet to see any indication of a UI, only been told more ideas.
Even the verbal / conceptual evidence is incomplete. How do the actual classes work? Where is any kind of detail about in-game crafting (non-Landmark) or resource gathering? Who has seen other playable race models? What about character creation -- what will it be like? Even though I'm not particularly interested in PvP, there's been nothing but vague hints about how these might work. There's no combat system, no weapon stats, no details about class spells, and nothing about the mysterious spell-weaving. How are Rally Point events initiated? Player creation? Developer creations with player discovery? Developer creation with public notice?
Hints, rumors, conceptual art, and some videos aren't evidence of an actual product ready to be tested and played by the public. I am beginning to wonder exactly how much of this game is actually coded. There hasn't even been a ballpark release date released. Can we expect anyone to get some kind of hands-on before Summer 2015? Even the Beta registration doesn't hint at any date other than 'Soon'. Is that 'Clock soon' or 'Geologic time soon'?
Now, what do we do about getting some answers from this site and TenTonHammer? I think their feet need to be held to the fire and they need to explain how and why they honored this 'marketing campaign' with Game of E3. If SOE's E3 presentation was anything but a dog-and-pony show and these sites have actually seen and had some hands-on with a playable version, let's hear the details of that, not the SOE-made demonstration videos we've been shown.
I'd challenge the MMORPG.com editorial staff to show their credibility in this matter.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
yes but the combat and the way they handle skills and abilities is very similar, is it not?
ask yourself this, is EQN going to be more familiar to EQ players or GW2 players? this is supposed to be an everquest game and they took more features from other games than they did everquest it seems.
that's not to say this is a GW2 clone but it does have some similar core systems. too bad it didn't have some similar core systems to everquest.
So if I created a awesome sounding game with a little tech demo for E3 next year I should be able to win Best of show too?
Get out of here with that SOE man love. They did not deserve Best of Show period. All these games out there that have so much to show that have awesome graphics, gameplay and concepts that they could actually SHOW PEOPLE and this won?
This demo of 2 maps beat out WIldstar, ESO, Destiny, Final Fantasy and The Division?
------------------------------
You see, every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with their surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You spread to an area, and you multiply, and you multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet.-Mr.Smith
Then why complain? They have more to reveal. Judge it then. This has been a dream of game devs for quite a long time.
I don't think it should of one Best of Show but because there was nothing they could show us to back it up at the time and let us judge for ourselves.
As to your tirade I don't believe Destiny or The Division was actually playable at E3 either except by the demonstrating Devs at best.ESO,Final Fantasy and Wildstar were playable to everyone there however and I would of given the MMORPG of show to one of them probably.
I do agree with the person you lambast that EQN stated goals are far more ambitious than the MMORPGs you mentioned though whether any of them actually pan out is a different question.
However in the end it is the MMORPG.com staff's opinion and you or I or anyone doesn't have the right to tell them what their opinion should be,we can disagree with their choices though.
What should of won best in show for a MMORPG?
ArcheAge: Eastern game that appeals to a particular crowd and when it eventually makes it to the rest of the world, won't have much of an impact.
WAR 40k: Little known beyond everyone loves the IP, from what we do know, doesn't sound mind blowing, just hopefully a good use of the IP for once.
Destiny: Appeals to the FPS crowd and isn't going to change the world of mmorpg gaming.
Wildstar: Great looking game if you are into WoW in space and themeparks (millions upon millions are). Will be successful, but not reinventing the wheel, just putting nice rims on it.
Elder Scrolls Online: Skyrim meets DAoC RVR and PVP. Two clones must be better then one? If you like these two elements, you're in luck. But again, it isn't going to change anything.
Everquest Next: To me, it is unfair to put it in the same genre as these games (maybe AA) but to say EQN is on par with Wildstar or EQ itself is just inaccurate.
Yes it has elements from other games. EQ (sorry UO) started something that most games now follow. I think EQN is less copying Minecraft, GW2, and other games and instead is just a product of this time. We will see the same game mechanics in many to come. The traditional elements from 10 years ago are running there course and its time for what's "Next."
Action based combat, classes with freedom, huge open world, player created content taking the first seat, etc.
Out of the games listed, EQN is the only one either promising or delivering anything new and groundbreaking to the genre.
It is the total package. There is lots of work to be done, but it is leaps ahead of the competition.
Again, not 100% original, but it is taking the best of several modern games and adding a heck of a lot of new elements on top of what they have done in previous SOE games.
I feel the same about EQ and WoW.
EQ started it, WoW perfected and then ruined what many people wanted in a game, at the time. Neither was perfect, but they had strong appeal and were the total package in their own right.
The times are changing and old veterans (like myself) need to either stay on the train or get off at the next stop. We aren't in control of the landscape around us and if you can't handle what's to come, you are missing out.
-----------
tl;dr
It is all subjective.
There was enough to see for them to form an educated opinion compared to what was available at the time.
EQN is not 100% original, but it is the most "groundbreaking" or outside the box thinking game from the list available. Even if that means using other elements that are becoming more and more common in today's games.
Basing the winner off of "completed" status is silly as there is a wide range and makes judging meaningless as obviously the game closest to launch would win, regardless if it is a piece of poo compared to those still in alpha/beta.
If you came up with something amazing then sure you could.
Division is good but it isn't an MMO really, more an FPS from what I could tell but vs the others you mention....yes, head and shoulders above them.
All your points you bring up are very moot and ignore all the other facts that make it feel like GW2. Combat where you have the telegraphed circle, skill usage limitations being the big things that jump out.
The game certainly has a feel or elements of GW2 and I strongly have a feeling that people are going to be massively dissapointed in EQN. My money is on PFO or CU for a real sandbox fantasy MMO.
You dont think that the developers at E3 who worked hard to put together playable hands on demos of their game are being slighted? I think its a little insulting to all the other devs who put forth the effort to let their products be judged on their own merit.
Honestly why do you care? mmorpg.com saw something that they extremely liked and deemed it worthy of best in show. Honestly they could have given it to MLP online and I wouldnt give a rats ass.
Playing: FFXIV, DnL, and World of Warships
Waiting on: Ashes of Creation
Simple answer: They shouldn't have won best of show.
Best of show should go to a game that has great ideas that were actually made into a functioning game. Until it's an actual product (or close to it) it should not win best in show.
What happened was like me getting a bunch of truly great ideas for a game, making some powerpoints and making some videos to present what the game is gonna be without having even close to an actual game done (where you REALLY can know if those ideas work out or not). Without an actual game you can't say it works or it is fun. Such a presentation should never win best of show no matter how great the plans are.
I mostly made the comment in reference to the 8 skill combat bar tied to your class which seems very much like GW2 to me, and since combat is such a big part of a MMORPG experience (for me anyways) it's very important.
GW2 combat model is one very big reason why I didn't care for it (or its predecessor) so I'm viewing this with some concern.
The rest of the stuff mentioned sounds pretty cool and hopefully they'll make me overlook a combat model that I don't care for.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Most games at every E3 would not meet your criteria then.Most games shown are only demos or very focused and very limited playable demos at best.By your criteria there would be no game of Show winners for any category any year unless a game was shown that happened to be close to release,which is not the purpose of E3.
Where I think MMORPG.com erred was you should cater to your audience and giving an award to a game your audience can't also see is not catering to them.
"Best in Show" ????!!!!
Should have been "Best in Theory" ....
Lots of game have started by spouting "We will have this and this and that and this other stuff" and all they received from gaming sights was "mehh" or "We'll see"
I really wish that Horizons had delivered on the game that they were spouting about .... but they didn't/couldn't for various reasons.
SoE the evil empire spouts their drivel and gets the hype/marketing machine going and sites/comsumers eat it up like a hobo on a ham sammich.
We will see SoE dev's/marketing start to peel back layers of promises and time goes on with the:
"it's wont make launch but we will and it later" .... then
"well we had to drop this and have to lower this, but, we will still have this" ....
"Ok, so this didn't make it, but, we are really trying to get this kept because we love you the players"
"Well due to Board (not our fault) decisions we will have to drop XXOXX because it wont make the time table they have set"
"Hey look we made a minecraft mod for you!!"
Ughh... next ... move on please
I highly doubt the company that does the absolute least amount of advertising was the one paying people off. Its such an idiotic theory.
I played games that had this feature 10 years ago...........
I saw nothing new happening in any of their presentations.
I doubt they were paid off, but SOE probably gave them some inside information. Bill didn't make that release article from nothing.
I remember hearing about the voxel engine they're using here on mmorpg.com funnily enough and tbh did not think it would be in an mmo engine anytime soon!
From that pov: Yes. And now there's one...............
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Which games had a totally destructible environment?
Or more to the point, which MMO's?