I am really waiting for a game like this to pop up. Where the history of the game world is written by players and for players. But it would really require so much from both sides of the field (players and developers) that it is sadly an utopia at this point.
If you want to make a true MMO sandbox, you cannot limit PvP with hard code. Limiting PvP hard with capless player advancement makes this a single player game. And actually it makes it a little bit more boring. There should be means preventing oerwhelming PvP (where one player cannot win against the other no matter the circumstances) but banishing PvP is a shot in the knee.
If I decide to be ie a merchant. And find a very lucrative trade route. But there is a problem of brigands on the way. Without the PvP factor one is limited to only the things developers coded in. And players always comes with content requests faster then developers spit it out.
Let's say we have only the mechanic of attack, talk and item/gold dropping coded in.
In this example if the brigands are npc's I could have the options to: fight them, pay someone to fight them, try to outrun them or take a detour.
If the brigands are PvP inclined players who want to PK me for the drop (in terms of gameplay) the possibilities increase very much. They have the choice of PK'ing me on the spot. Or they can come with agreement with me. They can agree to get some gold from me and walk away. I can even i.e. pay them to escort me further on the way. If they insist on being hostile I can in example try to scare them with my friends, or make a bounty to kill them so I can pass. Or even make a complaint for the player who is the land owner that his forest is brigandful and he should sort this out, unless he wants me to pay less taxes. Or I can pay another player to act as a dummy (take an empty cart and go on the same route a little ahead of me). This all may work under NPC coding but player imagination is unlimited, development resources aren't.
I am really waiting for a game like this to pop up. Where the history of the game world is written by players and for players. But it would really require so much from both sides of the field (players and developers) that it is sadly an utopia at this point.
If you want to make a true MMO sandbox, you cannot limit PvP with hard code. Limiting PvP hard with capless player advancement makes this a single player game. And actually it makes it a little bit more boring. There should be means preventing oerwhelming PvP (where one player cannot win against the other no matter the circumstances) but banishing PvP is a shot in the knee.
If I decide to be ie a merchant. And find a very lucrative trade route. But there is a problem of brigands on the way. Without the PvP factor one is limited to only the things developers coded in. And players always comes with content requests faster then developers spit it out.
Let's say we have only the mechanic of attack, talk and item/gold dropping coded in.
In this example if the brigands are npc's I could have the options to: fight them, pay someone to fight them, try to outrun them or take a detour.
If the brigands are PvP inclined players who want to PK me for the drop (in terms of gameplay) the possibilities increase very much. They have the choice of PK'ing me on the spot. Or they can come with agreement with me. They can agree to get some gold from me and walk away. I can even i.e. pay them to escort me further on the way. If they insist on being hostile I can in example try to scare them with my friends, or make a bounty to kill them so I can pass. Or even make a complaint for the player who is the land owner that his forest is brigandful and he should sort this out, unless he wants me to pay less taxes. Or I can pay another player to act as a dummy (take an empty cart and go on the same route a little ahead of me). This all may work under NPC coding but player imagination is unlimited, development resources aren't.
its a nice scenario, problem is you can be 99% certain if its PC brigands you bump into, they will just kill you, am sure there is some great players out there that is pro "roleplay" but its really really rare, that Id not want to leave it up as an option to begin with. it is the kind of community I love in theory....only way this could happen would be if you had talked to the guys earlier on in game, and then you d still think less of them for wanting part of what you have worked for...just because you are a merchant and weaker in combat.
over all just dont have the trust ppl would actually play the game as a MMO and not an online FPS game, kill everyone you see mentallity, if its possible.
Lets say someone released a sandbox mmo with a capless skill system.
The game focuses on non instanced dungeons, gaining fame with factions, world/rare boss monsters with a clear focus on co-op play and solo viability in a pve environment.
The game has a heavy crafting and non-combat (gathering, social) mechanic focus also.
While having a more pve/social focus the game offers pvp. A basic faction system with a couple dedicated pvp (flag enabled) zones that are completly optional.
Would you play this game.
A sandbox with pve progression from day 1, the option to pvp but it isnt forced and a real focus on social activities, rp and crafting/gathering.
Again would you play this?
I would try it for sure. If everything was brought together nicely...it sounds like a game that I could waste lots of time on
To the caterpillar it is the end of the world, to the master, it is a butterfly.
I'd play it if it had item decay and an economy that was fully focused on/driven by crafters (i.e. no BOE nonsense, and loot drops that were inferior to crafted items).
Lets say someone released a sandbox mmo with a capless skill system.
The game focuses on non instanced dungeons, gaining fame with factions, world/rare boss monsters with a clear focus on co-op play and solo viability in a pve environment.
The game has a heavy crafting and non-combat (gathering, social) mechanic focus also.
While having a more pve/social focus the game offers pvp. A basic faction system with a couple dedicated pvp (flag enabled) zones that are completly optional.
Would you play this game.
A sandbox with pve progression from day 1, the option to pvp but it isnt forced and a real focus on social activities, rp and crafting/gathering.
Again would you play this?
It depends.... I'm not sure what you mean by PvE, you don't mention questing or story lines but you do mention RP and social mechanics... This game you just described sounds like UO to me, which I quit because of the lack of developer created storylines and quests.
So if this is your PvE sandbox, basically UO, then no I wouldn't play that game ever again.
I'd play it if it had item decay and an economy that was fully focused on/driven by crafters (i.e. no BOE nonsense, and loot drops that were inferior to crafted items).
how about if its a player that have to repair your items, instead of the NPC, as in it being a full crafter line - well tied to smithing or tailoring or what would be fitting, if in a fantasy setting I guess :P
do know what you mean tho, would wish player crafted items had more of a real effect, and that the hard items to make were player made, maybe need materials from various places. but then just the problem with balance, where you actually can get someone to do it, and not have everyone being that crafter.
absolutely dislike the killing NPC for the sake of loot only. MMOs always were more or less about the gear, but the big diffrence being how you obtain it, and if its so awesome that it become the only "real point" of the game - the NPC dropped gear.
I like the philosophy of a sandbox game, but where immersion is lost is AI....
Look at darkfall, how can PvE truly inspire someone to take part in it when the quest givers act like lifeless ATM's whose currency is quests?
On that note, I enjoyed the combat partially, but it becomes very simple, how to make it more complex but still fun, please dont ask me.
Now another shortcoming of Darkfall is the graphics, I run a high end machine and it always seemed as if NPC's were camoflauged, maybe it was because of their lifeless ness.
IMHO the world needs to be DYNAMIC, the NPC's need to have purpose ex: Blacksmiths should be doing their job...gathering materials stoking the fire, sleeping at night...eating lunch...and so on.
Maybe put a resteraunt in the inn where NPC''s go for breaks to eat or find them at the bar after work for an hour or two.
I mean in reality most people are creatures of habit..so it really doesnt take too much to give an NPC a life.
On the same note you could have dynamic events and destructible buildings, and players and npc that can learn how to build to repair towns. ex: dragon gets pissed off by player who fails to slay it, it flies off and starts destroying the local village, unless its stopped it could totally destroy the village and the NPC's that survived would relocate temporarily for safety to another nearby village. That would make for some spectacular PvE
As far as PvP is concerned..add politics. Let players run for mayor, become king and allow these offices to hold benefits when interacting with guild members or their constituents, thus giving players the ambition to take that spot either through political means, or violent means.
Let political positions come with the ability to control rule sets, and brand enemies, thus creating PvP
Allow for criminals, gangs and so on.
I mean just with the proper AI dynamic and some clever rule sets you can truly make a sandbox game come alive.
To the caterpillar it is the end of the world, to the master, it is a butterfly.
Is combat sandbox style? Then maybe. Pet can tank? Kiting the "boss" or minions is a valid tactic? Is crowd control in? Can I charm things and they will be useful for the risk? Is it more than just spam 1-3-3-3-3-3-3-3-1-3-3-3-3-3-3-3?
I want to see combat opened up to free thinking and action as much as I want to see the a "living" world.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
So what would be sandbox, the character progression or the pve progression.
If its character progression, you going to get 1 build of character...the healing tank with spike DD....see ryzom and kiss any real class roles and group mechanics goodbye....say hello to the self sufficiant "everyman for himself" group...what fun.,...
If its pve progression thats sandbox, what you end up with is wow minus the battlegrounds, minus the dungeons, minus the linear quest lines....which is what exactly? A f2p grinder?
Also everyone has their own specific definition of what is sandbox so its impossible to even say "this game is sandbox" without people saying that you cant have a sandbox without player housing or some shit.
So what would be sandbox, the character progression or the pve progression.
If its character progression, you going to get 1 build of character...the healing tank with spike DD....see ryzom and kiss any real class roles and group mechanics goodbye....say hello to the self sufficiant "everyman for himself" group...what fun.,...
If its pve progression thats sandbox, what you end up with is wow minus the battlegrounds, minus the dungeons, minus the linear quest lines....which is what exactly? A f2p grinder?
Also everyone has their own specific definition of what is sandbox so its impossible to even say "this game is sandbox" without people saying that you cant have a sandbox without player housing or some shit.
I must admit you just inspired me to look at my own project in a *somewhat* different perspective.
The biggest problem, and really the only one, I have about PvP is there's always people that have an 8 year old mentality. They think because they can kill noobs with thier maxed out character, they're some kind of ultimate pvper. This is the main thing that kills any FFA PvP game, not just sandbox. Unfortunately, with the expansion of the MMO market, came all the "little kids". Used to be, you only killed someone if they where KoS (kill on sight...) or they did something to you. 2 words, No Honor.
So what would be sandbox, the character progression or the pve progression.
If its character progression, you going to get 1 build of character...the healing tank with spike DD....see ryzom and kiss any real class roles and group mechanics goodbye....say hello to the self sufficiant "everyman for himself" group...what fun.,...
If its pve progression thats sandbox, what you end up with is wow minus the battlegrounds, minus the dungeons, minus the linear quest lines....which is what exactly? A f2p grinder?
Also everyone has their own specific definition of what is sandbox so its impossible to even say "this game is sandbox" without people saying that you cant have a sandbox without player housing or some shit.
I must admit you just inspired me to look at my own project in a *somewhat* different perspective.
I must make haste! To the nerd cave!
*runs to notebook*
The largest misconception i see on these forums in reference to player suggested improvements and game idea's is that they sound good at a glance, but when they flesh out in game, they can be complete disasters and have unintended consequences. The misconception is really that making these games is so easy, that developers must be stupid for not seeing the light....
There is a reason that a lot of the games are the way that they are, its because its what is currently working best for the the players who are paying.
Right now the trend is MMORPG without the life sucking time commitment. Which is why every game that is doing well has moved towards theme park activities. The head of this curve are games that are allowing cross server instanced pvp theme park rides as well as cross server pve rides.
They do this so that johnny 14 year old can get a few dungeons or battle grounds done after school before dinner, and mr emplyed 9-5 30 year old can do the same after work.
Gone are the days where the mmorpg market consists of paying players who have 14 hours a day 7 days a week to create their own player generated sandbox activites together.
Also given the choice, every player will pick the most powerful combinations of traits, which is why classes are defined. This creates a need for eachother and give play to tried and true tank/dd/heal group mechanics that are still fun decades after their induction into the gaming world, as long as everyone has a needed role in the group.
The largest misconception i see on these forums in reference to player suggested improvements and game idea's is that they sound good at a glance, but when they flesh out in game, they can be complete disasters and have unintended consequences. The misconception is really that making these games is so easy, that developers must be stupid for not seeing the light....
There is a reason that a lot of the games are the way that they are, its because its what is currently working best for the the players who are paying.
Right now the trend is MMORPG without the life sucking time commitment. Which is why every game that is doing well has moved towards theme park activities. The head of this curve are games that are allowing cross server instanced pvp theme park rides as well as cross server pve rides.
They do this so that johnny 14 year old can get a few dungeons or battle grounds done after school before dinner, and mr emplyed 9-5 30 year old can do the same after work.
Gone are the days where the mmorpg market consists of paying players who have 14 hours a day 7 days a week to create their own player generated sandbox activites together.
Also given the choice, every player will pick the most powerful combinations of traits, which is why classes are defined. This creates a need for eachother and give play to tried and true tank/dd/heal group mechanics that are still fun decades after their induction into the gaming world, as long as everyone has a needed role in the group.
I agree. Given the opportunity, some players will always try to gravitate to the most efficient build possible for their playstyle (soloing, grouping, raiding or PVP). We cannot get away from that. It was even in SWG (TK + swordman if i recall).
There will always be those who try to min-max and use "cookie cutter" builds. But that's not necessarily the point. People often look at RPG's and notice the wider variance they can get in customising their character, that a class based system with pre-locked stat builds wouldn't normally allow.
Flexibility in the hands of the player, creates options. Yes people WILL use cookie cutter builds, but the options are there nonetheless to try out different things.
Now I also agree that themepark MMO's have been tailored around offering small chunks of entertainment which the player can control. As you acknowledge, peoples lives have changed. They can no longer spend 14 hours per day on an MMO.
But there's nothing to say that such a constraint cannot be built into a new MMO design model. A hybrid as it where.
So what would be sandbox, the character progression or the pve progression.
If its character progression, you going to get 1 build of character...the healing tank with spike DD....see ryzom and kiss any real class roles and group mechanics goodbye....say hello to the self sufficiant "everyman for himself" group...what fun.,...
If its pve progression thats sandbox, what you end up with is wow minus the battlegrounds, minus the dungeons, minus the linear quest lines....which is what exactly? A f2p grinder?
Also everyone has their own specific definition of what is sandbox so its impossible to even say "this game is sandbox" without people saying that you cant have a sandbox without player housing or some shit.
There are roles in Ryzom due to gear restrictions/penalties.
That game also has Non-instanced raids, world bosses, roaming rare mobs, missions, factions to run with and Dev run events that change lore forever.
See that ^ you have pve content and a capless skill system where roles are important due to gear restriction.
Also its simply impossible to master all crafting and gathering skills so there is no such thing as being a "everyman for himself".
It bothers me that your so uninformed of ryzom mechanics. To say there arent any roles in the game and everyone ends up being a nuker,healer, tank. Ever run an event? hunt? raid? try to kill a boss? You need someone to be a tank (maybe even two or three tanks), you need heals, Dps (maybe even some CC).
The myth that a capless system requires players to train everything to be competitive needs to be put to bed because its completely false.
As long as you have a gear restriction system a character can train forever while still needing to switch armor to fullfill roles for specific situations. Its similar to how Eve does it with different ships requiring certain skills while others are useless for that ship.
This bullshit that a capless system requires everyone to be the same is so stupid. If you people got passed the trials of these capless games you would be much more educated on the subject.
The largest misconception i see on these forums in reference to player suggested improvements and game idea's is that they sound good at a glance, but when they flesh out in game, they can be complete disasters and have unintended consequences. The misconception is really that making these games is so easy, that developers must be stupid for not seeing the light....
There is a reason that a lot of the games are the way that they are, its because its what is currently working best for the the players who are paying.
Right now the trend is MMORPG without the life sucking time commitment. Which is why every game that is doing well has moved towards theme park activities. The head of this curve are games that are allowing cross server instanced pvp theme park rides as well as cross server pve rides.
They do this so that johnny 14 year old can get a few dungeons or battle grounds done after school before dinner, and mr emplyed 9-5 30 year old can do the same after work.
Gone are the days where the mmorpg market consists of paying players who have 14 hours a day 7 days a week to create their own player generated sandbox activites together.
Also given the choice, every player will pick the most powerful combinations of traits, which is why classes are defined. This creates a need for eachother and give play to tried and true tank/dd/heal group mechanics that are still fun decades after their induction into the gaming world, as long as everyone has a needed role in the group.
I agree. Given the opportunity, some players will always try to gravitate to the most efficient build possible for their playstyle (soloing, grouping, raiding or PVP). We cannot get away from that. It was even in SWG (TK + swordman if i recall).
There will always be those who try to min-max and use "cookie cutter" builds. But that's not necessarily the point. People often look at RPG's and notice the wider variance they can get in customising their character, that a class based system with pre-locked stat builds wouldn't normally allow.
Flexibility in the hands of the player, creates options. Yes people WILL use cookie cutter builds, but the options are there nonetheless to try out different things.
Now I also agree that themepark MMO's have been tailored around offering small chunks of entertainment which the player can control. As you acknowledge, peoples lives have changed. They can no longer spend 14 hours per day on an MMO.
But there's nothing to say that such a constraint cannot be built into a new MMO design model. A hybrid as it where.
You will always have min maxers and FotM builds in every mmo, sandbox, themepark or hybrid.
You will always have min maxers and FotM builds in every mmo, sandbox, themepark or hybrid.
Exactly, there is no escaping that. To me a class less system allows for more variance than a more rigid class system found in a lot of themepark MMO's, but that doesn't mean that EVERY variance HAS to be the most efficient possible. But that's not the point. The point is to ALLOW people to vary their builds more, whether its efficient or not.
However, theres no reason why you couldn't have a VERY flexible class system. One that isn't as rigid as some themepark games and thus allow for greater variance whilst restricting just some elements of what the players can / can't do. There is a "grey" area between the two extremes.
You will always have min maxers and FotM builds in every mmo, sandbox, themepark or hybrid.
Exactly, there is no escaping that. As you yourself probably appreciate, to me a class less system allows for variance but that doesn't mean that EVERY variance is the most efficient possible. But that's not the point. The point is to ALLOW people to vary their builds more, whether its efficient or not.
However, theres no reason why you couldn't have a VERY flexible class system. One that isn't as rigid as some themepark games and thus allow for greater variance whilst restricting just some elements of what the players can / can't do. There is a "grey" area between the two extremes.
We could have a flexible class system but from my experience playing these games I've never come across one.
Since AAA developers are hard pressed to take a chance on anything we might never see one.
You will always have min maxers and FotM builds in every mmo, sandbox, themepark or hybrid.
Exactly, there is no escaping that. As you yourself probably appreciate, to me a class less system allows for variance but that doesn't mean that EVERY variance is the most efficient possible. But that's not the point. The point is to ALLOW people to vary their builds more, whether its efficient or not.
However, theres no reason why you couldn't have a VERY flexible class system. One that isn't as rigid as some themepark games and thus allow for greater variance whilst restricting just some elements of what the players can / can't do. There is a "grey" area between the two extremes.
We could have a flexible class system but from my experience playing these games I've never come across one.
Since AAA developers are hard pressed to take a chance on anything we might never see one.
The same can be said of any design that varies from "what sells". Fear of the unknown is a very powerful motivator indeed. Someone needs to either take a chance and risk losing everything, or prove to the industry that such mechanics ARE worth investing time and resources into. Which is precisely why I wrote that post about SOE and SWG Pre-CU. SOE have the opportunity to pioneer a new design model by using an old one as a blueprint.
And if SOE aren't prepared to do that, it's no surprise that others aren't either.
Another option is for an MMO company to just launch a website and forums, and thrash it out with the playerbase about a possible design. Perhaps have frequent "polls" on the forum about that design to gauge the reaction to it and publish details about the changes at each iteration. Each this point, the design is just on paper, no resources or time has been committed to it.
So in some ways, the method of gleaming information about the customer requirements emulate this thread, but on a more "official" forum which is populated by potential players AND the devs.
Good poll, and so far a resounding number of respondants have been favorable.
I think this is what the market needs, a good PVE focused sandbox as described by the OP. Recent sandbox games have all been trying to recreate what UO was when launched, and that's isn't what a majority of the player base is willing to pay for these days.
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
I love the concept of a wide-open sandbox, but I'm not playing another MMOG until someone comes out with a 24/7 advancement, solo-centric game. Solo-friendly just doesn't cut it any more, and I don't have enough time to devote to another massively multiplayer online typing marathon game.
I love the concept of a wide-open sandbox, but I'm not playing another MMOG until someone comes out with a 24/7 advancement, solo-centric game. Solo-friendly just doesn't cut it any more, and I don't have enough time to devote to another massively multiplayer online typing marathon game.
Then why not play Oblivion or a game like it. This is not a flame directed at you but if you dont have the time to play one then why do it? Console games have many addons these days to keep the game moving forward and adding content. You could even do Fallout 3 or something.
Even though I myself am a BIG advocate of MMO's that cater for mutiple playstyles, I have to agree with Parrot.
There comes a point whereby if you want a solo ONLY game (as opposed to one that caters for soloing AND other playstyles), and you are not interested in the slightest about grouping, raiding, joining a guild, chatting to people you meet online, pvp, interacting with the economy and meaningful crafting (because those too interact with the economy and other players); then it is at THAT point that you have to begin to re-evaluate what it is that you REALLY want, and whether that actually be found where you are looking for it.
If you strip ALL player interaction at ALL levels from an MMO, then what you are left with can no longer be classified as an MMO, it is a single player game. Furthermore, it wouldn't have to be an online one (aside from updates), because no interaction with others is required. So, expecting a single player game in an MMO industry is a little silly. You're looking in the wrong place. If you don't have the time or the inclination to interact with others at ANY level (I'm not just talking about grouping) then its time to give up MMO's and install Oblivion or Mass Effect.
However, if you read Meleagars blogs, its possible that he's referring to a game whereby the player still interacts with others, but progresses without having to put any effort in to progress and thus progression is automatic. There is already a game that does that, its called Eve Online. And the real-time offline leveling system is, in my opinion, the epitome of lazyness. Yes, leveling SHOULDN'T be the only focus in an MMO. But if you're going to remove it, you have to replace it with other encouragements to play. Which is something Eve DOESN'T do for me.
Comments
I am really waiting for a game like this to pop up. Where the history of the game world is written by players and for players. But it would really require so much from both sides of the field (players and developers) that it is sadly an utopia at this point.
If you want to make a true MMO sandbox, you cannot limit PvP with hard code. Limiting PvP hard with capless player advancement makes this a single player game. And actually it makes it a little bit more boring. There should be means preventing oerwhelming PvP (where one player cannot win against the other no matter the circumstances) but banishing PvP is a shot in the knee.
If I decide to be ie a merchant. And find a very lucrative trade route. But there is a problem of brigands on the way. Without the PvP factor one is limited to only the things developers coded in. And players always comes with content requests faster then developers spit it out.
Let's say we have only the mechanic of attack, talk and item/gold dropping coded in.
In this example if the brigands are npc's I could have the options to: fight them, pay someone to fight them, try to outrun them or take a detour.
If the brigands are PvP inclined players who want to PK me for the drop (in terms of gameplay) the possibilities increase very much. They have the choice of PK'ing me on the spot. Or they can come with agreement with me. They can agree to get some gold from me and walk away. I can even i.e. pay them to escort me further on the way. If they insist on being hostile I can in example try to scare them with my friends, or make a bounty to kill them so I can pass. Or even make a complaint for the player who is the land owner that his forest is brigandful and he should sort this out, unless he wants me to pay less taxes. Or I can pay another player to act as a dummy (take an empty cart and go on the same route a little ahead of me). This all may work under NPC coding but player imagination is unlimited, development resources aren't.
yes. Enjoyed SWG pre cu pve. EVE's was okay for a time.
die.
its a nice scenario, problem is you can be 99% certain if its PC brigands you bump into, they will just kill you, am sure there is some great players out there that is pro "roleplay" but its really really rare, that Id not want to leave it up as an option to begin with. it is the kind of community I love in theory....only way this could happen would be if you had talked to the guys earlier on in game, and then you d still think less of them for wanting part of what you have worked for...just because you are a merchant and weaker in combat.
over all just dont have the trust ppl would actually play the game as a MMO and not an online FPS game, kill everyone you see mentallity, if its possible.
I would try it for sure. If everything was brought together nicely...it sounds like a game that I could waste lots of time on
To the caterpillar it is the end of the world, to the master, it is a butterfly.
I'd play it if it had item decay and an economy that was fully focused on/driven by crafters (i.e. no BOE nonsense, and loot drops that were inferior to crafted items).
It depends.... I'm not sure what you mean by PvE, you don't mention questing or story lines but you do mention RP and social mechanics... This game you just described sounds like UO to me, which I quit because of the lack of developer created storylines and quests.
So if this is your PvE sandbox, basically UO, then no I wouldn't play that game ever again.
how about if its a player that have to repair your items, instead of the NPC, as in it being a full crafter line - well tied to smithing or tailoring or what would be fitting, if in a fantasy setting I guess :P
do know what you mean tho, would wish player crafted items had more of a real effect, and that the hard items to make were player made, maybe need materials from various places. but then just the problem with balance, where you actually can get someone to do it, and not have everyone being that crafter.
absolutely dislike the killing NPC for the sake of loot only. MMOs always were more or less about the gear, but the big diffrence being how you obtain it, and if its so awesome that it become the only "real point" of the game - the NPC dropped gear.
I like the philosophy of a sandbox game, but where immersion is lost is AI....
Look at darkfall, how can PvE truly inspire someone to take part in it when the quest givers act like lifeless ATM's whose currency is quests?
On that note, I enjoyed the combat partially, but it becomes very simple, how to make it more complex but still fun, please dont ask me.
Now another shortcoming of Darkfall is the graphics, I run a high end machine and it always seemed as if NPC's were camoflauged, maybe it was because of their lifeless ness.
IMHO the world needs to be DYNAMIC, the NPC's need to have purpose ex: Blacksmiths should be doing their job...gathering materials stoking the fire, sleeping at night...eating lunch...and so on.
Maybe put a resteraunt in the inn where NPC''s go for breaks to eat or find them at the bar after work for an hour or two.
I mean in reality most people are creatures of habit..so it really doesnt take too much to give an NPC a life.
On the same note you could have dynamic events and destructible buildings, and players and npc that can learn how to build to repair towns. ex: dragon gets pissed off by player who fails to slay it, it flies off and starts destroying the local village, unless its stopped it could totally destroy the village and the NPC's that survived would relocate temporarily for safety to another nearby village. That would make for some spectacular PvE
As far as PvP is concerned..add politics. Let players run for mayor, become king and allow these offices to hold benefits when interacting with guild members or their constituents, thus giving players the ambition to take that spot either through political means, or violent means.
Let political positions come with the ability to control rule sets, and brand enemies, thus creating PvP
Allow for criminals, gangs and so on.
I mean just with the proper AI dynamic and some clever rule sets you can truly make a sandbox game come alive.
To the caterpillar it is the end of the world, to the master, it is a butterfly.
I really enjoyed SWG. Granted, it was SW. A game like Mortal online or Darkfall, with a PvE focus and some pvp wouldn't interest me.
If they made, let's say a Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter sandbox, something with lore that I know, it'd be different.
But I don't think I could stand any multiplayer game without some form of fun pvp.
Sure, I would definitely try it out.
Would it deliver? That's a whole different story.
Is combat sandbox style? Then maybe. Pet can tank? Kiting the "boss" or minions is a valid tactic? Is crowd control in? Can I charm things and they will be useful for the risk? Is it more than just spam 1-3-3-3-3-3-3-3-1-3-3-3-3-3-3-3?
I want to see combat opened up to free thinking and action as much as I want to see the a "living" world.
Forever looking for employment. Life is rather dull without it.
It would have to have exceptional MOB AI.
So what would be sandbox, the character progression or the pve progression.
If its character progression, you going to get 1 build of character...the healing tank with spike DD....see ryzom and kiss any real class roles and group mechanics goodbye....say hello to the self sufficiant "everyman for himself" group...what fun.,...
If its pve progression thats sandbox, what you end up with is wow minus the battlegrounds, minus the dungeons, minus the linear quest lines....which is what exactly? A f2p grinder?
Also everyone has their own specific definition of what is sandbox so its impossible to even say "this game is sandbox" without people saying that you cant have a sandbox without player housing or some shit.
I must admit you just inspired me to look at my own project in a *somewhat* different perspective.
I must make haste! To the nerd cave!
*runs to notebook*
The biggest problem, and really the only one, I have about PvP is there's always people that have an 8 year old mentality. They think because they can kill noobs with thier maxed out character, they're some kind of ultimate pvper. This is the main thing that kills any FFA PvP game, not just sandbox. Unfortunately, with the expansion of the MMO market, came all the "little kids". Used to be, you only killed someone if they where KoS (kill on sight...) or they did something to you. 2 words, No Honor.
The largest misconception i see on these forums in reference to player suggested improvements and game idea's is that they sound good at a glance, but when they flesh out in game, they can be complete disasters and have unintended consequences. The misconception is really that making these games is so easy, that developers must be stupid for not seeing the light....
There is a reason that a lot of the games are the way that they are, its because its what is currently working best for the the players who are paying.
Right now the trend is MMORPG without the life sucking time commitment. Which is why every game that is doing well has moved towards theme park activities. The head of this curve are games that are allowing cross server instanced pvp theme park rides as well as cross server pve rides.
They do this so that johnny 14 year old can get a few dungeons or battle grounds done after school before dinner, and mr emplyed 9-5 30 year old can do the same after work.
Gone are the days where the mmorpg market consists of paying players who have 14 hours a day 7 days a week to create their own player generated sandbox activites together.
Also given the choice, every player will pick the most powerful combinations of traits, which is why classes are defined. This creates a need for eachother and give play to tried and true tank/dd/heal group mechanics that are still fun decades after their induction into the gaming world, as long as everyone has a needed role in the group.
I agree. Given the opportunity, some players will always try to gravitate to the most efficient build possible for their playstyle (soloing, grouping, raiding or PVP). We cannot get away from that. It was even in SWG (TK + swordman if i recall).
There will always be those who try to min-max and use "cookie cutter" builds. But that's not necessarily the point. People often look at RPG's and notice the wider variance they can get in customising their character, that a class based system with pre-locked stat builds wouldn't normally allow.
Flexibility in the hands of the player, creates options. Yes people WILL use cookie cutter builds, but the options are there nonetheless to try out different things.
Now I also agree that themepark MMO's have been tailored around offering small chunks of entertainment which the player can control. As you acknowledge, peoples lives have changed. They can no longer spend 14 hours per day on an MMO.
But there's nothing to say that such a constraint cannot be built into a new MMO design model. A hybrid as it where.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
There are roles in Ryzom due to gear restrictions/penalties.
That game also has Non-instanced raids, world bosses, roaming rare mobs, missions, factions to run with and Dev run events that change lore forever.
See that ^ you have pve content and a capless skill system where roles are important due to gear restriction.
Also its simply impossible to master all crafting and gathering skills so there is no such thing as being a "everyman for himself".
It bothers me that your so uninformed of ryzom mechanics. To say there arent any roles in the game and everyone ends up being a nuker,healer, tank. Ever run an event? hunt? raid? try to kill a boss? You need someone to be a tank (maybe even two or three tanks), you need heals, Dps (maybe even some CC).
The myth that a capless system requires players to train everything to be competitive needs to be put to bed because its completely false.
As long as you have a gear restriction system a character can train forever while still needing to switch armor to fullfill roles for specific situations. Its similar to how Eve does it with different ships requiring certain skills while others are useless for that ship.
This bullshit that a capless system requires everyone to be the same is so stupid. If you people got passed the trials of these capless games you would be much more educated on the subject.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
You will always have min maxers and FotM builds in every mmo, sandbox, themepark or hybrid.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
Exactly, there is no escaping that. To me a class less system allows for more variance than a more rigid class system found in a lot of themepark MMO's, but that doesn't mean that EVERY variance HAS to be the most efficient possible. But that's not the point. The point is to ALLOW people to vary their builds more, whether its efficient or not.
However, theres no reason why you couldn't have a VERY flexible class system. One that isn't as rigid as some themepark games and thus allow for greater variance whilst restricting just some elements of what the players can / can't do. There is a "grey" area between the two extremes.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
We could have a flexible class system but from my experience playing these games I've never come across one.
Since AAA developers are hard pressed to take a chance on anything we might never see one.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
The same can be said of any design that varies from "what sells". Fear of the unknown is a very powerful motivator indeed. Someone needs to either take a chance and risk losing everything, or prove to the industry that such mechanics ARE worth investing time and resources into. Which is precisely why I wrote that post about SOE and SWG Pre-CU. SOE have the opportunity to pioneer a new design model by using an old one as a blueprint.
And if SOE aren't prepared to do that, it's no surprise that others aren't either.
Another option is for an MMO company to just launch a website and forums, and thrash it out with the playerbase about a possible design. Perhaps have frequent "polls" on the forum about that design to gauge the reaction to it and publish details about the changes at each iteration. Each this point, the design is just on paper, no resources or time has been committed to it.
So in some ways, the method of gleaming information about the customer requirements emulate this thread, but on a more "official" forum which is populated by potential players AND the devs.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
Good poll, and so far a resounding number of respondants have been favorable.
I think this is what the market needs, a good PVE focused sandbox as described by the OP. Recent sandbox games have all been trying to recreate what UO was when launched, and that's isn't what a majority of the player base is willing to pay for these days.
"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
I love the concept of a wide-open sandbox, but I'm not playing another MMOG until someone comes out with a 24/7 advancement, solo-centric game. Solo-friendly just doesn't cut it any more, and I don't have enough time to devote to another massively multiplayer online typing marathon game.
Even though I myself am a BIG advocate of MMO's that cater for mutiple playstyles, I have to agree with Parrot.
There comes a point whereby if you want a solo ONLY game (as opposed to one that caters for soloing AND other playstyles), and you are not interested in the slightest about grouping, raiding, joining a guild, chatting to people you meet online, pvp, interacting with the economy and meaningful crafting (because those too interact with the economy and other players); then it is at THAT point that you have to begin to re-evaluate what it is that you REALLY want, and whether that actually be found where you are looking for it.
If you strip ALL player interaction at ALL levels from an MMO, then what you are left with can no longer be classified as an MMO, it is a single player game. Furthermore, it wouldn't have to be an online one (aside from updates), because no interaction with others is required. So, expecting a single player game in an MMO industry is a little silly. You're looking in the wrong place. If you don't have the time or the inclination to interact with others at ANY level (I'm not just talking about grouping) then its time to give up MMO's and install Oblivion or Mass Effect.
However, if you read Meleagars blogs, its possible that he's referring to a game whereby the player still interacts with others, but progresses without having to put any effort in to progress and thus progression is automatic. There is already a game that does that, its called Eve Online. And the real-time offline leveling system is, in my opinion, the epitome of lazyness. Yes, leveling SHOULDN'T be the only focus in an MMO. But if you're going to remove it, you have to replace it with other encouragements to play. Which is something Eve DOESN'T do for me.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's