I lol when i hear anything remotely surrounding pvp.Being able to flag pvp or set it's rules does not make a game or content,it is simply a menu with checked off commands.
ARK is not much better than H1Z1 doing the exact same thing only a little more developed.You can ride a mount but other than that,the same thing just dinosaurs instead of Zombies.Same wooden walls no content,just a map with dinosaurs and a few commands.
I like to see REAL assets,not just cheap wooden walls and floors,i like to see more tools to develop the game,npc's with AI and now on that subject,give the dinosaurs some decent AI ,that is pathetic the AI they have.I remember watching players kill dinosaurs and they would just stand there like nothing was happening,that is really sad to release a game like that.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I play mmos for 20 years...hell, a little before Dark Age of Camelot...and this game is single handedly the best game ive played since 2005 > present. I have a thingie for FFXIV but cant compare the worlds.
The game is EA so expect the bugs and anything...but the ammount you can build its insane. There are so many blueprints to build that one player cant learn all.
There are servers who you can join...there are servers where everyhing is x2-x5 faster..that means, you focus more on PvP than building.
Almost anything you dream you can build it.
I play on Primitive 458. If any of you wants a hand with the game, hop on and ask for me. I will be more then happy to help you all.
There are ways to play it
Normal servers (where you have engrams) vs Primitive servers where you have just basic tools and weapons and act like a real caveman.:)
I thought this discussion was about future survival sandbox mmos not 64 player run private servers.
In a way private servers are good idea. If you are not satisfied with rules - for example FFA PVP. You have opportunity to join different ruleset server. I think Das Tal are also entertaining same idea ?
I agree 100%. Sandbox games need the "restrictions" of smallish communities where rules can be agreed upon and enforced more easily. Very similar to the idea that MUDs had back in the day. Many MUDs were based on the same core (like DikuMUD), but the actual gameplay itself would vary greatly between different servers. The community itself can be greater than just the sum of the population of a single world. Players are able to interact and connect via social media and forums which makes these types of games pseudo-mmos without the need of having thousands on a singular server.
As technology grows the ability to create a true virtual world (think Log Horizon) will become more of a possibility.
I lol when i hear anything remotely surrounding pvp.Being able to flag pvp or set it's rules does not make a game or content,it is simply a menu with checked off commands.
ARK is not much better than H1Z1 doing the exact same thing only a little more developed.You can ride a mount but other than that,the same thing just dinosaurs instead of Zombies.Same wooden walls no content,just a map with dinosaurs and a few commands.
I like to see REAL assets,not just cheap wooden walls and floors,i like to see more tools to develop the game,npc's with AI and now on that subject,give the dinosaurs some decent AI ,that is pathetic the AI they have.I remember watching players kill dinosaurs and they would just stand there like nothing was happening,that is really sad to release a game like that.
I think you have some major misconceptions about the game. Perhaps you should check its current state , and not some preview of 2 year old alpha build you obviously talking about ?
I was responding to how OP described the game, but if a PVE only server is an option, that might be better for a lot of people.
Since I haven't played the game, I don't know whether that would be fun or not.
I just wanted to reply to the OP to make the point that a dream sandbox doesn't have to have ffa pvp. There are other possibilities. I don't mind pvp within limits. Also, there are probably a lot of people would like farming, crafting, pve games with limited pvp. It just seems like a quick and easy way to make up for a lack of content (sandbox toys, tools, systems) to make a game ffa pvp. It doesn't have to be that way, but that's what it seems like happened to games like Darkfall and Mortal Online. They just turn into griefers paradises while population dwindles to a few hardcore clans/guilds that just fight each other until the game dies out.
FFA PVP games create a join up or die mentality which dominates every other aspect of the game. Eventually there is one last big clan or alliance that dominates and that is the end of the story.
I guess that won't happen on small 70-player servers, so this is not really an MMO if there are only 70 in a world, in my opinion.
Combat in Ark is terrible. Taming dinosaurs and gathering materials is boring/tedious and takes forever. These are the reasons I quit playing this.
I want a sandbox with more RPG/MOBA style combat and less of a "realistic" combat style.
Serious games must have boring and tedious parts. The "new age" trend to make everything mini-game is what caused dumbing down in modern games.
Without great effort you can not have great accomplishment.
I also think the combat is a weak point at the moment, and one of the off-putting things about these survival games is the grind.
For example, having to eat constantly is used as a device to drive these types of games forward and add tension/excitement, but it can get tedious if the balance is not right.
One other thing- having to endure "boring and tedious" gameplay does not = "great effort". I might expend "great effort" in minecraft to build a complex structure/map, achieving something "great" while enjoying myself.
I notice many old school mmo players try to justify boring and tedious gameplay like you have, it is quite amusing.
Serious games must have boring and tedious parts. The "new age" trend to make everything mini-game is what caused dumbing down in modern games.
Without great effort you can not have great accomplishment.
Really? ... "great accomplishment" in using an entertainment product?
Really? .... Boring and tedious parts in entertainment products?
and i thought we are playing games for fun. Sure .. put in a challenge ... but don't expect i will waste my leisure time on something boring. If i want to do that, I can always watch paint dry.
Its ironical that as we see sun is setting on MMOs , the one game that is not actual MMO is everything people wanted from that pie in the sky sandbox MMO.
The real move forward came from totally different ( and new ) genre - survival games.
...
So... We have a game that has all ingredients of dream sandbox MMO. But its actually game limited to 70 people per server. And that is only thing that makes it non MMO.
What an irony
It's not irony at all. The survival games just backtracked to the early online worlds (MUDS and early MMOs) and focused on creating a world with gameplay, and then built out from there. If you look at almost any thread here or elsewhere about making an MMO, it all starts with "I'm going to have x races and y professions and..." BAM... from the very first sentence they've begin pigeonholing the project into another EQ/WOW variant.
Survival games backtracked to creating a world and then going straight into what the players do in the world. Everything about the player character is completely secondary, compared to MMOs which have grown more and more about the player character each year.
Sandbox elements of MMOs have always been that way, but that gameplay has always been compromised by the character focus. In a character focus, the gameplay is centered around scripted content that tells the person they are the most important part of the game world. In a world focus, the gameplay is centered around creative content and world sim rules to allow players to vie for the role of most important part of the game world. Undeniably, that kind of gameplay has a natural home in survival games.
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
Comments
ARK is not much better than H1Z1 doing the exact same thing only a little more developed.You can ride a mount but other than that,the same thing just dinosaurs instead of Zombies.Same wooden walls no content,just a map with dinosaurs and a few commands.
I like to see REAL assets,not just cheap wooden walls and floors,i like to see more tools to develop the game,npc's with AI and now on that subject,give the dinosaurs some decent AI ,that is pathetic the AI they have.I remember watching players kill dinosaurs and they would just stand there like nothing was happening,that is really sad to release a game like that.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I play mmos for 20 years...hell, a little before Dark Age of Camelot...and this game is single handedly the best game ive played since 2005 > present. I have a thingie for FFXIV but cant compare the worlds.
The game is EA so expect the bugs and anything...but the ammount you can build its insane. There are so many blueprints to build that one player cant learn all.
There are servers who you can join...there are servers where everyhing is x2-x5 faster..that means, you focus more on PvP than building.
Almost anything you dream you can build it.
I play on Primitive 458. If any of you wants a hand with the game, hop on and ask for me. I will be more then happy to help you all.
There are ways to play it
Normal servers (where you have engrams)
vs
Primitive servers where you have just basic tools and weapons and act like a real caveman.:)
my id: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198015787561
As technology grows the ability to create a true virtual world (think Log Horizon) will become more of a possibility.
Since I haven't played the game, I don't know whether that would be fun or not.
I just wanted to reply to the OP to make the point that a dream sandbox doesn't have to have ffa pvp. There are other possibilities. I don't mind pvp within limits. Also, there are probably a lot of people would like farming, crafting, pve games with limited pvp. It just seems like a quick and easy way to make up for a lack of content (sandbox toys, tools, systems) to make a game ffa pvp. It doesn't have to be that way, but that's what it seems like happened to games like Darkfall and Mortal Online. They just turn into griefers paradises while population dwindles to a few hardcore clans/guilds that just fight each other until the game dies out.
FFA PVP games create a join up or die mentality which dominates every other aspect of the game. Eventually there is one last big clan or alliance that dominates and that is the end of the story.
I guess that won't happen on small 70-player servers, so this is not really an MMO if there are only 70 in a world, in my opinion.
But interesting all the same.
For example, having to eat constantly is used as a device to drive these types of games forward and add tension/excitement, but it can get tedious if the balance is not right.
One other thing- having to endure "boring and tedious" gameplay does not = "great effort". I might expend "great effort" in minecraft to build a complex structure/map, achieving something "great" while enjoying myself.
I notice many old school mmo players try to justify boring and tedious gameplay like you have, it is quite amusing.
Really? .... Boring and tedious parts in entertainment products?
and i thought we are playing games for fun. Sure .. put in a challenge ... but don't expect i will waste my leisure time on something boring. If i want to do that, I can always watch paint dry.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
It's not irony at all. The survival games just backtracked to the early online worlds (MUDS and early MMOs) and focused on creating a world with gameplay, and then built out from there. If you look at almost any thread here or elsewhere about making an MMO, it all starts with "I'm going to have x races and y professions and..." BAM... from the very first sentence they've begin pigeonholing the project into another EQ/WOW variant.
Survival games backtracked to creating a world and then going straight into what the players do in the world. Everything about the player character is completely secondary, compared to MMOs which have grown more and more about the player character each year.
Sandbox elements of MMOs have always been that way, but that gameplay has always been compromised by the character focus. In a character focus, the gameplay is centered around scripted content that tells the person they are the most important part of the game world. In a world focus, the gameplay is centered around creative content and world sim rules to allow players to vie for the role of most important part of the game world. Undeniably, that kind of gameplay has a natural home in survival games.
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