as far as Mount and Blade specifically what you are calling clunky is actually designed that way on purpose. Its supposed to be more realistic.
no, there is a difference between "realistic" and "clunky".
Mount and Blade felt clunky.
Bodies moving oddly, weird animations, not connecting when I should have connected, especially on the mount. Odd lighting issues.
I thought the game design, what they were going for was great. But the implementation wasn't.
There is a difference between "realistic" where you have combatants that are hitting, bobbing and weaving as a combatant would do and having the combatants move oddly, feel slidey n the ground, etc.
the core point I am making with Mount and Blade is that its designed EXACTLY AS THEY HAD PLANNED.
you might not agree with the method of combat but its not a bug nor was it lazy design, its was EXPLICTLY done that way on purpose and many people understand why. That is light years away from bug
You and I seem to have a communication problem. I'm not sure of any other way to say it.
they did not plan to make the game awkward and clunky. Being "realistic" does not mean "odd animations" or "weird ligthing" or "not connecting".
yes they did.
the way you walk is by design, the fact that combat is 'clunky' is also by design. Clearly I wouldnt use the word 'clunky' but he felt that it was only becuase he didnt understand what they game was trying to do. as far as lighting I dont know what he is talking about.
Have you played the game? Do you understand that it does combat BY DESIGN completely different and more detailed then other games
example, when you get hit in the face with a polearm you are going to wobble..why? because in real life you would be disorentied.
Yeah, agian, you and I just can't communicate.
You just don't read the words I put down or don't understand them or they mean something different to you.
Why in the world would you construe "being hit in the face and wobbling" as awkward or stilted?
I completely understand that and I'm essentially talking about bad animations.
And NOT like the other poster put it "some people are looking for a kung fu movie.
In any case, I do have to apologize, I went home and started looking through my old games only to have discovered I tossed them.
Shadowbane was one that came to mind as I felt that had a decent amount of bugs and glitches.
Having said that, since Age of Conana and Warhammer online were both "buggy as heck" and since I don't have my old games to remind me what the heck they were, I can't press an argument about "some" indy games being buggy as heck.
Mount and Blade still had bad animations.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar I bet they hoped and believed it eiuld be a lot smoother. No one designs something to be awkward. Awkward was unintended.
wrong
they HAD to expliclty make it that way, it doesnt happen on its own.
Walking, running and combat is hard in that game and its that way for a reason. the code didnt just write itself that way by accident.
Just for the record Willow I wanted to say I agree with you, even though I have not played the game, I did watch the video.
And I did not see clunky.
I think what we are talking about is, is that most people think fighting in an MMO should look like a Kung Fu movie where all the moves are executed perfectly and it looks more like a ballet, than a fight.
Mount and Blade looks more like UFC fighting which is obviously the more realistic fighting, but compared to stylized Kung Fu fighting in a movie, I suppose you could call it "clunky". I think in this case people are mistaking design decisions, for bad animation.
However like Willow says, I believe that is what the Devs were going for in Mount and Blade, therefore it is by design as he said. I would not see this as a negative in a game, because personally I like watching both styles of fighting.
the first time I played it i thought to myself 'ouch wait this is...clunky'...then I did the tutorial and I started to understand what they were trying to do.
I can very clearly see how someone who is not interested in what the tutorial had to show would just get impaitent and gloss over it waiting to get outside and then get frustrated when it didnt behave like they are used to.
I think one of the largest challenges for many indies aside from not having a huge marketing budget is that if the game doesnt feel EXACTLY like a AAA people are used to then some people loose focus. I think also people have a mental block going in with indie games (I know I used to). They start from the word go they have negitivity in the back of their mind.
I say all this because this is how I felt before making a more open minded transformation.
as far as Mount and Blade specifically what you are calling clunky is actually designed that way on purpose. Its supposed to be more realistic.
no, there is a difference between "realistic" and "clunky".
Mount and Blade felt clunky.
Bodies moving oddly, weird animations, not connecting when I should have connected, especially on the mount. Odd lighting issues.
I thought the game design, what they were going for was great. But the implementation wasn't.
There is a difference between "realistic" where you have combatants that are hitting, bobbing and weaving as a combatant would do and having the combatants move oddly, feel slidey n the ground, etc.
the core point I am making with Mount and Blade is that its designed EXACTLY AS THEY HAD PLANNED.
you might not agree with the method of combat but its not a bug nor was it lazy design, its was EXPLICTLY done that way on purpose and many people understand why. That is light years away from bug
You and I seem to have a communication problem. I'm not sure of any other way to say it.
they did not plan to make the game awkward and clunky. Being "realistic" does not mean "odd animations" or "weird ligthing" or "not connecting".
yes they did.
the way you walk is by design, the fact that combat is 'clunky' is also by design. Clearly I wouldnt use the word 'clunky' but he felt that it was only becuase he didnt understand what they game was trying to do. as far as lighting I dont know what he is talking about.
Have you played the game? Do you understand that it does combat BY DESIGN completely different and more detailed then other games
example, when you get hit in the face with a polearm you are going to wobble..why? because in real life you would be disorentied.
Yeah, agian, you and I just can't communicate.
You just don't read the words I put down or don't understand them or they mean something different to you.
Why in the world would you construe "being hit in the face and wobbling" as awkward or stilted?
I completely understand that and I'm essentially talking about bad animations.
And NOT like the other poster put it "some people are looking for a kung fu movie.
In any case, I do have to apologize, I went home and started looking through my old games only to have discovered I tossed them.
Shadowbane was one that came to mind as I felt that had a decent amount of bugs and glitches.
Having said that, since Age of Conana and Warhammer online were both "buggy as heck" and since I don't have my old games to remind me what the heck they were, I can't press an argument about "some" indy games being buggy as heck.
this video shows Mount and Blade combat that is all SPECIFICALLY DESIGN EXACTLY AS IT IS.
and it is THE reason people like it.
peroid...end of story
if you would like to know WHY it is that way (which I noticed nobody seems to give two fucks about) I can indulge you.
So yeah, I watched the video and "yes" it's stiff and robotic. Some sliding along the ground as well from some of those npc's.
This has nothing to do with creating "realistic" combat.
Perhaps you think, for some reason, not having a character jump all over the place, do acrobatics, etc is what I'm saying when I point out these animations.
no.
What I am pointing out is the stiff, robotic, unnatural way these avatars move. Has nothing to do with their speed or that they aren't twirling their weapons.
Same with the indie game I tried last night, Project Gorgon (which I do recommend by the way if you can put your mind back to earlier games and it feeling a bit like an earlier game) the animations felt like junk. And there were things floating on the land. Like trees.
However, I do believe it's in Alpha so floating things can be forgiven. Though I highly doubt that the animations and visual representation will change by leaps and bounds. I think their kickstarter is trying to address this though it's very behind.
So yeah, give me more of the "spirit" of the combat in Mount and Blade. Seriously, sign me up, I hate the light shows that most of these games want to adopt.
But my point stands that the visual representation will always suffer, sometimes feeling junky and that is a huge hurdle for some players.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
the first time I played it i thought to myself 'ouch wait this is...clunky'...then I did the tutorial and I started to understand what they were trying to do.
I can very clearly see how someone who is not interested in what the tutorial had to show would just get impaitent and gloss over it waiting to get outside and then get frustrated when it didnt behave like they are used to.
I think one of the largest challenges for many indies aside from not having a huge marketing budget is that if the game doesnt feel EXACTLY like a AAA people are used to then some people loose focus. I think also people have a mental block going in with indie games (I know I used to). They start from the word go they have negitivity in the back of their mind.
I say all this because this is how I felt before making a more open minded transformation.
It is not a mental block. It is not that people want stuff that they are used to.
You have to open to the idea that what they are trying to do .. is just not fun for many.
As a point of comparison. i played quite a few indie games such as Gone Home, and the ROOM where there aren't even combat. But the point is that the "realistic" combat in Mount & Blade (which i have no problem that they try) is just not fun for me. I don't want combat to be realistic, i want it to be fantastic, fun, with super powers.
Games are supposed to be entertaining. Too much realism can get in the way of that, at least for me.
Dated graphics also does not help. That game lost me both on presentation & gameplay.
the first time I played it i thought to myself 'ouch wait this is...clunky'...then I did the tutorial and I started to understand what they were trying to do.
I can very clearly see how someone who is not interested in what the tutorial had to show would just get impaitent and gloss over it waiting to get outside and then get frustrated when it didnt behave like they are used to.
I think one of the largest challenges for many indies aside from not having a huge marketing budget is that if the game doesnt feel EXACTLY like a AAA people are used to then some people loose focus. I think also people have a mental block going in with indie games (I know I used to). They start from the word go they have negitivity in the back of their mind.
I say all this because this is how I felt before making a more open minded transformation.
It is not a mental block. It is not that people want stuff that they are used to.
You have to open to the idea that what they are trying to do .. is just not fun for many.
As a point of comparison. i played quite a few indie games such as Gone Home, and the ROOM where there aren't even combat. But the point is that the "realistic" combat in Mount & Blade (which i have no problem that they try) is just not fun for me. I don't want combat to be realistic, i want it to be fantastic, fun, with super powers.
Games are supposed to be entertaining. Too much realism can get in the way of that, at least for me.
Dated graphics also does not help. That game lost me both on presentation & gameplay.
understand and be very clear about this.
what I described (closed minded and all) is EXACTLY what I personally went thru when starting to play indie games.
Added: I totally agree that graphics do not help. That said, if people could focus on call graphics graphics instead of 'buggy as heck'...'i mean reall clunky' that would also be helpful.
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
Originally posted by lizardbones Concerning Minecraft, it does not have a persistent, shared world. It has many worlds and most of them have one player in them. Vanilla Minecraft has zero RPG features so it is not an mmorpg. Minecraft does not have a lobby on the PC so it does not fit neatly into the general mmo category either. Mods can change all of this but vanilla Minecraft seems to be much more its own thing.
That's one of the key points in all this. An indie dev making a single-player or multiplayer sandbox style game has a far better chance of hitting the mark than an indie dev trying to make a sandbox MMO. The scope of the project takes such a massive leap forward that the inability to deliver a quality product/service (or deliver anything at all, for that matter) becomes almost inevitable.
For example, APB: Reloaded has amazing cosmetic customization for avatars and vehicles, but to pull that off they have to limit each city instance to 100 users. To pull that off at 1,000 users would more than likely require either sacrificing some aspect of the game to compensate for the increased requirements of the client/server/network/etc, or expand their team and resources to develop and maintain the infrastructure to support the textures, physics and all the other craziness they have going on. There's a point where the scope for a niche project extends either beyond the capacity of the small team or into the realm of negative returns due to the low revenue of a niche audience.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
Name 3.
AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0
indies that are Sandbox = Wurm Online, Xyson, and argueably Darkfall, Eve Online. Just to name the ones I personally have played.
It appears that AAAs have about as much experience with Sandboxes as Tom Hanks does...someone around zero and zero
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
Name 3.
AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0
indies that are Sandbox = Wurm Online, Xyson, and argueably Darkfall, Eve Online. Just to name the ones I personally have played.
It appears that AAAs have about as much experience with Sandboxes as Tom Hanks does...someone around zero and zero
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
Name 3.
AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0
indies that are Sandbox = Wurm Online, Xyson, and argueably Darkfall, Eve Online. Just to name the ones I personally have played.
It appears that AAAs have about as much experience with Sandboxes as Tom Hanks does...someone around zero and zero
UO wasn't a sandbox??? SWG wasn't a sandbox????
they very well maybe I just have never played them so I cant speak to it. You know how people get on the word 'sandbox'.
I think its fair to say that indies have more sandbox games then AAAs which is...zero So indies might be better at defining the word
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
Name 3.
AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0
indies that are Sandbox = Wurm Online, Xyson, and argueably Darkfall, Eve Online. Just to name the ones I personally have played.
It appears that AAAs have about as much experience with Sandboxes as Tom Hanks does...someone around zero and zero
UO wasn't a sandbox??? SWG wasn't a sandbox????
they very well maybe I just have never played them so I cant speak to it. You know how people get on the word 'sandbox'.
I think its fair to say that indies have more sandbox games then AAAs which is...zero So indies might be better at defining the word
They are also the ones failing at making it mainstream. Which I said earlier is doing more damage to the "brand" than good. But that's just my thought.
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
Name 3.
AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0
indies that are Sandbox = Wurm Online, Xyson, and argueably Darkfall, Eve Online. Just to name the ones I personally have played.
It appears that AAAs have about as much experience with Sandboxes as Tom Hanks does...someone around zero and zero
UO wasn't a sandbox??? SWG wasn't a sandbox????
they very well maybe I just have never played them so I cant speak to it. You know how people get on the word 'sandbox'.
I think its fair to say that indies have more sandbox games then AAAs which is...zero So indies might be better at defining the word
UO and SWG were as much sandbox, if not more so, than EVE online. You mentioned EVE Online. You also stated the following: "AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0"
Just because you haven't played them, doesn't give you the right to pretend that they dont exist. The reason they stopped being made by AAA developers, is because the audiance for themeparks was/is so much more.
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
Name 3.
AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0
indies that are Sandbox = Wurm Online, Xyson, and argueably Darkfall, Eve Online. Just to name the ones I personally have played.
It appears that AAAs have about as much experience with Sandboxes as Tom Hanks does...someone around zero and zero
UO wasn't a sandbox??? SWG wasn't a sandbox????
they very well maybe I just have never played them so I cant speak to it. You know how people get on the word 'sandbox'.
I think its fair to say that indies have more sandbox games then AAAs which is...zero So indies might be better at defining the word
They are also the ones failing at making it mainstream. Which I said earlier is doing more damage to the "brand" than good. But that's just my thought.
Also, CCP is not indie dev, lol.
here is the trouble with your thought.
If indies have a hard time bringing 'Sandbox' to the mainstream as you suggest why would AAAs be at all interested in making sandboxes?
If it really as you suggest the the term 'Sandbox' would not be a hyper popular term that AAAs are wanting to expoit in the first place. Chances are Sandbox actually are really popular and AAAs see indies make a lot of money of sanboxes and want in on it. If that wasnt the case they wouldnt give two fucks about sandboxes.
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
Name 3.
AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0
indies that are Sandbox = Wurm Online, Xyson, and argueably Darkfall, Eve Online. Just to name the ones I personally have played.
It appears that AAAs have about as much experience with Sandboxes as Tom Hanks does...someone around zero and zero
UO wasn't a sandbox??? SWG wasn't a sandbox????
they very well maybe I just have never played them so I cant speak to it. You know how people get on the word 'sandbox'.
I think its fair to say that indies have more sandbox games then AAAs which is...zero So indies might be better at defining the word
UO and SWG were as much sandbox, if not more so, than EVE online. You mentioned EVE Online. You also stated the following: "AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0"
Just because you haven't played them, doesn't give you the right to pretend that they dont exist. The reason they stopped being made by AAA developers, is because the audiance for themeparks was/is so much more.
I guess I am asking then.
What AAA game is a sandbox? I dont think UO is considered a AAA but perhaps SWG is which I hadnt considered so..there it is. AAA = 1 sandbox game.
maybe provide me a list of AAA games that are sandboxes?
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
Name 3.
AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0
indies that are Sandbox = Wurm Online, Xyson, and argueably Darkfall, Eve Online. Just to name the ones I personally have played.
It appears that AAAs have about as much experience with Sandboxes as Tom Hanks does...someone around zero and zero
UO wasn't a sandbox??? SWG wasn't a sandbox????
they very well maybe I just have never played them so I cant speak to it. You know how people get on the word 'sandbox'.
I think its fair to say that indies have more sandbox games then AAAs which is...zero So indies might be better at defining the word
UO and SWG were as much sandbox, if not more so, than EVE online. You mentioned EVE Online. You also stated the following: "AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0"
Just because you haven't played them, doesn't give you the right to pretend that they dont exist. The reason they stopped being made by AAA developers, is because the audiance for themeparks was/is so much more.
I guess I am asking then.
What AAA game is a sandbox? I dont think UO is considered a AAA but perhaps SWG is which I hadnt considered so..there it is. AAA = 1 sandbox game.
maybe provide me a list of AAA games that are sandboxes?
UO was always owned by EA, and was the frist "big budget" MMO...if thats not AAA, then you are literally picking and chosing items to fit your view.
What part of UO do you think makes it not a sanbox VS EVE?
I dont..
lets back up a bit...like a whole lot
I added games that I have personally played because I didnt want to have to defend a game as a sandbox that I havent played. That is why I added Eve as 'argueable' but didnt add UO because to be honest I know VERY little about that game.
My list was only a list of examples, not a list of all.
I think the main take away that is getting missed here is this
AAA games = 0
indies games > 0
I am looking for a list of AAA games (MMO) that are sandboxes because as far as I know its zero.
What part of UO do you think makes it not a sanbox VS EVE?
I dont..
lets back up a bit...like a whole lot
I added games that I have personally played because I didnt want to have to defend a game as a sandbox that I havent played. That is why I added Eve as 'argueable' but didnt add UO because to be honest I know VERY little about that game.
My list was only a list of examples, not a list of all.
I think the main take away that is getting missed here is this
AAA games = 0
indies games > 0
I am looking for a list of AAA games (MMO) that are sandboxes because as far as I know its zero.
UO is AAA....and is arguably the first AAA MMO ever made. You went from "There are 0 AAA sandboxes" to "I have played 0 AAA sandboxes"...
Its obvious that every point you get proven wrong on, you are ujjust going to turn it into meaning something else.
Pretty much ever first gen MMO was sandbox, AND AAA. UO, AO, SWG, etc etc. Many are shut down now or are in pure maintanance mode, which is exactly why non indie's stopped making them.....the themepark audiance is MUCH larger.
UO was always owned by EA, and was the frist "big budget" MMO...if thats not AAA, then you are literally picking and chosing items to fit your view.
so I am treading in areas I dont know much about when it comes to UO.
I do read a lot of posts here and it seems like most posters will pull in UO and SWG when arguing about indies vs AAA. or rather 'how it used to be' vs 'how it is now'
So with that I have to divert, I do feel that because a publishing company owns a game developer that its likely they are no longer an indie (because of where funding comes from) but that is an interesting conversation in of itself.
So for you UO and SWG are AAA games. fair enough I divert to that then.
What part of UO do you think makes it not a sanbox VS EVE?
I dont..
lets back up a bit...like a whole lot
I added games that I have personally played because I didnt want to have to defend a game as a sandbox that I havent played. That is why I added Eve as 'argueable' but didnt add UO because to be honest I know VERY little about that game.
My list was only a list of examples, not a list of all.
I think the main take away that is getting missed here is this
AAA games = 0
indies games > 0
I am looking for a list of AAA games (MMO) that are sandboxes because as far as I know its zero.
UO is AAA....and is arguably the first AAA MMO ever made. You went from "There are 0 AAA sandboxes" to "I have played 0 AAA sandboxes"...
Its obvious that every point you get proven wrong on, you are ujjust going to turn it into meaning something else.
Pretty much ever first gen MMO was sandbox, AND AAA. UO, AO, SWG, etc etc. Many are shut down now, which is exactly why non indie's stopped making them.....the themepark audiance is MUCH larger.
I didnt go from..i flat out didnt not know
My knowedge of UO is extreemly small I didnt know it was owned by EA
What part of UO do you think makes it not a sanbox VS EVE?
I dont..
lets back up a bit...like a whole lot
I added games that I have personally played because I didnt want to have to defend a game as a sandbox that I havent played. That is why I added Eve as 'argueable' but didnt add UO because to be honest I know VERY little about that game.
My list was only a list of examples, not a list of all.
I think the main take away that is getting missed here is this
AAA games = 0
indies games > 0
I am looking for a list of AAA games (MMO) that are sandboxes because as far as I know its zero.
UO is AAA....and is arguably the first AAA MMO ever made. You went from "There are 0 AAA sandboxes" to "I have played 0 AAA sandboxes"...
Its obvious that every point you get proven wrong on, you are ujjust going to turn it into meaning something else.
Pretty much ever first gen MMO was sandbox, AND AAA. UO, AO, SWG, etc etc. Many are shut down now, which is exactly why non indie's stopped making them.....the themepark audiance is MUCH larger.
I didnt go from..i flat out didnt not know
My knowedge of UO is extreemly small I didnt know it was owned by EA
so AAA = 2
There are more than 2, I just happened to list 2 of the more prolific ones. Your statment was "there are zero AAA sandboxes", when you should have said "I know of zero AAA sandboxes"...we kindly would have educated you on the subject.
Fact is, sandboxes were tried by AAAs, and not to say that they failed outright, but they were dwarfed by themeparks, hense thats where the development shifted to. Even themeparks that are considered "faileurs" are vastly more successfull than most sandboxes.
Comments
Yeah, agian, you and I just can't communicate.
You just don't read the words I put down or don't understand them or they mean something different to you.
Why in the world would you construe "being hit in the face and wobbling" as awkward or stilted?
I completely understand that and I'm essentially talking about bad animations.
And NOT like the other poster put it "some people are looking for a kung fu movie.
In any case, I do have to apologize, I went home and started looking through my old games only to have discovered I tossed them.
Shadowbane was one that came to mind as I felt that had a decent amount of bugs and glitches.
Having said that, since Age of Conana and Warhammer online were both "buggy as heck" and since I don't have my old games to remind me what the heck they were, I can't press an argument about "some" indy games being buggy as heck.
Mount and Blade still had bad animations.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
the first time I played it i thought to myself 'ouch wait this is...clunky'...then I did the tutorial and I started to understand what they were trying to do.
I can very clearly see how someone who is not interested in what the tutorial had to show would just get impaitent and gloss over it waiting to get outside and then get frustrated when it didnt behave like they are used to.
I think one of the largest challenges for many indies aside from not having a huge marketing budget is that if the game doesnt feel EXACTLY like a AAA people are used to then some people loose focus. I think also people have a mental block going in with indie games (I know I used to). They start from the word go they have negitivity in the back of their mind.
I say all this because this is how I felt before making a more open minded transformation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-QnUZmdTwo
this video shows Mount and Blade combat that is all SPECIFICALLY DESIGN EXACTLY AS IT IS.
and it is THE reason people like it.
peroid...end of story
if you would like to know WHY it is that way (which I noticed nobody seems to give two fucks about) I can indulge you.
So yeah, I watched the video and "yes" it's stiff and robotic. Some sliding along the ground as well from some of those npc's.
This has nothing to do with creating "realistic" combat.
Perhaps you think, for some reason, not having a character jump all over the place, do acrobatics, etc is what I'm saying when I point out these animations.
no.
What I am pointing out is the stiff, robotic, unnatural way these avatars move. Has nothing to do with their speed or that they aren't twirling their weapons.
Same with the indie game I tried last night, Project Gorgon (which I do recommend by the way if you can put your mind back to earlier games and it feeling a bit like an earlier game) the animations felt like junk. And there were things floating on the land. Like trees.
However, I do believe it's in Alpha so floating things can be forgiven. Though I highly doubt that the animations and visual representation will change by leaps and bounds. I think their kickstarter is trying to address this though it's very behind.
So yeah, give me more of the "spirit" of the combat in Mount and Blade. Seriously, sign me up, I hate the light shows that most of these games want to adopt.
But my point stands that the visual representation will always suffer, sometimes feeling junky and that is a huge hurdle for some players.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Let me change your eyesight a little bit.
What if I tell you that those indie remain indie and niche because of the way they grab the "sandbox" concept?
lets do a little history lesson here.
Which AAA game defined the word 'Sandbox'
oops thats right it came from the indie games..damnit!
It is not a mental block. It is not that people want stuff that they are used to.
You have to open to the idea that what they are trying to do .. is just not fun for many.
As a point of comparison. i played quite a few indie games such as Gone Home, and the ROOM where there aren't even combat. But the point is that the "realistic" combat in Mount & Blade (which i have no problem that they try) is just not fun for me. I don't want combat to be realistic, i want it to be fantastic, fun, with super powers.
Games are supposed to be entertaining. Too much realism can get in the way of that, at least for me.
Dated graphics also does not help. That game lost me both on presentation & gameplay.
understand and be very clear about this.
what I described (closed minded and all) is EXACTLY what I personally went thru when starting to play indie games.
Added: I totally agree that graphics do not help. That said, if people could focus on call graphics graphics instead of 'buggy as heck'...'i mean reall clunky' that would also be helpful.
Doesn't mean squat. The sandbox is still nothing. People don't even know the definition of sandbox. What is a sandbox, how do you define a sandbox, that is extremely opinionated answer and varies from person to person. Im sure this website has a 20+ pages long discussion on what the sandbox is.
So to twist it even further, which indie dev has a successful sandbox MMO? CCP isn't indie. If you consider CCP an indie then google is indie company as well.
You may mention DF:UW but this game doesn't click with so many people that it does more damage to the term sandbox than favor.
In the end the only game that may do the sandbox genre some good will be EQ:Next.
ArcheAge is as much sandbox as Lineage 2 with housing is.
How do you define indie developer too? Because this term has as many explanations as there are for "sandboxes"
I think its kinda funny given the term has been around for awhile and there isnt a SINGLE AAA MMO that anyone considers a sandbox.. not one...not a single one...nada...nothing...zip.
Yet in indie space there are.....
with that who gives a flat fuck what AAAs think sandboxes are they dont have one they are even willing to call a sandbox...argontly hysterical
That's one of the key points in all this. An indie dev making a single-player or multiplayer sandbox style game has a far better chance of hitting the mark than an indie dev trying to make a sandbox MMO. The scope of the project takes such a massive leap forward that the inability to deliver a quality product/service (or deliver anything at all, for that matter) becomes almost inevitable.
For example, APB: Reloaded has amazing cosmetic customization for avatars and vehicles, but to pull that off they have to limit each city instance to 100 users. To pull that off at 1,000 users would more than likely require either sacrificing some aspect of the game to compensate for the increased requirements of the client/server/network/etc, or expand their team and resources to develop and maintain the infrastructure to support the textures, physics and all the other craziness they have going on. There's a point where the scope for a niche project extends either beyond the capacity of the small team or into the realm of negative returns due to the low revenue of a niche audience.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Name 3.
AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0
indies that are Sandbox = Wurm Online, Xyson, and argueably Darkfall, Eve Online. Just to name the ones I personally have played.
It appears that AAAs have about as much experience with Sandboxes as Tom Hanks does...someone around zero and zero
UO wasn't a sandbox??? SWG wasn't a sandbox????
they very well maybe I just have never played them so I cant speak to it. You know how people get on the word 'sandbox'.
I think its fair to say that indies have more sandbox games then AAAs which is...zero So indies might be better at defining the word
They are also the ones failing at making it mainstream. Which I said earlier is doing more damage to the "brand" than good. But that's just my thought.
Also, CCP is not indie dev, lol.
UO and SWG were as much sandbox, if not more so, than EVE online. You mentioned EVE Online. You also stated the following: "AAAs that are Sandbox = zer0"
Just because you haven't played them, doesn't give you the right to pretend that they dont exist. The reason they stopped being made by AAA developers, is because the audiance for themeparks was/is so much more.
here is the trouble with your thought.
If indies have a hard time bringing 'Sandbox' to the mainstream as you suggest why would AAAs be at all interested in making sandboxes?
If it really as you suggest the the term 'Sandbox' would not be a hyper popular term that AAAs are wanting to expoit in the first place. Chances are Sandbox actually are really popular and AAAs see indies make a lot of money of sanboxes and want in on it. If that wasnt the case they wouldnt give two fucks about sandboxes.
oopps for you
I guess I am asking then.
What AAA game is a sandbox? I dont think UO is considered a AAA but perhaps SWG is which I hadnt considered so..there it is. AAA = 1 sandbox game.
maybe provide me a list of AAA games that are sandboxes?
UO was always owned by EA, and was the frist "big budget" MMO...if thats not AAA, then you are literally picking and chosing items to fit your view.
I dont..
lets back up a bit...like a whole lot
I added games that I have personally played because I didnt want to have to defend a game as a sandbox that I havent played. That is why I added Eve as 'argueable' but didnt add UO because to be honest I know VERY little about that game.
My list was only a list of examples, not a list of all.
I think the main take away that is getting missed here is this
AAA games = 0
indies games > 0
I am looking for a list of AAA games (MMO) that are sandboxes because as far as I know its zero.
UO is AAA....and is arguably the first AAA MMO ever made. You went from "There are 0 AAA sandboxes" to "I have played 0 AAA sandboxes"...
Its obvious that every point you get proven wrong on, you are ujjust going to turn it into meaning something else.
Pretty much ever first gen MMO was sandbox, AND AAA. UO, AO, SWG, etc etc. Many are shut down now or are in pure maintanance mode, which is exactly why non indie's stopped making them.....the themepark audiance is MUCH larger.
so I am treading in areas I dont know much about when it comes to UO.
I do read a lot of posts here and it seems like most posters will pull in UO and SWG when arguing about indies vs AAA. or rather 'how it used to be' vs 'how it is now'
So with that I have to divert, I do feel that because a publishing company owns a game developer that its likely they are no longer an indie (because of where funding comes from) but that is an interesting conversation in of itself.
So for you UO and SWG are AAA games. fair enough I divert to that then.
I didnt go from..i flat out didnt not know
My knowedge of UO is extreemly small I didnt know it was owned by EA
so AAA = 2
There are more than 2, I just happened to list 2 of the more prolific ones. Your statment was "there are zero AAA sandboxes", when you should have said "I know of zero AAA sandboxes"...we kindly would have educated you on the subject.
Fact is, sandboxes were tried by AAAs, and not to say that they failed outright, but they were dwarfed by themeparks, hense thats where the development shifted to. Even themeparks that are considered "faileurs" are vastly more successfull than most sandboxes.