Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Not theme park, Not Sand Box, Somewhere in the middle.
robert4818
Member UncommonPosts: 661
I look back towards some of the older MMOs and realize that they don't fit either of the two pre-defined genres of MMOs now.
DAOC, EQ1, FF11, etc were neither clearly sandbox, or clearly themepark. They had a different mix of the two extremes.
EQ1 had good amounts of Quests, dugneons, and everything else in it. At the same time you were free to explore, dig around, and make your own path through the world.
Didn't like questing in the Freeport area, Hop a boat to the nearby island, or start hiking cross country to Qeynos. Now don't get me wrong, EQ had alot of limits on its freedom as well, there wasn't quite the ability to mold the world that a good sandbox will have.
SO, in that vein, what I want from an MMO is one that truly mixes the two genres. Lots of sandbox feel, the ability to chart your own path, etc. AND good quests and systems to run through.
What does this mean? It means that the game needs some solid tweaks in order to seamlessly fit the mix between the two genres.
First, the game world needs to be dynamic. The ability to change the world (even in small ways) is what helps players define their own paths. This means that the players need to be able to affect things (Landscape, ecology, politics, area control, etc.) (Note that I said AFFECT things, not change them... Players don't need to be able to be politicians to affect politics, but they should be able to affect the game's NPC politicians towards one goal or another)
Second quests need a re-thinking. As of right now, quests are designed to move the story. In a sandboxy game, quests need to support the "story". This may mean coming up with a much more dynamic quest system than we currently have. But quests, just like monsters and dungeons need to "live" in the world, not exist to simply move you forward.
Third, Take the emphasis off of "advancement". Advancement can still happen, but players playing the game should not have to worry about making that next level.
To use some single player analogies. Often when you play single player RPGs, the player focuses on playing the game, and not on achieving that next numerical number. It doesn't matter if the game is "Themepark" like a Final Fantasy Game, or Sandbox like Fallout 3. The focus on the player is most often on PLAYING instead of leveling up. Unfortunately, MMOs lose that feel, and the focus instead falls on leveling (either direct, or indirect as in end-game gear runs).
To fix that, you need to create a game that offers multiple goals. Players can then chase goals and level as they go...
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
Comments
Soooo.... Guild Wars 2? With a quest-less open world full of events that happen around you, that you may or may not take part in (and witness the consequences either way), and with multiple ways to contribute to the effort, alongside an ongoing personal (instanced) story that most resembles a hero's quest, with personalized choices to be made along the way that affect the path your story takes, who lives or dies, etc.?
That would be ArcheAge.
You stay sassy!
maybe if you like korean grindfests
I agree I think there is sizeable portion of gamers bored with WoW model basing only on grinding instances and raids.
I thin that those gamers would like something ADDED to combat in instances and raids. That means rich crating system, housing, exploring ,politics maybe religion? Hobbies , mini games well many things.
Closest to bringing something apart of instrances and raids from upcoming big titles is ArcheAge. Hope it succeds
I've been saying it for years, a hybrid is what people really want and something that would be a great success.
Most recent game, is Vanguard, after playing tonight I cant see any reason that the population aint huge, its a far better game than everquest 2, RIFT or any other tripe.
Ex. myth of soma, legend of mir, mu online and eudemons online player.
Current game : Runescape (until pc build is complete)
I can answer that one.
Vanguard will probably go down as one of the absolute worst releases in MMO history. I played it at launch and it was buggy. It crashed alot. SOE actually deserves alot of credit for how VG is now. It was released way to early because, the developers literally ran out of money. SOE took it on and for the most part rescued it.
Unfortunately, I think it ends up being "to little, to late" for the game. By the time the game was fixed, there really wasn't anyone interested anymore.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
Yes, the hybrid exists and deserves to be played. Vanguard is an excellent game that needs more population! If it were to come out today with it's current feature list, it would have a very solid playerbase if not a big one.
I have long argued that the perfect game would start out a compelling themepark and unwind into a more and more freedom. I like to think of it as a sandpark...
I believe that the essence of a themepark is to give the player an introduction to both the game play as well as the game world. I like to think of this as the phase where the player transforms from a nobody to a hero. It would be filled with lore and lessons on both how to navigate the game as well as how the world and player interact. This would not be a terribly long phase, but it would be indepth and almost feel like a game unto itself, perhaps best likened to what AoC was trying to accomplish, but with greater polish and more lore.
The second phase of the game would be a sandpark - the quests would be very themepark like, but your control and freedom over your characters increases. You have a greater freedom of skills and alternative advancement options, (I'd love to see a diplomacy system that wasn't a simplistic mini-game). This part of the game would also give players the ability to recruit companions to begin building their own kingdoms.
The final phase or more appropriately phases would be another game transition. Players at this point have the ability to invest further in a kindgom of their own. The game at this point can shift back and forth between an MMORPG and an RTS. Most content updates would be focused on the MMO side because the RTS would be mostly player driven with PvE and PvP elements and the choice to participate in either or both.
This. Exactly that.
Vanguard release was total fail. Not because of game features but because of state game was released in and crap support.
Vanguard at time of release had horrible performance on that day PC's. It was bugged , crashed , there was exploits allowing for those who know get alot of gold very quickly. Support was too weak propably becasue of lack of funds , so patches were slow and becasue of not enough GM's and abdunance of exploits there were alot of farmers.
All of that scared players away and game had interest at beggining.
But state it was released in gave it no chance at all.
After such fail at beggining mmo cannot come back alive. We saw it to some extent in Warhammer or AoC as well.
It is years too late for Vanguard now , you just cannot recover from horrid release in Mmorpg genre, and Vanguard was possibly worst release for big productions. At least 6-12 months too early. Bah even WoW released with as big problems as Vanguard was and with insufficient support like V. was would fail.
Agree, I don't care how people label a game to be themepark or sandbox and empty desert, I just want a good game.
I do have something to say about the current leveling system, I do hate how the level system tends to segregate the players between endgame and leveling. I would like to see some form of leveling that doesn't realise in numbers, such as, a social status leveling. A lot of games starts of with players with no fame or value in a society, instead of using a number, give them social status, the higher your status is, the more story centric event you get to participate or unlocking deeper parts of the city/dungeons to explore.
I also would like to see players progression isn't defined by gaining skills or upgrading armor. Lets say you start of with a standard sword only, as you progression in a game, you can unlock maybe a side weapon slot that you can equip with a light weapon, dagger of sorts. So instead of having pre defined classes, you are what you equip, and what you based your knowledge on.
Also character movement speed varies on what you focus your training on, so some players are faster, some players are slower.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
OP I want that too. But most of the older MMOs were very time consuming. Whereas todays are made to be accessible. I would rather something in between those as well. I don't mind taking 6 months to hit level cap, just as long as there are a lot of fun filler activities(whatever that could be).
Edit:sorry somehow I missed half of the OP
Take a look at the skill progression system I thought up.
As I said in the OP, part of making a successful hybrid game would be removing the "ding" as the goal. Its an easier said than done concept, but I think its essential. Eve does this by doing a time based advancement system. The problem I see with that though is that it didn't really replace that with any other meaningful goal for new players. From a casual standpoint a hybrid might include quest/mission generators that a casual player can pick up and run with.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
I also wish someone would implement EverQuest's faction system. then you would get a gem.
Sounds like Archeage to me, apparently that is being developed with sandbox in mind. However, I have heard there will be levels and quests etc... that work in the same way as other theme park's do. Although only for the first 15 levels then it is all open ended.
For me I personally feel it evolves around what options the game gives you to have fun. Most theme parks seem to soley focus on combat with everything else just bolted on and not really being that important (Crafting for example).
A game needs to be a lot more than this now. That is one reason why I think a lot of people are tired of the current MMO's we have, they are all pretty much all the same. Kill this, kill this, level up, kill this, kill this etc... A game needs to have a lot more options now to progress your character as that aspect has just become so stale.
Why can't a character soley concentrate on crafting and develop his character based on this? Why does he even have to carry a weapon and dare I say it even kill anything. Why can't he concentrate on exploring, creating maps and selling them to other players? Heck, why can't he build his own tavern, malt his own beer, arrange his own gambling games, hire his own staff, advertise on his own notice board, arrange his own entertainers etc... Ok ok perhaps I'm getting a bit carried away but you get the general idea. Not everything has to be kill x to get y as the main form of progression within the game.
The market is saturated with MMO's where everything is about killing and looting. I am not saying lets have a game without this, I am just saying don't make it the sole most important aspect of the game. Give players options on how they live and breath in their gaming world. I think then we will start to see something sparkle in a dark dreary list of MMO's.
WHat I want are themparks that are the best they can be, and sandboxes that are the best they can be. Blending the two you're just going to spoil the two flavors IMO. A themebox is going to be too themepark, a sandpark is going to put sand in some peoples undies. ON the other hand a themepark with a touch of sandbox, and a sandbox with a touch of theme can work. It's just has to be a taste though and nothing more.
The two designs have distinctive features that they depend on, trying too broad a focus would only work to santize the ability to craft a uniquely different experience. Rather it would feel gimmicky, too little substance put into all the different flavors, ultimately I see it being a disapointment. If we're talking realistic design costs and product management.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I disagree with you. The primary idea of Sandbox games is Freedom and Emergent Gameplay. They don't really offer a whole lot to do, you have to discover, and design it as you go.
Theme parks, are generally focused on running you through quests, leveling you up, and passing you through everything on your way. There is really no freedom.
What I'm looking at is closer to the middle. You don't necessarily have complete freedom, but at the same time, you have more than enough goals that you can chase an enough ways to get there that there is a decent feel of freedom. You also have the quests, and such that make up a theme park, but you re-tool them. Quests no longer serve as a road to point you down the story while hiding the grinding curve. Instead they are simply there for you to chase as you run across them. You won't do a chain of them, then get pointed down towards the next hub. Instead a hub might simply exist for you to stumble upon.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
Not theme park, not sandbox, but a themepark in a sandbox.
FEEL THE FULL
FREE-TO-FLAME
FANTASY.
Meh.
For all I know, no MMO is pure themepark or pure sandbox.
For example Vanguard was clearly a themepark, but it had sandbox elements such as uninstanced housing and player boats.
This isn't a middle, this is sandbox.
Asherons call 2 was rather good example of hybrid mmo you where free no hold hands no instance and you could do quests grind in fellowships with 9 players or do quests with fellowship or solo, group grind.
Totally free skill tree put in XP whatever skill you want with UNIQUE CLASSES like TACTICIAN.
And without elfs dwarfs and orcs seems perfect mmo to me, pitty its gone. I want my tumerok back:)
Source or bullshit. The fact that not much information about exactly whether there is grind or not is out, I call your bullshit.
That is, unless you are in beta which I dont imagine to be very likely.
Well if he say less freedom i dont see why you call it a sandbox becouse for me a sandbox is total freedom whatever you wanne do.
When some think its comming from korea its grindfest, while many western games also can be called grindfest i dont see why ARCHEAGE should be grindfest?
As long game is fun who cares if its grind or not.
Your mistake is that you consider freedom as 'do whatever you wanne do' which is not what freedom actually is.