First off, many of you confuse sandbox with open world pvp. A sandbox game does not need open world pvp to be a sandbox game. SWG is proof of that.
Secondly if you have open world pvp you better have significant consequences built into it to prevent it from being a gank fest. Notice the very sparse populations of Darkfall and MO, none have consequences to any degree.
Thirdly, UO was enhanced by Trammel. Very few left the game when it was added and many joined. Personally thought that those that left missed out on a much better game.
Lastly, if they make this a f2p as I suspect, you can write this game off too, most of us won't touch a pay-to-win game.
Who? considering that F2P get most of the players these days.
Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP. Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged. The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP.
It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best. The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch". Can all of these gams just be that terrible? Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?
There's nothing wrong with open world pvp. It's how it's presented that makes it good or bad. Being flagged at the moment you log on to the time you log off should be a choice or option not mandatory. The one thing that SWG pre-cu did right was to incorporate the Overt/Covert pvp system. It let you PVP in the open world the way you liked.
Maybe someday browser-based games will be commonplace, but today's technology is not up to par. While a fan of the novel series, I am not looking forward to this IP.
[/b][/quote]
Could NOT have said it better myself. If it's PvP-based (not clear to me as yet), I'd add another "= bad" to the list.
In addition, I think Game of Thrones really does not lend itself to an MMO game setting. Consider me very wary of this one.
Ok on paper this sounds absolutely amazing (except the F2P part). However I am sceptic because I often heard all these promises during development, just to be cut later one.
So I will watch this game carefully and see what happens with it. Could be massive...
I am REALLY not a fan of browser based games. I have yet to see one that I could actually see myself playing for any real length of time. This saddens me, as I was truly hoping this would be something to look forward to. I hate to judge, because i know it's still early in the whole browser based thing.. but I just dont see this being epic.
I agree! I cringed when I read "browser base"... we'll wait and see "browser based" does equal possible lunch time play.
Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP. Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged. The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP.
It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best. The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch". Can all of these gams just be that terrible? Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?
Martin need to get off his ass and get on the next book the winds of winter. He's not getting any younger and hes talking about 2 or 3 years till he starts the next book and talking about adding 1 more book.
He's 63 years old and at his pace the last 2 or 3 books wont be out for a good 10-15 years. dance with dragons was a OK book and a vary bad book for all the time it took him.
Amen. DWD had ben done for years and spent many years more in edits as I understand it.
This game might wind up being incredilbe, but would have done itself a huge favor by steering clear of this IP.
Fans of the books know that Game of Thrones is moreso a footnote or a setup for the landscape and players that the actual story takes place in and around. That being the state of their world in winter while a battle for light and dark ensues.
Lastly, no House Targaryen equals no Game of Thrones.
Martin need to get off his ass and get on the next book the winds of winter. He's not getting any younger and hes talking about 2 or 3 years till he starts the next book and talking about adding 1 more book.
He's 63 years old and at his pace the last 2 or 3 books wont be out for a good 10-15 years. dance with dragons was a OK book and a vary bad book for all the time it took him.
Amen. DWD had ben done for years and spent many years more in edits as I understand it.
This game might wind up being incredilbe, but would have done itself a huge favor by steering clear of this IP.
Fans of the books know that Game of Thrones is moreso a footnote or a setup for the landscape and players that the actual story takes place in and around. That being the state of their world in winter while a battle for light and dark ensues.
Lastly, no House Targaryen equals no Game of Thrones.
Indeed! No House Targaryen, no GOT!
No house targaryen equals no $50 fighting dragon mounts.
Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP. Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged. The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP.
It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best. The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch". Can all of these gams just be that terrible? Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?
+1 Sandboxers love to blame everything except the possibility that a sandbox game could ever be popular in the first place. The only formula that I could see possibly breaking the suckage barrier would be a sandpark game, but I'm sure the purists would whine about that as well.
Why would you even want a sandbox MMO where you can't attack other players? Not trying to be sarcastic, just understand. If your only interest in is PvE, don't theme park MMOs already do that so much better?
The idea of a sandbox has always been a world that's player-made, player-driven. I think that's why UO lost its appeal for so many when they split the world into Trammel/Feluccia. It didn't really become a sandbox so much as a kittypool, where you fight monsters that are so easy that you could pretty much faceroll the hardest things in the game.
Sandbox means sandbox
Themepark means themepark
And PVP means PVP the same way PVE means PVE.
Don´t mix up concepts. You don't need to attack any player to have a player-driven economy. You don't need pvp to enjoy a sandbox experience.
Building your castle in the middle of nowhere has way more to do with sandbox games than having to defend it from other players afterwards.
So yes, sandbox games that are PVE centric are possible. Sandbox does not mean PVP. Sandbox means sandbox.
I agree but I think the sandbox needs to decide at the design stage process what it is going to be, I don't think the UO way of just splitting into 2 rule sets is good, do one or the other.
I do also think that a sandbox based on GoT has to have PvP, where's the satisfaction over stabbing an NPC in the back
Game of Thrones without open-world PvP doesn't make much sense IMHO. I mean GoT really is all about each and everyone fighting and backstabbing eachother. I don't see how this could be properly translated into PvE with instanced battlegrounds or some nonsense like that.
I have yet to play a browser based game that felt like it was worth a crap. Why they couldn't pony up for a real game and not a browser based write off is beyond me.
The images shown look nice, but game images released by a company are usually touched up. I have serious doubts that any browser based game can run graphics like that in a MMO sized game environment and not run like crap or be pretty limited in terms of gameplay and such.
My money says those screenshots are really touched up.
I would have been interested in this had it not been browser based.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
the idea of a player driven open world is great on paper, then you add the players to it and thats when the whole thing screws up. now if people got into the role of their character in the world open PVP sandboxes would work extremely well.
but unfortunately many MMO players play these games simply to ruin everyone elses day and so they can say "lulz i pwn!". I would love to play a game like Skyrim with other players where you have this massive world to explore and can do just about anything. but ultimately you will have players like my friend who when i asked him what his plans are in skyrim for his character responded ...
"I plan on killing every NPC i come across and try to get as big a bounty as i can on my character"
Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP. Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged. The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP.
It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best. The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch". Can all of these gams just be that terrible? Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?
+1 Sandboxers love to blame everything except the possibility that a sandbox game could ever be popular in the first place. The only formula that I could see possibly breaking the suckage barrier would be a sandpark game, but I'm sure the purists would whine about that as well.
Why would you even want a sandbox MMO where you can't attack other players? Not trying to be sarcastic, just understand. If your only interest in is PvE, don't theme park MMOs already do that so much better?
The idea of a sandbox has always been a world that's player-made, player-driven. I think that's why UO lost its appeal for so many when they split the world into Trammel/Feluccia. It didn't really become a sandbox so much as a kittypool, where you fight monsters that are so easy that you could pretty much faceroll the hardest things in the game.
Not all Sandbox games a ffa pvp, and they don't need to be, open and constant pvp has nothing to do with Sandbox, if anything it'll surely limit the amount of players who'd try it out, me for one.
Let people flag themselves, players who enjoy to attack others, can do so, with others who are interested in it, just make the flag take some minutes to kick in, so you can't surprise jump some guy who's already flagged.
It's like saying that themepark games should be pve only
Unfortunatly it seems that once again that sandbox has to mean open world PvP. Now granted that they have not said this will be the case at this early stage, but this usually means that you are always PvP flagged. The reality is that not every player likes to PvP, and there are players who like PvP but not open world PvP.
It is funny how these open world pvp games keep coming and how they keep achieving mediocre success at best. The reason always seems to be "blah blah broken game system" or "blah blah game wasn't ready to launch". Can all of these gams just be that terrible? Or could it be that sandbox with forced open world PvP is not the recepie for success that a loud vocal minority would like everyone to believe?
Of all the stupid complaints... It's -game of thrones-. You know... the Song of Ice and Fire. A series based around political intrigue, backstabbing, murder, dragons, and WAR. One of the most gritty, realistic, and harsh fantasy existences in recent memory. Rape, murder, incest. Are you sure you've even read the books?
If you saw "Game of Thrones" in the title and didn't think it would be PvP, you were obviously kidding yourself and put zero thought into it. Game of Thrones would be a travesty if it wasn't all about PvP.
That said, I don't know how much I like that this title is in the hands of this particular company. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Comments
Who? considering that F2P get most of the players these days.
Will it have politics?
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
I will just stick to Season 2 in April/May:D
All hail the Barn Owl! oh.. and the RED SQUIRREL!!!
Ooh, so soonThere's nothing wrong with open world pvp. It's how it's presented that makes it good or bad. Being flagged at the moment you log on to the time you log off should be a choice or option not mandatory. The one thing that SWG pre-cu did right was to incorporate the Overt/Covert pvp system. It let you PVP in the open world the way you liked.
[quote][i]Originally posted by Czanrei[/i]
[b]Bigpoint = bad
Sandbox = good
Browser-based= bad
2/3 bad = bad
Maybe someday browser-based games will be commonplace, but today's technology is not up to par. While a fan of the novel series, I am not looking forward to this IP.
[/b][/quote]
Could NOT have said it better myself. If it's PvP-based (not clear to me as yet), I'd add another "= bad" to the list.
In addition, I think Game of Thrones really does not lend itself to an MMO game setting. Consider me very wary of this one.
Uggh...My favorite series of books or all times just turned into a browser game, by a company reputed for P2W games...
I just feel like I found out Cristina Hendricks has a penis.
Ok on paper this sounds absolutely amazing (except the F2P part). However I am sceptic because I often heard all these promises during development, just to be cut later one.
So I will watch this game carefully and see what happens with it. Could be massive...
My gaming blog
I agree! I cringed when I read "browser base"... we'll wait and see "browser based" does equal possible lunch time play.
Wow man get out of my head!
Amen. DWD had ben done for years and spent many years more in edits as I understand it.
This game might wind up being incredilbe, but would have done itself a huge favor by steering clear of this IP.
Fans of the books know that Game of Thrones is moreso a footnote or a setup for the landscape and players that the actual story takes place in and around. That being the state of their world in winter while a battle for light and dark ensues.
Lastly, no House Targaryen equals no Game of Thrones.
Indeed! No House Targaryen, no GOT!
No house targaryen equals no $50 fighting dragon mounts.Game of Thrones without open-world PvP doesn't make much sense IMHO. I mean GoT really is all about each and everyone fighting and backstabbing eachother. I don't see how this could be properly translated into PvE with instanced battlegrounds or some nonsense like that.
BigPoint + such great IP as Game of Thrones = disgrace
This company is awful and their business models are hilariously bad.
Not touching anything BigPoint made with 3 meters long stick.
Im not going to crap on the game just yet. My worries are the following
1)Will it be sandbox enough? Deep crafting and resource gathering?
2)Bigpoint reputation with Cash Shops worries me.
I have yet to play a browser based game that felt like it was worth a crap. Why they couldn't pony up for a real game and not a browser based write off is beyond me.
The images shown look nice, but game images released by a company are usually touched up. I have serious doubts that any browser based game can run graphics like that in a MMO sized game environment and not run like crap or be pretty limited in terms of gameplay and such.
My money says those screenshots are really touched up.
I would have been interested in this had it not been browser based.
My blog:
Then I should start hating it. And be proud of hating it if that cracked article was correct.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Bigpoint & browser = NO DEAL!!!! at all!!!
the idea of a player driven open world is great on paper, then you add the players to it and thats when the whole thing screws up. now if people got into the role of their character in the world open PVP sandboxes would work extremely well.
but unfortunately many MMO players play these games simply to ruin everyone elses day and so they can say "lulz i pwn!". I would love to play a game like Skyrim with other players where you have this massive world to explore and can do just about anything. but ultimately you will have players like my friend who when i asked him what his plans are in skyrim for his character responded ...
"I plan on killing every NPC i come across and try to get as big a bounty as i can on my character"
/facepalm
Not all Sandbox games a ffa pvp, and they don't need to be, open and constant pvp has nothing to do with Sandbox, if anything it'll surely limit the amount of players who'd try it out, me for one.
Let people flag themselves, players who enjoy to attack others, can do so, with others who are interested in it, just make the flag take some minutes to kick in, so you can't surprise jump some guy who's already flagged.
It's like saying that themepark games should be pve only
On topic:
Browser based???? no thanks.
Of all the stupid complaints... It's -game of thrones-. You know... the Song of Ice and Fire. A series based around political intrigue, backstabbing, murder, dragons, and WAR. One of the most gritty, realistic, and harsh fantasy existences in recent memory. Rape, murder, incest. Are you sure you've even read the books?
If you saw "Game of Thrones" in the title and didn't think it would be PvP, you were obviously kidding yourself and put zero thought into it. Game of Thrones would be a travesty if it wasn't all about PvP.
That said, I don't know how much I like that this title is in the hands of this particular company. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
When you play the Game of Thrones, you Pay-to-Win or you die; there is no middle ground.