If you don't want to play then don't play. Quit being so desperate to convince other people to share your feelings. Its ok to be in the minority, you don't need us to validate your feelings.
No I don't, but neither do I need your attempt to say I am wrong.
Critics are a two way thing. If you don't like to read my words, press the X in top right corner of window.
I am a member of this site too, and as long as I am that, I will post whatever I please within the rules. Your argument empty attempt of stopping me, is only fuel for my engine.
I'm not trying to stop you from posting. I'm not saying you are wrong for having different tastes than many of us have, I'm commenting on your desperate need to convince others that they should share your tastes. I agree that you can post whatever you please within the rules. I believe that I'm also within the rules. I'm not attacking you for having a need for others to validate your opinions, I'm pointing out that it's not necessary.
And I'd say WoW's numbers stayed high over the years due in significant part to the rest of the developers in the genre trying to "out WoW WoW" and failing to deliver that level of polish/finish. So, naturally, why would people stay with a pretender when they can have the original?
TOR is themepark (surprise, right? ) but doesn't look to try to emulate WoW. How well Bioware makes TOR "themepark but different from WoW" I think has large influence on the keeping a high number of subs on a sustained basis. Maybe "story" is it but for some reason I see people just clicking through to the dialogue choice (and picking one that "sounds cool") and trying to get to the combat part. Which is why I don't see 1million+ consecutive long term (more than 12 months straight) retention.
Why do you keep making no sense?
Use your brains, why would people play more than 1 game, more than 1 shooter or RTS or eat more than 1type of food? Because they like variety and not doing/eating the same things for years. Is it that hard to understand?
If people like themepark gameplay, it doesn't mean that only 1 themepark MMO, a WoW, suits them.
Just like if people like sandbox MMO's, it isn't just that they would only like a UO or EVE and no other sandbox MMO. You didn't hear the sandbox crowd go 'if they wanted to play a sandbox MMO they would play the original, UO, and no others'.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
And I'd say WoW's numbers stayed high over the years due in significant part to the rest of the developers in the genre trying to "out WoW WoW" and failing to deliver that level of polish/finish. So, naturally, why would people stay with a pretender when they can have the original?
TOR is themepark (surprise, right? ) but doesn't look to try to emulate WoW. How well Bioware makes TOR "themepark but different from WoW" I think has large influence on the keeping a high number of subs on a sustained basis. Maybe "story" is it but for some reason I see people just clicking through to the dialogue choice (and picking one that "sounds cool") and trying to get to the combat part. Which is why I don't see 1million+ consecutive long term (more than 12 months straight) retention.
Why do you keep making no sense?
Use your brains, why would people play more than 1 game, more than 1 shooter or RTS or eat more than 1type of food? Because they like variety and not doing/eating the same things for years. Is it that hard to understand?
If people like themepark gameplay, it doesn't mean that only 1 themepark MMO, a WoW, suits them.
Just like if people like sandbox MMO's, it isn't just that they would only like a UO or EVE and no other sandbox MMO. You didn't hear the sandbox crowd go 'if they wanted to play a sandbox MMO they would play the original, UO, and no others'.
See how little sense you make?
I dunno, I think I get what Khal is saying.
WoW != themepark
WoW is a game that falls within the definition of themepark, but it does not completely define the sub-genre. For example, Everquest, EQ2, and DAoC are all themeparks as well but are pretty differentiated from WoW. I feel like the problem with the post-WoW themeparks is that they all tried to emulate WoW too much, they weren't differentiated enough.
WoW differentiated itself from its competitors with things like the quest-leveling system, story-driven dungeon instances, etc. But all of the post-WoW themepark MMORPGs just try to copy WoW's differentiating features and add on one or two minor changes.
It's not enough.
When I played through Rift, Aion, and WAR, I seriously felt like I was playing WoW. The experience was just waaaaaay too similar to WoW, and I felt like WoW offered a much more polished version of that experience.
My thought has been just like what Khal said: "you can't out WoW, WoW." If you're going to make a themepark, make it different. Put in features that TRULY differentiate it from WoW. A novel class system and random rift events just isn't enough. The gameplay experience just has to feel different from WoW.
I think that SWTOR is trying to do this with their story concept. BW never said "let's make WoW in space." In my opinion, they decided to take what they know, story-based SP RPGs, and combine it with the WoW paradigm in order to achieve something new.
This is conjunction with the SW setting may be enough to differentiate SWTOR from WoW, but only time will tell.
This is what I don't understand about people that call some MMOs themeparks in a riducule kind of way. Most RPGs, old school and new, would be considered themeparks. Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate, Zork, Betrayal at Krondor, Mass Effect, Xenogears, Final Fantasy.
Whoa, whoa, hold it right there, buddy. The original Baldur's Gate games are extremely sandbox, and so is Mass Effect (the original, not ME2). I can understand how someone might miss these things, but I spent approximately 70 hours playing strictly sandbox content in the first Mass Effect that had nothing to do with the story line, or directed narrative. It was simply me, wandering the planets, looking for resources and treasures, and the game was built open enough for players to do that. A hybrid? Sure, but it had plenty of sand in its box. And BG? Seriously? You don't have to follow any major story elements AT ALL in that game, you can strictly be a dude who wanders into strangers houses and steals their shit, or someone who attacks town guards and kills innocents, or simply wander the wilderness looking for adventures and random encounters, which there are plenty to be found outside of the main story line of that game.
The rest of what you said, I didn't even read or get to. Honestly, this whole thread has reached the point of ambiguity, because so many people are talking about so many different topics, but I just wanted to clarify: Baldur's Gate and Mass Effect may have themepark elements, but they also have plenty of sand.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
And I'd say WoW's numbers stayed high over the years due in significant part to the rest of the developers in the genre trying to "out WoW WoW" and failing to deliver that level of polish/finish. So, naturally, why would people stay with a pretender when they can have the original?
TOR is themepark (surprise, right? ) but doesn't look to try to emulate WoW. How well Bioware makes TOR "themepark but different from WoW" I think has large influence on the keeping a high number of subs on a sustained basis. Maybe "story" is it but for some reason I see people just clicking through to the dialogue choice (and picking one that "sounds cool") and trying to get to the combat part. Which is why I don't see 1million+ consecutive long term (more than 12 months straight) retention.
Why do you keep making no sense?
Use your brains, why would people play more than 1 game, more than 1 shooter or RTS or eat more than 1type of food? Because they like variety and not doing/eating the same things for years. Is it that hard to understand?
If people like themepark gameplay, it doesn't mean that only 1 themepark MMO, a WoW, suits them.
Just like if people like sandbox MMO's, it isn't just that they would only like a UO or EVE and no other sandbox MMO. You didn't hear the sandbox crowd go 'if they wanted to play a sandbox MMO they would play the original, UO, and no others'.
See how little sense you make?
I dunno, I think I get what Khal is saying.
WoW != themepark
WoW is a game that falls within the definition of themepark, but it does not completely define the sub-genre. For example, Everquest, EQ2, and DAoC are all themeparks as well but are pretty differentiated from WoW. I feel like the problem with the post-WoW themeparks is that they all tried to emulate WoW too much, they weren't differentiated enough.
WoW differentiated itself from its competitors with things like the quest-leveling system, story-driven dungeon instances, etc. But all of the post-WoW themepark MMORPGs just try to copy WoW's differentiating features and add on one or two minor changes.
It's not enough.
When I played through Rift, Aion, and WAR, I seriously felt like I was playing WoW. The experience was just waaaaaay too similar to WoW, and I felt like WoW offered a much more polished version of that experience.
My thought has been just like what Khal said: "you can't out WoW, WoW." If you're going to make a themepark, make it different. Put in features that TRULY differentiate it from WoW. A novel class system and random rift events just isn't enough. The gameplay experience just has to feel different from WoW.
I think that SWTOR is trying to do this with their story concept. BW never said "let's make WoW in space." In my opinion, they decided to take what they know, story-based SP RPGs, and combine it with the WoW paradigm in order to achieve something new.
This is conjunction with the SW setting may be enough to differentiate SWTOR from WoW, but only time will tell.
I guess no two people will experience a game in the same way but I didn't get any WoW deja vu when I was playing Rift. Played WoW for 4 years, had 6 level 80s, raided religiously, pvp fanatic. But playing Rift didn't really remind of WoW at all. It felt different in graphics, in how talent mechanics functioned in combat, in the Rift invasions.
On the other hand Warhammer Online felt like WoW's long lost brother in terms of graphics, but with a lot less polish. Even the character animations felt WoWish.
Also don't get WoW deja vu with TOR. TOR looks like how WoW might look if it was being developed 6 years later to run on better hardware and have better grahical effects, more polygons, more interactive animations, higher rez textures. But... then it wouldn't be WoW. The only thing similar about them is they both have a cartoonish stylized technique that replaces texture detail with highly saturated color. But from someone that is obsessed with graphics, the grahpics of TOR don't remind me of WoW.
This is what I don't understand about people that call some MMOs themeparks in a riducule kind of way. Most RPGs, old school and new, would be considered themeparks. Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate, Zork, Betrayal at Krondor, Mass Effect, Xenogears, Final Fantasy.
Whoa, whoa, hold it right there, buddy. The original Baldur's Gate games are extremely sandbox, and so is Mass Effect (the original, not ME2). I can understand how someone might miss these things, but I spent approximately 70 hours playing strictly sandbox content in the first Mass Effect that had nothing to do with the story line, or directed narrative. It was simply me, wandering the planets, looking for resources and treasures, and the game was built open enough for players to do that. A hybrid? Sure, but it had plenty of sand in its box. And BG? Seriously? You don't have to follow any major story elements AT ALL in that game, you can strictly be a dude who wanders into strangers houses and steals their shit, or someone who attacks town guards and kills innocents, or simply wander the wilderness looking for adventures and random encounters, which there are plenty to be found outside of the main story line of that game.
The rest of what you said, I didn't even read or get to. Honestly, this whole thread has reached the point of ambiguity, because so many people are talking about so many different topics, but I just wanted to clarify: Baldur's Gate and Mass Effect may have themepark elements, but they also have plenty of sand.
Betrayal at Krondor had a lot of sandbox in it as well...I remember just wandering around and finding treasure chests and stuff. I don't think I ever played much of the storyline in the game but I enjoyed it. Then again, I don't think I ever got really far .
Final Fantasy games used to have a lot of sandbox elements in them as well. Usually once you got to around the end of the game you could spend a lot of time exploring the world and getting the hidden "uber" items and spells so you could fight the "uber" boss like Emerald Weapon in FFVII.
You also left out a ton of more predominantly sandbox RPGs from your post:
The Elder Scrolls series (5 games), The Ultima series (9 games), Ultima Underworld series (2 games), Fallout series (4 games), those old SSI gold box games...I could go on
This is what I don't understand about people that call some MMOs themeparks in a riducule kind of way. Most RPGs, old school and new, would be considered themeparks. Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate, Zork, Betrayal at Krondor, Mass Effect, Xenogears, Final Fantasy.
Whoa, whoa, hold it right there, buddy. The original Baldur's Gate games are extremely sandbox, and so is Mass Effect (the original, not ME2). I can understand how someone might miss these things, but I spent approximately 70 hours playing strictly sandbox content in the first Mass Effect that had nothing to do with the story line, or directed narrative. It was simply me, wandering the planets, looking for resources and treasures, and the game was built open enough for players to do that. A hybrid? Sure, but it had plenty of sand in its box. And BG? Seriously? You don't have to follow any major story elements AT ALL in that game, you can strictly be a dude who wanders into strangers houses and steals their shit, or someone who attacks town guards and kills innocents, or simply wander the wilderness looking for adventures and random encounters, which there are plenty to be found outside of the main story line of that game.
The rest of what you said, I didn't even read or get to. Honestly, this whole thread has reached the point of ambiguity, because so many people are talking about so many different topics, but I just wanted to clarify: Baldur's Gate and Mass Effect may have themepark elements, but they also have plenty of sand.
Yeah that's my point. Those classic RPGs in reality have sandbox elements, but if they were made massively multiplayer a lot of MMO gamers on these forums would call them themepark MMOs. Simply having an engaging interactive branching pre-existing storyline that leads you from A to B or C or D means themepark to some people.
This is what I don't understand about people that call some MMOs themeparks in a riducule kind of way. Most RPGs, old school and new, would be considered themeparks. Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate, Zork, Betrayal at Krondor, Mass Effect, Xenogears, Final Fantasy.
Whoa, whoa, hold it right there, buddy. The original Baldur's Gate games are extremely sandbox, and so is Mass Effect (the original, not ME2). I can understand how someone might miss these things, but I spent approximately 70 hours playing strictly sandbox content in the first Mass Effect that had nothing to do with the story line, or directed narrative. It was simply me, wandering the planets, looking for resources and treasures, and the game was built open enough for players to do that. A hybrid? Sure, but it had plenty of sand in its box. And BG? Seriously? You don't have to follow any major story elements AT ALL in that game, you can strictly be a dude who wanders into strangers houses and steals their shit, or someone who attacks town guards and kills innocents, or simply wander the wilderness looking for adventures and random encounters, which there are plenty to be found outside of the main story line of that game.
The rest of what you said, I didn't even read or get to. Honestly, this whole thread has reached the point of ambiguity, because so many people are talking about so many different topics, but I just wanted to clarify: Baldur's Gate and Mass Effect may have themepark elements, but they also have plenty of sand.
Betrayal at Krondor had a lot of sandbox in it as well...I remember just wandering around and finding treasure chests and stuff. I don't think I ever played much of the storyline in the game but I enjoyed it. Then again, I don't think I ever got really far .
Final Fantasy games used to have a lot of sandbox elements in them as well. Usually once you got to around the end of the game you could spend a lot of time exploring the world and getting the hidden "uber" items and spells so you could fight the "uber" boss like Emerald Weapon in FFVII.
You also left out a ton of more predominantly sandbox RPGs from your post:
The Elder Scrolls series (5 games), The Ultima series (9 games), Ultima Underworld series (2 games), Fallout series (4 games), those old SSI gold box games...I could go on
Definitely. If anything, old school RPG's were far more sandbox than they were narratively themepark. Thanks for chiming in.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
WoW is a game that falls within the definition of themepark, but it does not completely define the sub-genre. For example, Everquest, EQ2, and DAoC are all themeparks as well but are pretty differentiated from WoW. I feel like the problem with the post-WoW themeparks is that they all tried to emulate WoW too much, they weren't differentiated enough.
WoW differentiated itself from its competitors with things like the quest-leveling system, story-driven dungeon instances, etc. But all of the post-WoW themepark MMORPGs just try to copy WoW's differentiating features and add on one or two minor changes.
It's not enough.
When I played through Rift, Aion, and WAR, I seriously felt like I was playing WoW. The experience was just waaaaaay too similar to WoW, and I felt like WoW offered a much more polished version of that experience.
My thought has been just like what Khal said: "you can't out WoW, WoW." If you're going to make a themepark, make it different. Put in features that TRULY differentiate it from WoW. A novel class system and random rift events just isn't enough. The gameplay experience just has to feel different from WoW.
I think that SWTOR is trying to do this with their story concept. BW never said "let's make WoW in space." In my opinion, they decided to take what they know, story-based SP RPGs, and combine it with the WoW paradigm in order to achieve something new.
This is conjunction with the SW setting may be enough to differentiate SWTOR from WoW, but only time will tell.
I guess no two people will experience a game in the same way but I didn't get any WoW deja vu when I was playing Rift. Played WoW for 4 years, had 6 level 80s, raided religiously, pvp fanatic. But playing Rift didn't really remind of WoW at all. It felt different in graphics, in how talent mechanics functioned in combat, in the Rift invasions.
On the other hand Warhammer Online felt like WoW's long lost brother in terms of graphics, but with a lot less polish. Even the character animations felt WoWish.
Also don't get WoW deja vu with TOR. TOR looks like how WoW might look if it was being developed 6 years later to run on better hardware and have better grahical effects, more polygons, more interactive animations, higher rez textures. But... then it wouldn't be WoW. The only thing similar about them is they both have a cartoonish stylized technique that replaces texture detail with highly saturated color. But from someone that is obsessed with graphics, the grahpics of TOR don't remind me of WoW.
I've noticed that the quest-leveling structure is what makes a game feel like WoW to me. Note that this is just my personal opinion though. If an MMORPG's gameplay predominantly involves me going into a town (or quest-node), rightclicking NPCs with exclamation points or something over their heads, and then killing 10 rats...then yeah it's going to feel like WoW to me.
I'm just really burned out on the quest-grind...it all blends together for me.
I've noticed that the quest-leveling structure is what makes a game feel like WoW to me. Note that this is just my personal opinion though. If an MMORPG's gameplay predominantly involves me going into a town (or quest-node), rightclicking NPCs with exclamation points or something over their heads, and then killing 10 rats...then yeah it's going to feel like WoW to me.
I'm just really burned out on the quest-grind...it all blends together for me.
I never really got into the WOW thing, so nothing really feels like WOW to me. However what you said above sounds a lot like typical RPG's to me, well instead of right clicking it's usually pressing E, space or something else.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
True. And in my estimation WOW's longevity had in large part to do with (in no particular order):
1) it's established IP
2) The marketing campaign (visibility and creativity)
3) It's many ties into pop culture
For me a valid question is how many of the targetted TOR audience are "super SW fans" that would tolerate #'s 2 and 3. If it's not a big issue, then alls well. If it is, then Bioware has to bank on those items drawing in others who don't care about the SW skin but just want a story laden themepark game. To keep those folks, though, I'd think making the game link into pop culture would be a key point.
Hmm, I don't know, I find point 1 and 3 dubious.
Establised IP is really not saying something because in itself it's not enough although of course, it does help. You only have to look at the big IP's being used for MMO's with varying degrees of success.
Ties into pop culture, sorry, but this imo a minor point, unless you want to expand it to 'recognisability' and mainstream audience awareness.
WoW became widely known to people that had nothing to do with MMO's, it entered mainstream awareness of the masses, and there were a whole lot of people playing it. That in itself can become an appealing factor when friends or school mates are playing it, and it draws in people that usually pay no attention to MMO's at all.
My #3 does include being easily recognized by default. That's the "pop" part.
As far as #1 I put more weight in it than you I guess because I can easily see the daisy-chain effect. Most people that are hooked into a given "story" or world are more prone to give a new play on that world a try and enjoy it. Aezeroth was familiar to all those RTS (even if they knew nothing about the games lore) and so visually it was easy for them to feel comfortable in WoW.
As far as the big named IPs being used these days and their varying success I'd chalk that up to the companies either 1) not putting forth a highly polished product and/or 2) having a project lead that steps so far away from what the IP world is about it turns off those core IP hooked fans (think the Shadowrun FPS by Microsoft) who of course get vocal and as a result those MMO fans smell something fishy and stay away too.
And yes, WoW became widely known by people who didn't MMO because #2 made use of #3. Mr.T (A-Team and Rocky), Vern Troyer (Austin Powers), Ozzy Osbourne (Black Sabbath, Ozzy). Those ads grabbed people who knew those personalities (but maybe had no clue to what an MMO or WoW was) and got them to thinking if this person I idolized does this, then I should too. The daisy chain effect kicked off from there.
Can Bioware pull this off? Well, I can tell you that there are alot of SW fans out there not happy with Lucas Arts for SWG NGE AS WELL AS the first three prequels. Sure, they don't post here, but they are there. It'll take one heck of a marketing campaign to bring them in. Right now the only group I see Bioware having a firm grasp on is a section of MMO themepark fans (with a few exceptions sprinkled in). And again, even that group is wanting something new within the confines of the themepark model. Many are banking on the whole emphasis on story and the voice-overs. I just don't know if what Bioware has done will satiate that crowd. As of late no AAA themepark has.
Those commercials hit way after WOW was already popular.
Aside from UO? The point is, there have been sandbox AAA titles and they didn't do well, there are plenty of sandbox fantasy titles out right now that aren't doing well... We could say, "Name one themepark fantasy game where you cook instead of killing" or "Name a triple A themepark racing MMORPG" .
I asked if you could name one AAA fantasy sandbox MMORPG besides UO...you couldn't do it because there isn't one.
Your other arguments are irrelevant. We're not talking about the audience for cooking themeparks or racing themeparks. We're talking about a potential audience for a AAA fantasy sandbox MMORPG, or at least one with a lot of sandbox elements like Archeage will be.
You can't look at underfunded, indie, problem-ridden games like Darkfall or Mortal Online and say that their success of failure determines the potential audience for any fantasy sandbox. A game can be bad or inaccessible regardless of what genre it's in. Until we have a AAA fantasy sandbox that is marketed and implemented very well, we'll never know how many people would actually be attracted to that experience.
Actually I can, just because something is underfunded or problem ridden doesn't mean that it isn't a triple A MMO. What about Vanguard? Pretty decent in terms of a lot of sandbox elements, triple A, yet, tons of problems. Does it matter if something is triple A or not?
Really this is a very bad argument. If you want to wait for a triple A sandbox mmo with no problems, you'll be waiting for a very very long time. As I've said, we've seen sandbox MMOs before, some triple A, some done by indies, that doesn't suddenly mean they are without problems. It doesn't mean that they are suddenly popular either. Even with established IPs. The only sandbox MMO at this point in the fantasy genre that will come close is, again, the elder scrolls series. Its unlikely we'll ever see another fantasy IP done that has enough appeal to core gamers as that.
People think Archeage will be that game.... it won't. It doesn't have enough exposure. Thats not to say it won't do well, but we won't see a sandbox title in the same rankings as TOR.
And I'd say WoW's numbers stayed high over the years due in significant part to the rest of the developers in the genre trying to "out WoW WoW" and failing to deliver that level of polish/finish. So, naturally, why would people stay with a pretender when they can have the original?
TOR is themepark (surprise, right? ) but doesn't look to try to emulate WoW. How well Bioware makes TOR "themepark but different from WoW" I think has large influence on the keeping a high number of subs on a sustained basis. Maybe "story" is it but for some reason I see people just clicking through to the dialogue choice (and picking one that "sounds cool") and trying to get to the combat part. Which is why I don't see 1million+ consecutive long term (more than 12 months straight) retention.
Why do you keep making no sense?
You may not be able to understand me but I'm pretty sure what I'm saying is a coherent thought.
Use your brains, why would people play more than 1 game, more than 1 shooter or RTS or eat more than 1type of food? Because they like variety and not doing/eating the same things for years. Is it that hard to understand?
Whoa, did you really have to go with a personal attack? Indeed, if you didn't go off in attack mode and tried to understand what I wrote you'd see I'm pretty much saying the same thing you did just here. Bioware, in my view, wants to go themepark but wants to make it different enough from WoW such that they are giving some variety to themepark gamers who have tried other themepark games, found they were to similar to WoW (hence why start over when they are already invested in WoW) and just go back to WoW ( which has the dual effect of bolstering WoW's long time numbers and making the new themeparks look like they underperform).
If people like themepark gameplay, it doesn't mean that only 1 themepark MMO, a WoW, suits them.
Yep, which is why I said what I said above and in the post quoted above that.
Just like if people like sandbox MMO's, it isn't just that they would only like a UO or EVE and no other sandbox MMO. You didn't hear the sandbox crowd go 'if they wanted to play a sandbox MMO they would play the original, UO, and no others'.
I never ever conveyed that I believed such a concept. Course I can't dictate how you interpret what you read.
See how little sense you make?
No, I just see how you totally misterpreted what I said. And since your misunderstanding led you to insult I think our conversation is done here. Have a great day.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
And I'd say WoW's numbers stayed high over the years due in significant part to the rest of the developers in the genre trying to "out WoW WoW" and failing to deliver that level of polish/finish. So, naturally, why would people stay with a pretender when they can have the original?
TOR is themepark (surprise, right? ) but doesn't look to try to emulate WoW. How well Bioware makes TOR "themepark but different from WoW" I think has large influence on the keeping a high number of subs on a sustained basis. Maybe "story" is it but for some reason I see people just clicking through to the dialogue choice (and picking one that "sounds cool") and trying to get to the combat part. Which is why I don't see 1million+ consecutive long term (more than 12 months straight) retention.
Why do you keep making no sense?
Use your brains, why would people play more than 1 game, more than 1 shooter or RTS or eat more than 1type of food? Because they like variety and not doing/eating the same things for years. Is it that hard to understand?
If people like themepark gameplay, it doesn't mean that only 1 themepark MMO, a WoW, suits them.
Just like if people like sandbox MMO's, it isn't just that they would only like a UO or EVE and no other sandbox MMO. You didn't hear the sandbox crowd go 'if they wanted to play a sandbox MMO they would play the original, UO, and no others'.
See how little sense you make?
I dunno, I think I get what Khal is saying.
WoW != themepark
WoW is a game that falls within the definition of themepark, but it does not completely define the sub-genre. For example, Everquest, EQ2, and DAoC are all themeparks as well but are pretty differentiated from WoW. I feel like the problem with the post-WoW themeparks is that they all tried to emulate WoW too much, they weren't differentiated enough.
WoW differentiated itself from its competitors with things like the quest-leveling system, story-driven dungeon instances, etc. But all of the post-WoW themepark MMORPGs just try to copy WoW's differentiating features and add on one or two minor changes.
It's not enough.
When I played through Rift, Aion, and WAR, I seriously felt like I was playing WoW. The experience was just waaaaaay too similar to WoW, and I felt like WoW offered a much more polished version of that experience.
My thought has been just like what Khal said: "you can't out WoW, WoW." If you're going to make a themepark, make it different. Put in features that TRULY differentiate it from WoW. A novel class system and random rift events just isn't enough. The gameplay experience just has to feel different from WoW.
I think that SWTOR is trying to do this with their story concept. BW never said "let's make WoW in space." In my opinion, they decided to take what they know, story-based SP RPGs, and combine it with the WoW paradigm in order to achieve something new.
This is conjunction with the SW setting may be enough to differentiate SWTOR from WoW, but only time will tell.
Creslin you 1000% nailed it on the head! That's exactly what I'm saying. Thanks bro.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
You may not be able to understand me but I'm pretty sure what I'm saying is a coherent thought.
Use your brains, why would people play more than 1 game, more than 1 shooter or RTS or eat more than 1type of food? Because they like variety and not doing/eating the same things for years. Is it that hard to understand?
Whoa, did you really have to go with a personal attack? Indeed, if you didn't go off in attack mode and tried to understand what I wrote you'd see I'm pretty much saying the same thing you did just here. Bioware, in my view, wants to go themepark but wants to make it different enough from WoW such that they are giving some variety to themepark gamers who have tried other themepark games, found they were to similar to WoW (hence why start over when they are already invested in WoW) and just go back to WoW ( which has the dual effect of bolstering WoW's long time numbers and making the new themeparks look like they underperform).
If people like themepark gameplay, it doesn't mean that only 1 themepark MMO, a WoW, suits them.
Yep, which is why I said what I said above and in the post quoted above that.
Just like if people like sandbox MMO's, it isn't just that they would only like a UO or EVE and no other sandbox MMO. You didn't hear the sandbox crowd go 'if they wanted to play a sandbox MMO they would play the original, UO, and no others'.
I never ever conveyed that I believed such a concept. Course I can't dictate how you interpret what you read.
See how little sense you make?
No, I just see how you totally misterpreted what I said. And sense your misunderstanding led you to insult I think our conversation is done here. Have a great day.
Alright, I apologize for what must have looked like a personal attack, but it's frustrating sometimes to keep seeing arguments used that - to me - make no sense at all.
Why do people keep repeating that same old argument, as if there's only 1 themepark MMO that could satisfy themepark MMO gamers? There are a whole pile of shooters that feel the same, but that doesn't prevent people from playing more than 1 shooter as well. The issue is that a lot of those other themepark MMO's were lacking in 1 way or the other, but if AAA themepark MMO's come around that can operate on the level of a WoW, then I think it becomes a totally different story.
The things that keep people go back to WoW are imo a mix of completely different reasons.
Originally posted by Creslin321
WoW != themepark
WoW is a game that falls within the definition of themepark, but it does not completely define the sub-genre. For example, Everquest, EQ2, and DAoC are all themeparks as well but are pretty differentiated from WoW. I feel like the problem with the post-WoW themeparks is that they all tried to emulate WoW too much, they weren't differentiated enough.
Wrong. EQ and DAoC were a far cry from 'themepark MMO', there was hardly any handholding or guidance at all, and one of the core components of themepark MMO's, quest based leveling, was as good as completely absent.
Sure, they were ancestors of WoW and its themepark gameplay style, but that doesn't make them themepark MMO's, just as neanderthals aren't the same as homo sapiens.
If you want to make a distinction in pre-WoW MMO's, then 'game focused' design (EQ, DAoC, AC) vs 'world oriented' (UO, SWG) design is a better definition, imo.
Themepark MMO's is just one offspring of 'game focused' design, but that doesn't mean that there can't be other implementations of 'game focused' design that isn't themepark MMO.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Aside from UO? The point is, there have been sandbox AAA titles and they didn't do well, there are plenty of sandbox fantasy titles out right now that aren't doing well... We could say, "Name one themepark fantasy game where you cook instead of killing" or "Name a triple A themepark racing MMORPG" .
I asked if you could name one AAA fantasy sandbox MMORPG besides UO...you couldn't do it because there isn't one.
Your other arguments are irrelevant. We're not talking about the audience for cooking themeparks or racing themeparks. We're talking about a potential audience for a AAA fantasy sandbox MMORPG, or at least one with a lot of sandbox elements like Archeage will be.
You can't look at underfunded, indie, problem-ridden games like Darkfall or Mortal Online and say that their success of failure determines the potential audience for any fantasy sandbox. A game can be bad or inaccessible regardless of what genre it's in. Until we have a AAA fantasy sandbox that is marketed and implemented very well, we'll never know how many people would actually be attracted to that experience.
Actually I can, just because something is underfunded or problem ridden doesn't mean that it isn't a triple A MMO. What about Vanguard? Pretty decent in terms of a lot of sandbox elements, triple A, yet, tons of problems. Does it matter if something is triple A or not?
Really this is a very bad argument. If you want to wait for a triple A sandbox mmo with no problems, you'll be waiting for a very very long time. As I've said, we've seen sandbox MMOs before, some triple A, some done by indies, that doesn't suddenly mean they are without problems. It doesn't mean that they are suddenly popular either. Even with established IPs. The only sandbox MMO at this point in the fantasy genre that will come close is, again, the elder scrolls series. Its unlikely we'll ever see another fantasy IP done that has enough appeal to core gamers as that.
People think Archeage will be that game.... it won't. It doesn't have enough exposure. Thats not to say it won't do well, but we won't see a sandbox title in the same rankings as TOR.
Honestly Masked, I don't specifically want to see a sandbox in the same rankings as what most fans are blowing TOR up to be. I just want to see a modern one made by a company that has the finances to actually make a MMO in the first place. I'm not a fan of Cryptic, but if I could get a sandbox MMO made with the level of polish as say Star trek Online, I'd be a happy subscriber. Darkfall, Mortal Online and Xyson which are probably the most notable sandbox attempts of late are all thre leagues away from the polish STO had.
That's to say the polish of what they had in STO. I'm not saying STO had the whole package. A nice looking game (not saying graphics are a lynch pin ; everyone likes nice looking things) with mechanics that work 95% of the time would be stellar. And you don't need to spend TOR type money to do that.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
And I'd say WoW's numbers stayed high over the years due in significant part to the rest of the developers in the genre trying to "out WoW WoW" and failing to deliver that level of polish/finish. So, naturally, why would people stay with a pretender when they can have the original?
TOR is themepark (surprise, right? ) but doesn't look to try to emulate WoW. How well Bioware makes TOR "themepark but different from WoW" I think has large influence on the keeping a high number of subs on a sustained basis. Maybe "story" is it but for some reason I see people just clicking through to the dialogue choice (and picking one that "sounds cool") and trying to get to the combat part. Which is why I don't see 1million+ consecutive long term (more than 12 months straight) retention.
Why do you keep making no sense?
Use your brains, why would people play more than 1 game, more than 1 shooter or RTS or eat more than 1type of food? Because they like variety and not doing/eating the same things for years. Is it that hard to understand?
If people like themepark gameplay, it doesn't mean that only 1 themepark MMO, a WoW, suits them.
Just like if people like sandbox MMO's, it isn't just that they would only like a UO or EVE and no other sandbox MMO. You didn't hear the sandbox crowd go 'if they wanted to play a sandbox MMO they would play the original, UO, and no others'.
See how little sense you make?
I dunno, I think I get what Khal is saying.
WoW != themepark
WoW is a game that falls within the definition of themepark, but it does not completely define the sub-genre. For example, Everquest, EQ2, and DAoC are all themeparks as well but are pretty differentiated from WoW. I feel like the problem with the post-WoW themeparks is that they all tried to emulate WoW too much, they weren't differentiated enough.
WoW differentiated itself from its competitors with things like the quest-leveling system, story-driven dungeon instances, etc. But all of the post-WoW themepark MMORPGs just try to copy WoW's differentiating features and add on one or two minor changes.
It's not enough.
When I played through Rift, Aion, and WAR, I seriously felt like I was playing WoW. The experience was just waaaaaay too similar to WoW, and I felt like WoW offered a much more polished version of that experience.
My thought has been just like what Khal said: "you can't out WoW, WoW." If you're going to make a themepark, make it different. Put in features that TRULY differentiate it from WoW. A novel class system and random rift events just isn't enough. The gameplay experience just has to feel different from WoW.
I think that SWTOR is trying to do this with their story concept. BW never said "let's make WoW in space." In my opinion, they decided to take what they know, story-based SP RPGs, and combine it with the WoW paradigm in order to achieve something new.
This is conjunction with the SW setting may be enough to differentiate SWTOR from WoW, but only time will tell.
Now you wait just a minute. Who are you to bring thought and reason to a SWTOR thread? Thats just silly. Unfortunetly there is always going to be people like this that keep arguing the same thing over and over. Yes it's on both sides of the fence, but the Warterboy refference is for all of those unique individuals who believe they are the first to proclaim SWTOR a WoW clone.
You may not be able to understand me but I'm pretty sure what I'm saying is a coherent thought.
Use your brains, why would people play more than 1 game, more than 1 shooter or RTS or eat more than 1type of food? Because they like variety and not doing/eating the same things for years. Is it that hard to understand?
Whoa, did you really have to go with a personal attack? Indeed, if you didn't go off in attack mode and tried to understand what I wrote you'd see I'm pretty much saying the same thing you did just here. Bioware, in my view, wants to go themepark but wants to make it different enough from WoW such that they are giving some variety to themepark gamers who have tried other themepark games, found they were to similar to WoW (hence why start over when they are already invested in WoW) and just go back to WoW ( which has the dual effect of bolstering WoW's long time numbers and making the new themeparks look like they underperform).
If people like themepark gameplay, it doesn't mean that only 1 themepark MMO, a WoW, suits them.
Yep, which is why I said what I said above and in the post quoted above that.
Just like if people like sandbox MMO's, it isn't just that they would only like a UO or EVE and no other sandbox MMO. You didn't hear the sandbox crowd go 'if they wanted to play a sandbox MMO they would play the original, UO, and no others'.
I never ever conveyed that I believed such a concept. Course I can't dictate how you interpret what you read.
See how little sense you make?
No, I just see how you totally misterpreted what I said. And sense your misunderstanding led you to insult I think our conversation is done here. Have a great day.
Alright, I apologize for what must have looked like a personal attack, but it's frustrating sometimes to keep seeing arguments used that - to me - make no sense at all.
Why do people keep repeating that same old argument, as if there's only 1 themepark MMO that could satisfy themepark MMO gamers? There are a whole pile of shooters that feel the same, but that doesn't prevent people from playing more than 1 shooter as well. The issue is that a lot of those other themepark MMO's were lacking in 1 way or the other, but if AAA themepark MMO's come around that can operate on the level of a WoW, then I think it becomes a totally different story.
The things that keep people go back to WoW are imo a mix of completely different reasons.
Cool, no harm no foul.
Yeah, that's what I was saying. Bioware has to take the familiar (themepark gameplay) and make it different enough to peak themepark gamers interest such that they don't feel like they have "already done this, got the t-shirt". My personal opinion based on info I've had first hand, I don't know that TOR is going to pull it off. I'm not wishing that it doesn't, mind you. It's just my conclusion based on the evidence placed before me.
If it does pull it off, great. It doesn't interest me, but it's good that there are folks out there with something to play. But, I do agree as Venekor initially mentions in this thread that ultimately TOR's success does nothing good for those like me who'd like to see a above decent quality sandbox game (of any IP, establish or new) make it into the genre.
No, I'm a firm believer that the companies in this genre will try to "out TOR TOR" for the next 7 years as they have tried to "out WoW WoW" for the past 7.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Actually I can, just because something is underfunded or problem ridden doesn't mean that it isn't a triple A MMO. What about Vanguard? Pretty decent in terms of a lot of sandbox elements, triple A, yet, tons of problems. Does it matter if something is triple A or not?
Really this is a very bad argument. If you want to wait for a triple A sandbox mmo with no problems, you'll be waiting for a very very long time. As I've said, we've seen sandbox MMOs before, some triple A, some done by indies, that doesn't suddenly mean they are without problems. It doesn't mean that they are suddenly popular either. Even with established IPs. The only sandbox MMO at this point in the fantasy genre that will come close is, again, the elder scrolls series. Its unlikely we'll ever see another fantasy IP done that has enough appeal to core gamers as that.
People think Archeage will be that game.... it won't. It doesn't have enough exposure. Thats not to say it won't do well, but we won't see a sandbox title in the same rankings as TOR.
Honestly Masked, I don't specifically want to see a sandbox in the same rankings as what most fans are blowing TOR up to be. I just want to see a modern one made by a company that has the finances to actually make a MMO in the first place. I'm not a fan of Cryptic, but if I could get a sandbox MMO made with the level of polish as say Star trek Online, I'd be a happy subscriber. Darkfall, Mortal Online and Xyson which are probably the most notable sandbox attempts of late are all thre leagues away from the polish STO had.
That's to say the polish of what they had in STO. I'm not saying STO had the whole package. A nice looking game (not saying graphics are a lynch pin ; everyone likes nice looking things) with mechanics that work 95% of the time would be stellar. And you don't need to spend TOR type money to do that.
I can respect that, but the problems here are usually IP related. We just don't have a vast amount of IPs out there that warrant sandbox style gameplay. Sure, I guess a new IP (like archeage) wiill fit the bill, but so many large established companies look to already established IPs to be their flagship titles. Fallout could be good in that regard. Cryptic is/was working on the Neverwinter game which they stated wasn't an MMO in particular, but they would have an interface geared towards player created content.
I'm all for sandbox games. I loved SWG, and played Darkfall and Xsyon for a few months, though nothing kept me longer than SWG, but in terms of the type of polish most players are expecting today, all of these sandbox titles are falling short.
I'm not against sandbox titles at all, I'm just more afraid to see poorly directed, unnamed titles garnering false hope as we've seen recently. Freedom is great, sandbox gameplay is fun, but I think we have to keep it all in perspective when comparing the market we've seen.
Originally posted by Khalathwyr Originally posted by DarkPony
Originally posted by Venekor
It's important that this MMO fails for the genre, otherwise we will see many more years of SWTOR clones which means many more years of WoW clones with cutscenes and probably made more linear. If SWTOR fails then we'll see a complete attitude change towards the genre and they'll have to do something new and innovative to kick start it again. Funny enough I find myself hoping on SOE because their next two games are going to be sandboxes.... I never thought I would but there really is nothing to look forward to other than Planetside, EQ3 and whatever Bethesda does.
That's pretty sad and flawed reasoning. Developers have a much easier time getting their funding if they can convince investors that the industry is growing and healthy; Swtor's potential succes could have a big impact on that, also by drawing in many people who haven't played mmorpgs before and subsequently increasing the overall mmorpg market share. And without WOW there wouldn't be WOW clones but there wouldn't be as much sandbox alternatives instead either. The bigger the industry, the more chance for indy and bigger devs to also make competing products that distinguish themselves from the big players and tap into niches of the marktet. Of course there will always be copycats of succesful formula's. In any market. But the fact that there hasn't been a sandbox mmorpg on the scale of WOW says as much about failing developers as of the mmorpg gamer demography. And I am curious if we would have been so interested in all those popular sandbox game's clones either. Big mmorpgs failing isn't in our interests at all. No, I think Venekor has a point. We've tried it for 7, almost 8 years as you describe and I'd like you to please point out to me the AAA MMORPG that is sandbox that has been made as a counter choice to all the AAA themeparks that have rolled out and under performed since 2004.
I'm not campaigning for TOR to "flop". I honestly don't give the game that much of my time for thought. That said, it is very easy to see that if it does do very well the developers in this industry will near 96% total try to follow suit. Which means 7 more years of a certain segement of this genre's population not getting a game that they can enjoy.
And the F'd up thing about it is that segement, by and large, are the folks that got this genre off the ground as customers while all the rest were playing RTS and FPS games.
Ideally I'd like to see TOR do ok and 3 or 4 AAA sandbox / SANDpark (emphasis on sand) games arise. That way themepark folks have TOR plus the whole slew of other AAA themeparks made over the last 7 years and sandbox fans would now have a few choice for AAA calibre sandboxes. Well if ToR becomes the new themepark standard that gets cloned over the next 7 years, the industry is at least heading in the right direction.
ToR will launch with: -17 massive planets to explore dwarfing WoW even now with all its expansions.
-A questing system that changes based on your choices throughout the entire leveling process. Teathered with cinematic cut scenes and fully voiced conversations.
-A dedicated pvp system already in place. Complete with instanced pvp scenarios, world pvp objectives, and specialized armor and weapons.
-An innovative crafting system integrated into the companions you meet with unique missons and multitasking features.
-Spaceships that not only serve as a personal house, but your crafting and business hub, companion management and space mission mini games.
WoW did not launch with a single one of those features. No housing, no pvp system, no personal story, a shallow drag n drop crafting system, and a world you could travel by foot in a few hours.
So to those of you who think ToR is stagnating the genre or its just WoW with lightsabers.. well I just dont see it. It is offering so much more than WoW ever did at launch and has things that WoW still doesnt even have now after all these years.
So...if ToR is a hit youre telling me I have to look forward to seven years of companies mimicking deep personal stories, personal housing, grounded pvp systems, unique crafting, fun minigames, and massive worlds? Yes please.
Since this thread is full of Guild Wars 2 fanboys, sandbox lovers, and EA haters...I'll just add this one last thing:
I've played SWTOR for months now and on the first day that preorders were offered I purchased the collector's edition.
It's the only collector's edition I've ever purchased.
This game isn't going to fail, and you hoping that it does and coming up with asenine reasons that it will, isn't going to change that fact. Guild Wars 2 will do fine, the sandbox games will continue to be released, but the vast majority of players will still be in games like swtor and WoW...and honestly, if you hate that kind of game so much, why would you want to be surrounded by people who enjoy it? You play your games and know that the population is going to be smaller by virtue of the gameplay...and we'll play ours.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
If it does pull it off, great. It doesn't interest me, but it's good that there are folks out there with something to play. But, I do agree as Venekor initially mentions in this thread that ultimately TOR's success does nothing good for those like me who'd like to see a above decent quality sandbox game (of any IP, establish or new) make it into the genre.
No, I'm a firm believer that the companies in this genre will try to "out TOR TOR" for the next 7 years as they have tried to "out WoW WoW" for the past 7.
Well, that's the thing, if SWTOR would be the only AAA MMO that would enter the MMO scene this upcoming year or 2 then you would have a point. But it isn't and that's why I believe in the 'dawn of a new era' vibe that the upcoming 1-2 years will kick off, at least if the MMO line up will come at least half close to realisation of its potential.
Because next to SWTOR we'll have a GW2, The Secret World, World of Darkness, TERA, Arche Age, Firefall, Blade & Soul, Planetside 2, Undead Labs' Class 4 zombie apocalypse MMO and Defiance, which to me looks like a healthy varied mix of AAA MMO's and lesser but interesting titles, from themepark MMO's to sandbox MMO's or hybrids and MMOFPS.
All these together if at least successful to a degree should open up the playing field to see some more variety in MMO gameplay and design paths on a high quality level.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
It's important that this MMO fails for the genre, otherwise we will see many more years of SWTOR clones which means many more years of WoW clones with cutscenes and probably made more linear.
If SWTOR fails then we'll see a complete attitude change towards the genre and they'll have to do something new and innovative to kick start it again.
Funny enough I find myself hoping on SOE because their next two games are going to be sandboxes.... I never thought I would but there really is nothing to look forward to other than Planetside, EQ3 and whatever Bethesda does.
That's pretty sad and flawed reasoning. Developers have a much easier time getting their funding if they can convince investors that the industry is growing and healthy; Swtor's potential succes could have a big impact on that, also by drawing in many people who haven't played mmorpgs before and subsequently increasing the overall mmorpg market share.
And without WOW there wouldn't be WOW clones but there wouldn't be as much sandbox alternatives instead either.
The bigger the industry, the more chance for indy and bigger devs to also make competing products that distinguish themselves from the big players and tap into niches of the marktet.
Of course there will always be copycats of succesful formula's. In any market. But the fact that there hasn't been a sandbox mmorpg on the scale of WOW says as much about failing developers as of the mmorpg gamer demography. And I am curious if we would have been so interested in all those popular sandbox game's clones either.
Big mmorpgs failing isn't in our interests at all.
No, I think Venekor has a point. We've tried it for 7, almost 8 years as you describe and I'd like you to please point out to me the AAA MMORPG that is sandbox that has been made as a counter choice to all the AAA themeparks that have rolled out and under performed since 2004.
I'm not campaigning for TOR to "flop". I honestly don't give the game that much of my time for thought. That said, it is very easy to see that if it does do very well the developers in this industry will near 96% total try to follow suit. Which means 7 more years of a certain segement of this genre's population not getting a game that they can enjoy.
And the F'd up thing about it is that segement, by and large, are the folks that got this genre off the ground as customers while all the rest were playing RTS and FPS games.
Ideally I'd like to see TOR do ok and 3 or 4 AAA sandbox / SANDpark (emphasis on sand) games arise. That way themepark folks have TOR plus the whole slew of other AAA themeparks made over the last 7 years and sandbox fans would now have a few choice for AAA calibre sandboxes.
Well if ToR becomes the new themepark standard that gets cloned over the next 7 years, the industry is at least heading in the right direction.
Your opinion though I don't agree with you as it is written above. If you add "for themeparks" then I'd agree with you some. I'm happy that those like you are getting what you want. It just seems that many like you have issue with others wanting something different than you and are loathe sympathize with them. Heck some even pointedly campaign against them getting it.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Comments
I'm not trying to stop you from posting. I'm not saying you are wrong for having different tastes than many of us have, I'm commenting on your desperate need to convince others that they should share your tastes. I agree that you can post whatever you please within the rules. I believe that I'm also within the rules. I'm not attacking you for having a need for others to validate your opinions, I'm pointing out that it's not necessary.
They will make their money back from retail box sales and DLs of the game alone. The subs are only extra monies they will be pocketing.
Why do you keep making no sense?
Use your brains, why would people play more than 1 game, more than 1 shooter or RTS or eat more than 1type of food? Because they like variety and not doing/eating the same things for years. Is it that hard to understand?
If people like themepark gameplay, it doesn't mean that only 1 themepark MMO, a WoW, suits them.
Just like if people like sandbox MMO's, it isn't just that they would only like a UO or EVE and no other sandbox MMO. You didn't hear the sandbox crowd go 'if they wanted to play a sandbox MMO they would play the original, UO, and no others'.
See how little sense you make?
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I dunno, I think I get what Khal is saying.
WoW != themepark
WoW is a game that falls within the definition of themepark, but it does not completely define the sub-genre. For example, Everquest, EQ2, and DAoC are all themeparks as well but are pretty differentiated from WoW. I feel like the problem with the post-WoW themeparks is that they all tried to emulate WoW too much, they weren't differentiated enough.
WoW differentiated itself from its competitors with things like the quest-leveling system, story-driven dungeon instances, etc. But all of the post-WoW themepark MMORPGs just try to copy WoW's differentiating features and add on one or two minor changes.
It's not enough.
When I played through Rift, Aion, and WAR, I seriously felt like I was playing WoW. The experience was just waaaaaay too similar to WoW, and I felt like WoW offered a much more polished version of that experience.
My thought has been just like what Khal said: "you can't out WoW, WoW." If you're going to make a themepark, make it different. Put in features that TRULY differentiate it from WoW. A novel class system and random rift events just isn't enough. The gameplay experience just has to feel different from WoW.
I think that SWTOR is trying to do this with their story concept. BW never said "let's make WoW in space." In my opinion, they decided to take what they know, story-based SP RPGs, and combine it with the WoW paradigm in order to achieve something new.
This is conjunction with the SW setting may be enough to differentiate SWTOR from WoW, but only time will tell.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Why not just let people be dissapointed?
Why are some of you acting like it's your personal quest to go on a crusade about how dissapointed they will be?
Whoa, whoa, hold it right there, buddy. The original Baldur's Gate games are extremely sandbox, and so is Mass Effect (the original, not ME2). I can understand how someone might miss these things, but I spent approximately 70 hours playing strictly sandbox content in the first Mass Effect that had nothing to do with the story line, or directed narrative. It was simply me, wandering the planets, looking for resources and treasures, and the game was built open enough for players to do that. A hybrid? Sure, but it had plenty of sand in its box. And BG? Seriously? You don't have to follow any major story elements AT ALL in that game, you can strictly be a dude who wanders into strangers houses and steals their shit, or someone who attacks town guards and kills innocents, or simply wander the wilderness looking for adventures and random encounters, which there are plenty to be found outside of the main story line of that game.
The rest of what you said, I didn't even read or get to. Honestly, this whole thread has reached the point of ambiguity, because so many people are talking about so many different topics, but I just wanted to clarify: Baldur's Gate and Mass Effect may have themepark elements, but they also have plenty of sand.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
I guess no two people will experience a game in the same way but I didn't get any WoW deja vu when I was playing Rift. Played WoW for 4 years, had 6 level 80s, raided religiously, pvp fanatic. But playing Rift didn't really remind of WoW at all. It felt different in graphics, in how talent mechanics functioned in combat, in the Rift invasions.
On the other hand Warhammer Online felt like WoW's long lost brother in terms of graphics, but with a lot less polish. Even the character animations felt WoWish.
Also don't get WoW deja vu with TOR. TOR looks like how WoW might look if it was being developed 6 years later to run on better hardware and have better grahical effects, more polygons, more interactive animations, higher rez textures. But... then it wouldn't be WoW. The only thing similar about them is they both have a cartoonish stylized technique that replaces texture detail with highly saturated color. But from someone that is obsessed with graphics, the grahpics of TOR don't remind me of WoW.
Betrayal at Krondor had a lot of sandbox in it as well...I remember just wandering around and finding treasure chests and stuff. I don't think I ever played much of the storyline in the game but I enjoyed it. Then again, I don't think I ever got really far
.
Final Fantasy games used to have a lot of sandbox elements in them as well. Usually once you got to around the end of the game you could spend a lot of time exploring the world and getting the hidden "uber" items and spells so you could fight the "uber" boss like Emerald Weapon in FFVII.
You also left out a ton of more predominantly sandbox RPGs from your post:
The Elder Scrolls series (5 games), The Ultima series (9 games), Ultima Underworld series (2 games), Fallout series (4 games), those old SSI gold box games...I could go on
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Yeah that's my point. Those classic RPGs in reality have sandbox elements, but if they were made massively multiplayer a lot of MMO gamers on these forums would call them themepark MMOs. Simply having an engaging interactive branching pre-existing storyline that leads you from A to B or C or D means themepark to some people.
Definitely. If anything, old school RPG's were far more sandbox than they were narratively themepark. Thanks for chiming in.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
I've noticed that the quest-leveling structure is what makes a game feel like WoW to me. Note that this is just my personal opinion though. If an MMORPG's gameplay predominantly involves me going into a town (or quest-node), rightclicking NPCs with exclamation points or something over their heads, and then killing 10 rats...then yeah it's going to feel like WoW to me.
I'm just really burned out on the quest-grind...it all blends together for me.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I never really got into the WOW thing, so nothing really feels like WOW to me. However what you said above sounds a lot like typical RPG's to me, well instead of right clicking it's usually pressing E, space or something else.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Those commercials hit way after WOW was already popular.
In Bioware we trust!
Actually I can, just because something is underfunded or problem ridden doesn't mean that it isn't a triple A MMO. What about Vanguard? Pretty decent in terms of a lot of sandbox elements, triple A, yet, tons of problems. Does it matter if something is triple A or not?
Really this is a very bad argument. If you want to wait for a triple A sandbox mmo with no problems, you'll be waiting for a very very long time. As I've said, we've seen sandbox MMOs before, some triple A, some done by indies, that doesn't suddenly mean they are without problems. It doesn't mean that they are suddenly popular either. Even with established IPs. The only sandbox MMO at this point in the fantasy genre that will come close is, again, the elder scrolls series. Its unlikely we'll ever see another fantasy IP done that has enough appeal to core gamers as that.
People think Archeage will be that game.... it won't. It doesn't have enough exposure. Thats not to say it won't do well, but we won't see a sandbox title in the same rankings as TOR.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Creslin you 1000% nailed it on the head! That's exactly what I'm saying. Thanks bro.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Alright, I apologize for what must have looked like a personal attack, but it's frustrating sometimes to keep seeing arguments used that - to me - make no sense at all.
Why do people keep repeating that same old argument, as if there's only 1 themepark MMO that could satisfy themepark MMO gamers? There are a whole pile of shooters that feel the same, but that doesn't prevent people from playing more than 1 shooter as well. The issue is that a lot of those other themepark MMO's were lacking in 1 way or the other, but if AAA themepark MMO's come around that can operate on the level of a WoW, then I think it becomes a totally different story.
The things that keep people go back to WoW are imo a mix of completely different reasons.
Wrong. EQ and DAoC were a far cry from 'themepark MMO', there was hardly any handholding or guidance at all, and one of the core components of themepark MMO's, quest based leveling, was as good as completely absent.
Sure, they were ancestors of WoW and its themepark gameplay style, but that doesn't make them themepark MMO's, just as neanderthals aren't the same as homo sapiens.
If you want to make a distinction in pre-WoW MMO's, then 'game focused' design (EQ, DAoC, AC) vs 'world oriented' (UO, SWG) design is a better definition, imo.
Themepark MMO's is just one offspring of 'game focused' design, but that doesn't mean that there can't be other implementations of 'game focused' design that isn't themepark MMO.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Honestly Masked, I don't specifically want to see a sandbox in the same rankings as what most fans are blowing TOR up to be. I just want to see a modern one made by a company that has the finances to actually make a MMO in the first place. I'm not a fan of Cryptic, but if I could get a sandbox MMO made with the level of polish as say Star trek Online, I'd be a happy subscriber. Darkfall, Mortal Online and Xyson which are probably the most notable sandbox attempts of late are all thre leagues away from the polish STO had.
That's to say the polish of what they had in STO. I'm not saying STO had the whole package. A nice looking game (not saying graphics are a lynch pin ; everyone likes nice looking things) with mechanics that work 95% of the time would be stellar. And you don't need to spend TOR type money to do that.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Now you wait just a minute. Who are you to bring thought and reason to a SWTOR thread? Thats just silly. Unfortunetly there is always going to be people like this that keep arguing the same thing over and over. Yes it's on both sides of the fence, but the Warterboy refference is for all of those unique individuals who believe they are the first to proclaim SWTOR a WoW clone.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
Cool, no harm no foul.
Yeah, that's what I was saying. Bioware has to take the familiar (themepark gameplay) and make it different enough to peak themepark gamers interest such that they don't feel like they have "already done this, got the t-shirt". My personal opinion based on info I've had first hand, I don't know that TOR is going to pull it off. I'm not wishing that it doesn't, mind you. It's just my conclusion based on the evidence placed before me.
If it does pull it off, great. It doesn't interest me, but it's good that there are folks out there with something to play. But, I do agree as Venekor initially mentions in this thread that ultimately TOR's success does nothing good for those like me who'd like to see a above decent quality sandbox game (of any IP, establish or new) make it into the genre.
No, I'm a firm believer that the companies in this genre will try to "out TOR TOR" for the next 7 years as they have tried to "out WoW WoW" for the past 7.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
I can respect that, but the problems here are usually IP related. We just don't have a vast amount of IPs out there that warrant sandbox style gameplay. Sure, I guess a new IP (like archeage) wiill fit the bill, but so many large established companies look to already established IPs to be their flagship titles. Fallout could be good in that regard. Cryptic is/was working on the Neverwinter game which they stated wasn't an MMO in particular, but they would have an interface geared towards player created content.
I'm all for sandbox games. I loved SWG, and played Darkfall and Xsyon for a few months, though nothing kept me longer than SWG, but in terms of the type of polish most players are expecting today, all of these sandbox titles are falling short.
I'm not against sandbox titles at all, I'm just more afraid to see poorly directed, unnamed titles garnering false hope as we've seen recently. Freedom is great, sandbox gameplay is fun, but I think we have to keep it all in perspective when comparing the market we've seen.
And without WOW there wouldn't be WOW clones but there wouldn't be as much sandbox alternatives instead either.
The bigger the industry, the more chance for indy and bigger devs to also make competing products that distinguish themselves from the big players and tap into niches of the marktet.
Of course there will always be copycats of succesful formula's. In any market. But the fact that there hasn't been a sandbox mmorpg on the scale of WOW says as much about failing developers as of the mmorpg gamer demography. And I am curious if we would have been so interested in all those popular sandbox game's clones either.
Big mmorpgs failing isn't in our interests at all.
No, I think Venekor has a point. We've tried it for 7, almost 8 years as you describe and I'd like you to please point out to me the AAA MMORPG that is sandbox that has been made as a counter choice to all the AAA themeparks that have rolled out and under performed since 2004.
I'm not campaigning for TOR to "flop". I honestly don't give the game that much of my time for thought. That said, it is very easy to see that if it does do very well the developers in this industry will near 96% total try to follow suit. Which means 7 more years of a certain segement of this genre's population not getting a game that they can enjoy.
And the F'd up thing about it is that segement, by and large, are the folks that got this genre off the ground as customers while all the rest were playing RTS and FPS games.
Ideally I'd like to see TOR do ok and 3 or 4 AAA sandbox / SANDpark (emphasis on sand) games arise. That way themepark folks have TOR plus the whole slew of other AAA themeparks made over the last 7 years and sandbox fans would now have a few choice for AAA calibre sandboxes.
Well if ToR becomes the new themepark standard that gets cloned over the next 7 years, the industry is at least heading in the right direction.
ToR will launch with:
-17 massive planets to explore dwarfing WoW even now with all its expansions.
-A questing system that changes based on your choices throughout the entire leveling process. Teathered with cinematic cut scenes and fully voiced conversations.
-A dedicated pvp system already in place. Complete with instanced pvp scenarios, world pvp objectives, and specialized armor and weapons.
-An innovative crafting system integrated into the companions you meet with unique missons and multitasking features.
-Spaceships that not only serve as a personal house, but your crafting and business hub, companion management and space mission mini games.
WoW did not launch with a single one of those features. No housing, no pvp system, no personal story, a shallow drag n drop crafting system, and a world you could travel by foot in a few hours.
So to those of you who think ToR is stagnating the genre or its just WoW with lightsabers.. well I just dont see it. It is offering so much more than WoW ever did at launch and has things that WoW still doesnt even have now after all these years.
So...if ToR is a hit youre telling me I have to look forward to seven years of companies mimicking deep personal stories, personal housing, grounded pvp systems, unique crafting, fun minigames, and massive worlds? Yes please.
Since this thread is full of Guild Wars 2 fanboys, sandbox lovers, and EA haters...I'll just add this one last thing:
I've played SWTOR for months now and on the first day that preorders were offered I purchased the collector's edition.
It's the only collector's edition I've ever purchased.
This game isn't going to fail, and you hoping that it does and coming up with asenine reasons that it will, isn't going to change that fact. Guild Wars 2 will do fine, the sandbox games will continue to be released, but the vast majority of players will still be in games like swtor and WoW...and honestly, if you hate that kind of game so much, why would you want to be surrounded by people who enjoy it? You play your games and know that the population is going to be smaller by virtue of the gameplay...and we'll play ours.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Well, that's the thing, if SWTOR would be the only AAA MMO that would enter the MMO scene this upcoming year or 2 then you would have a point. But it isn't and that's why I believe in the 'dawn of a new era' vibe that the upcoming 1-2 years will kick off, at least if the MMO line up will come at least half close to realisation of its potential.
Because next to SWTOR we'll have a GW2, The Secret World, World of Darkness, TERA, Arche Age, Firefall, Blade & Soul, Planetside 2, Undead Labs' Class 4 zombie apocalypse MMO and Defiance, which to me looks like a healthy varied mix of AAA MMO's and lesser but interesting titles, from themepark MMO's to sandbox MMO's or hybrids and MMOFPS.
All these together if at least successful to a degree should open up the playing field to see some more variety in MMO gameplay and design paths on a high quality level.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Your opinion though I don't agree with you as it is written above. If you add "for themeparks" then I'd agree with you some. I'm happy that those like you are getting what you want. It just seems that many like you have issue with others wanting something different than you and are loathe sympathize with them. Heck some even pointedly campaign against them getting it.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez