Originally posted by FreddyNoNose

Originally posted by Hawkaron

Sure, positive thing is that it gets easy to follow, no need to get lost as there's only one path, but destroys the feeling of freedom which a MMORPG should have as a standard in my personal dictionary.

 

These games are not hard.  What you are trying to do is posture as if you are a special person and so much better than everyone else.  You are not special.

Wat

Originally posted by rznkain

Originally posted by Hawkaron

Originally posted by Dedthom

What needs to be avoided is stereo typing people into " real MMOers want an sand box while linear play is for casual carebears".

Of course when this happens on this forum it will bring the internet down and we will all be moving into caves cause civilization will collapse.

 

Well, people who grew up with old-school MMORPGs will of course like sandbox a lot more while neo-MMORPG players except them to be linear. It's all decided by what we grew up with, and I grew up with the DAoC, SWG type of MMORPG.

 

 And your sure not as you pan it "old school" if daoc and swg were your first mmogs and your sure not elite in your thinking.

I never said that they are old-school.

Originally posted by Meridion

Originally posted by Hawkaron

Originally posted by Dedthom

What needs to be avoided is stereo typing people into " real MMOers want an sand box while linear play is for casual carebears".

Of course when this happens on this forum it will bring the internet down and we will all be moving into caves cause civilization will collapse.

 

Well, people who grew up with old-school MMORPGs will of course like sandbox a lot more while neo-MMORPG players except them to be linear. It's all decided by what we grew up with, and I grew up with the DAoC, SWG type of MMORPG.

Untrue, there are people who can cherish both, ride-like and sandbox. I can enjoy myself playing a totally linear shooter in multiplayer for months and months. Where you do nothing but respawn, kill, get killed... then again, I enjoy EvE, the tactics, the teamwork, the complexity...

It all depends on what you expect and demand. if you limit yourself to "i only play xy style" it's not the game's fault you don't have fun...

meridion

 

EDIT: Plus, I don't think linearity is the right term here. FEAR is linear, Half-Life is linear, but even the most narrowed-down games, like Guild Wars, offer a whole lot of different things to do. So the level of "guided gameplay" is pretty low compared to regular multiplayer-capable games.

It's natural to be used to how you originally played a genre. You played and liked it for what it was, and then here comes the new refined MMORPG game that sets a standard for the next generation, but you feel that it somehow differentiates from the MMORPGs you used to play. Sadly, you don't seem to enjoy it, so you demand MMORPGs to be like how they were when you actually liked the genre.

That's how it is like in my case. I feel that something has changed, and unfortunately I don't like it.

Yeah that group Linear really sucked in the 90's, they all looked like they were Gerardo (Rico Suave)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=artK5RbwSr0

Oh, sorry, were talking about mmorpgs...

SWG and EVE are the only sandbox style games I really liked. However I am not digging the SWG conversion to a linear mmorpg either.

EVE however, I get my fix when I want something different than land base mmo's.

Originally posted by Hawkaron

Originally posted by Meridion

Originally posted by Hawkaron

Originally posted by Dedthom

What needs to be avoided is stereo typing people into " real MMOers want an sand box while linear play is for casual carebears".

Of course when this happens on this forum it will bring the internet down and we will all be moving into caves cause civilization will collapse.

 

Well, people who grew up with old-school MMORPGs will of course like sandbox a lot more while neo-MMORPG players except them to be linear. It's all decided by what we grew up with, and I grew up with the DAoC, SWG type of MMORPG.

Untrue, there are people who can cherish both, ride-like and sandbox. I can enjoy myself playing a totally linear shooter in multiplayer for months and months. Where you do nothing but respawn, kill, get killed... then again, I enjoy EvE, the tactics, the teamwork, the complexity...

It all depends on what you expect and demand. if you limit yourself to "i only play xy style" it's not the game's fault you don't have fun...

meridion

 

EDIT: Plus, I don't think linearity is the right term here. FEAR is linear, Half-Life is linear, but even the most narrowed-down games, like Guild Wars, offer a whole lot of different things to do. So the level of "guided gameplay" is pretty low compared to regular multiplayer-capable games.

 

It's natural to be used to how you originally played a genre. You played and liked it for what it was, and then here comes the new refined MMORPG game that sets a standard for the next generation, but you feel that it somehow differentiates from the MMORPGs you used to play. Sadly, you don't seem to enjoy it, so you demand MMORPGs to be like how they were when you actually liked the genre.

That's how it is like in my case. I feel that something has changed, and unfortunately I don't like it.

This may be true for _you_ but I started back in the mid 90s to and it does not apply to me. I can enjoy the genre like it is now as well as I can enjoy the retro-style games like EvE.

Exactly for the same reasons btw -> Enjoying a genre for what it was and now is, and probably what it will be. As long as it's a game I'm gonna play it and enjoy myself.

BTW it's not THAT different, it's not like adventures, jumpnruns or space simulations, these games totally disappeared or merged with different types and bred to completely new gameplay experiences, like the 3D-action-adventure; ever though you would be shooting your way through a "use bar with door"-game when you played indiana jones III in 1992... ?

Meridion

Originally posted by Malall

Originally posted by aurick

WAR is actually less linear than just about any other MMO currently on the market.

WoW:  Each race has a starting area.  From level 10 on it quickly turns into two, maybe three places to go for quests.  At level 20 this becomes even more true.  By the 30's, even Horde and Alliance are sharing the same exact zones and mostly the same quest lines.  Any time you hit a certain level, you get a quest guiding you to the next area.  Occasionally you may jump into a battleground, but it's meaningless.  You get honor penalties for every level below 60, and no experience.  The whole level 1-68 range is really about world PvE.  At max level it becomes all about gear grinds through raids, reputation grinds, or battlegrounds and arenas.  There's very little world PvP other than ganking, even in zones that were built with PvP objectives like Zangarmarsh.  www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/basics/regionlevels.html  By the way, anyone who's ever seen Joanna's Leveling Guide knows just how linear WoW really is.  The mere fact that such a guide exists demonstrates the linear nature of the game.

 

Age of Conan:  Levels 1-20 are Tortage.  That's it.  Your destiny quest has some small variations depending on your archetype.  Levels 20-40 you have three paths that you can take; one for each race.  But if you don't want to spend any more time grinding at higher levels than absolutely necessary, you will ultimately do all quests in all three areas.  After level 40 it quickly turns into the same zones for everyone.  Fields of the Dead leads to Old Tarantia leads to E. Mountains, etc.  VERY linear.  And there's NOTHING other than questing to do, except when you take a few hours to grind out resources in a harvesting zone.

 

WAR:  Every race has a very unique starting area, with six in all.  Every race can level all the way to max within their own racial pairing.  Yes, the path within that is linear.  There's also a lot less running back and forth, which is a blessing.  At any point you can jump to another racial pairing.  That means that there are ALWAYS three different PvE paths that you can follow.  This is superior to WoW, which at times has only one zone to quest in. (Especially back in the vanilla days when you had no choice but to spend several levels in Ganklethorn Vale.)  At any time you can also opt to go into a RvR lake for PvP.  You will gain experience while doing this.  You will also be able to contribute, because if you're actually too low for the area you get bolstered up to an effective level.  At any time you can also opt to go into a scenario.  Again, you get bolstered, unlike WoW where you're useless in a battleground unless you're at the top few levels of each "decade".  And you get experience.

 

Anyone with any sort of objectivity will look at the evidence and see that WAR is the least linear of the three games.  It's also the only one to offer meaningful PvP -- PvP that not only grants you experience but is also a genuine challenge of peer vs. peer as opposed to the strong preying on the weak.

I notice you never mentioned Vanguard? Vanguard is sandbox and WAR is as far away from Vanguard as the US from the UK.

I would need to level up at least 10 toons in Vanguard to even see all half the early level content. I can level all the way to 50 having only seen an 1/8 of the game. There is no way in hell you can see half the content in Vanguard unless you have 10 atls.

I like war for it casual feel and counter strike type PVP but for vast exploration and free roaming vast world Vanguard wins hands down.

Vanguard is not the same game it was 18 months ago, it`s  the best PVE sandbox mmorpg out their at this present time.

Don`t take my word for it,you can download the free trail called Isle of dawn,it`s a 30 min download.

I've played Vanguard.  You're right about it being much less linear than WAR.  That doesn't change the fact that WAR is much less linear than AoC and WoW -- the two most talked-about MMO's in recent history.

I do like Vanguard.  Had a lot of fun with it now that it has matured a bit, and I will probably be back to play it some more.  Vanguard is an interesting game.  I just feel at the moment that WAR is more fun.

Originally posted by Hawkaron

Originally posted by goofy3k

Uh...and most mmorpgs aren't linear??

And if you're talking of sandbox style then the days of those mmorpgs are long gone..

 

 

Why yes. THANKS BLIZZARD!

But no, I don't think those days are gone. There will be a mmorpg which offers freedom some time, atlhough none might be in development atm. The WoW craze hasn't yet faded.

WoW is linear as much as WAR. Non sandbox modern MMO that is not linear and have much freedom to choose your path is VG. There is around 8-10 zones per every 5 char levels.  That makes nearly 100 zones where you can go. There are around 60 dungeons and most of them are bigger than BRD and Kara in WoW. With single char maxed you cannot compleate even 1/4 of the entire content.

people think this game is a mmoRPG and it is not at all it is a MMO action game.

it is more like a 3rd person action adventrue game then RPG, am i the only one that can see this >?

why keep trying to say it's a MMORPG is like saying a apple is like a orange cause there both round.

what sandbox lovers don't get is that they served their purpose, to keep the MMORPG genre afloat on it's debut years.

Once MMORPG's learned to walk, the companies making them aimed at a different, broader, audience.  From that moment onwards, the mmorpg pioneer players passed the torch to the masses. And the masses are basicly on the "console generation level". They log on, either go gank/pvp or find some pve instance that they do for the loot and loot only, not the imersion or the interaction.

the glory days of dungeon crawler's are gone. MMORPG's are not a niche game anymore.

And then I see comments about sandbox gaming, what the masses would do with sandbox? where is the loot table so they can check where to go? where is the predeterminated path to glory?

Why do you think religion is so popular? it points the way.

It is even odd how most old schoolers don't even see that most mmorpg today are in essence MMO's , where the only RPG part they sustain is character development trough itemization.

final conclusion: if you're an old schooler, mmorpg's are not your genre anymore, and as soon as you can understand such, you'll find a much greater level of joy, either by living your RL or playing them for what they are now, a game designed for the masses. and masses are not known for being bright, better, superior, but just average.

Originally posted by demented669

people think this game is a mmoRPG and it is not at all it is a MMO action game.

it is more like a 3rd person action adventrue game then RPG, am i the only one that can see this >?

why keep trying to say it's a MMORPG is like saying a apple is like a orange cause there both round.

There is no longer any RPG in MMO.

Comparing WAR to a third person action adventure is ludicrous, just as it would be to compare most MMOs to 3rd person shooter.

Neither apples or oranges are round. They are lumpy.

Originally posted by ProfRed

Well I would say there are three lines.  Scenarios, RvR, and PvE makes 3 lines.  Then there are 3 tiers to do these three lines in that you can switch between at any time.  3 x 3 = 9 so I would say at any time there are 9 linear paths that you can jump between which makes the game not so linear.  Most games = 1 linear path, maybe 2.  WAR = 9.  It is actually one of the less linear MMORPGS to come out as far as non sandbox MMO's go.

YOu fail to undertand the concept. Ofc a game with 1 path is more linear than a game with 2 paths but thats like adding another class and claiming its a path of its own. A game having more paths do not add trough it being more sandbox, it just got more content. A sandbox game rather  have possibilitys to creat paths rather than allredy designed which meen war can in no way be called sandbox in any regard no matter if its about rvr or pve or sc. Someone said this game got sandbox pvp, thats not true. With sandbox pvp the pvp got to be created by the players wether its ganking or massive battles aginst a diffrent  PLAYER communit and not faction. SC got allredy set goals with points and reward, can it get more lineare? IN a sandbox game you can bake in a quest into the pvp but the focus has to lay on players having the freedom to make thier own fights. Zone pvp is linare. The more rules a game has to restric pvp/pve makes it more linare but games got to have rules to make them work, like non pvp zones to respawn ect ect. Lineage2 got pvp that leans towards sanbox, the players picks the time, place and rewards for pvp. You can kill anyone you want anywhere except the peace zones which is nessesery for the game to be functional.Wether they fight for a rb or drama, its the players that makes the content., NCsoft only set up the frames.

The linear aspects only apply to PVE. They are virtually non-existent in RvR. 

I must have done at least 100 scenarios during the OB and not one was ever the same. Different team make-ups, different levels of skill, different tactics - the list goes on.

RvR in WAR is one of the most dynamic and diverse aspects I've ever seen in an MMO - I'm truly loving it.

Originally posted by Sweeet

The linear aspects only apply to PVE. They are virtually non-existent in RvR. 

I must have done at least 100 scenarios during the OB and not one was ever the same. Different team make-ups, different levels of skill, different tactics - the list goes on.

RvR in WAR is one of the most dynamic and diverse aspects I've ever seen in an MMO - I'm truly loving it.

 

Your wrong. This has more to do about combat than the aspects of global pvp in the game. Its only in a game with true open world pvp where the freedom is given to the players to fight for any objective or anyone we got a sandbox pvp game. This game got allredy set objectivs, the variables is much less and the reward is allredy at a vendor to be bought. In a open pvp world the reward could be whatever of many objectives you choose to fight for, objectives made by your allies to reach your own set goal. Here the goal is  to advance in rvr rank which will award you new items. The only variable here is sucess or failiur, skill or no skill and rank of items. The open world pvp is  restricted to certin zones here which adds towards the carebear layout that has been flurishing latly. Sc will soon be as grindish as wow BG, there is not much diffrent in the objectives of these two, only thing diffrent is classes and layout of combat in this game.

I like it. Sure it detracts from the world like feel but it makes it so meeting people for combat and PvE is a lot easier. Very simple and enjoyable.

---

Originally posted by Hawkaron

---

Originally posted by Meridion

---

Originally posted by Hawkaron

---

Originally posted by Dedthom

What needs to be avoided is stereo typing people into " real MMOers want an sand box while linear play is for casual carebears".
Of course when this happens on this forum it will bring the internet down and we will all be moving into caves cause civilization will collapse.

---

 
Well, people who grew up with old-school MMORPGs will of course like sandbox a lot more while neo-MMORPG players except them to be linear. It's all decided by what we grew up with, and I grew up with the DAoC, SWG type of MMORPG.

---

Untrue, there are people who can cherish both, ride-like and sandbox. I can enjoy myself playing a totally linear shooter in multiplayer for months and months. Where you do nothing but respawn, kill, get killed... then again, I enjoy EvE, the tactics, the teamwork, the complexity...
It all depends on what you expect and demand. if you limit yourself to "i only play xy style" it's not the game's fault you don't have fun...
meridion
 
EDIT: Plus, I don't think linearity is the right term here. FEAR is linear, Half-Life is linear, but even the most narrowed-down games, like Guild Wars, offer a whole lot of different things to do. So the level of "guided gameplay" is pretty low compared to regular multiplayer-capable games.

---

 
It's natural to be used to how you originally played a genre. You played and liked it for what it was, and then here comes the new refined MMORPG game that sets a standard for the next generation, but you feel that it somehow differentiates from the MMORPGs you used to play. Sadly, you don't seem to enjoy it, so you demand MMORPGs to be like how they were when you actually liked the genre.
That's how it is like in my case. I feel that something has changed, and unfortunately I don't like it.

---

8. to improve by inserting finer distinctions, superior elements, etc.: to refine on one's previous work.
.
Very little of that is being done in this genre.

Hardly any recent games have refined in a factorable way, and every game released since ~2003 or so has been nothing but a concoction of features envisioned in many other games meshed into a new game, with pretty or cute graphics layered on top of it.

WAR's Public Quest system are nothing more than Raids adapted for a PvP crowd. It is no different than having randoms come to a Lineage II castle seige and be allowed the right to participate. Attaching a Quest to it is not refinement, it is incentive because otherwise people wouldn't bother to do it seeing as how there would be no point...

WoW's quest system was not refinement in that quests existed in many other games. The only difference that WoW implemented, was that it really dumbed down the questing experience in MMOs. Remember quests in EQ that had scripts and the NPCs needed you to talk to them about a certain subject during the quest? When it was almost like having a conversation and you pretty much had to read it because the clue phrases were [surrounded by brackets] and you couldn't just click through them like these new games? Yea...

On top of their overly simplistic questing system, they put way too many in the game, and made the rewards so good that they became a way for gamers to Powerlevel and Twink themselves that people do nothing BUT click through them in a hurry as they are trying to maximize their XP/Items recieved per hour...

WoW and other games have refined nothing. They have done nothing but created a culture of gamers that are all about advancing as fast as possible. They have created a whole market of solo gamers that are exactly what this genre ISN'T for, but because they are able to make easy games that cater to those players and disguise them as MMORPGs, they keep churning them out.

That is why the MMORPG genre is full of crappy games, because there is too little refinement actually going on and too much copy/paste and reuse of old code (love the pet bugs that were in WAR, that were carbon copies from DAoC, but maybe that was just a coincidence).

AoC tried to refine melee combat, but failed. Vanguard did refine spell casting. DAoC created RvR and Lineage II refined Mass PvP. But seriously, with the way that game developers are actually thinking these days... There really isn't much refinement to be done because they are not innovating anything at all. WAR has no innovation in it, and neither did WoW.

Originally posted by UbahNecro

 

---

Originally posted by Hawkaron

---

Originally posted by Meridion

---

Originally posted by Hawkaron

---

Originally posted by Dedthom

 

What needs to be avoided is stereo typing people into " real MMOers want an sand box while linear play is for casual carebears".
Of course when this happens on this forum it will bring the internet down and we will all be moving into caves cause civilization will collapse.

---

 
Well, people who grew up with old-school MMORPGs will of course like sandbox a lot more while neo-MMORPG players except them to be linear. It's all decided by what we grew up with, and I grew up with the DAoC, SWG type of MMORPG.

---

 

Untrue, there are people who can cherish both, ride-like and sandbox. I can enjoy myself playing a totally linear shooter in multiplayer for months and months. Where you do nothing but respawn, kill, get killed... then again, I enjoy EvE, the tactics, the teamwork, the complexity...
It all depends on what you expect and demand. if you limit yourself to "i only play xy style" it's not the game's fault you don't have fun...
meridion
 
EDIT: Plus, I don't think linearity is the right term here. FEAR is linear, Half-Life is linear, but even the most narrowed-down games, like Guild Wars, offer a whole lot of different things to do. So the level of "guided gameplay" is pretty low compared to regular multiplayer-capable games.

---

 
It's natural to be used to how you originally played a genre. You played and liked it for what it was, and then here comes the new refined MMORPG game that sets a standard for the next generation, but you feel that it somehow differentiates from the MMORPGs you used to play. Sadly, you don't seem to enjoy it, so you demand MMORPGs to be like how they were when you actually liked the genre.
That's how it is like in my case. I feel that something has changed, and unfortunately I don't like it.

---

Call them different, not refined...
.

 

8. to improve by inserting finer distinctions, superior elements, etc.: to refine on one's previous work.
.
Very little of that is being done in this genre.

Hardly any recent games have refined in a factorable way, and every game released since ~2003 or so has been nothing but a concoction of features envisioned in many other games meshed into a new game, with pretty or cute graphics layered on top of it.

WAR's Public Quest system are nothing more than Raids adapted for a PvP crowd. It is no different than having randoms come to a Lineage II castle seige and be allowed the right to participate. Attaching a Quest to it is not refinement, it is incentive because otherwise people wouldn't bother to do it seeing as how there would be no point...

WoW's quest system was not refinement in that quests existed in many other games. The only difference that WoW implemented, was that it really dumbed down the questing experience in MMOs. Remember quests in EQ that had scripts and the NPCs needed you to talk to them about a certain subject during the quest? When it was almost like having a conversation and you pretty much had to read it because the clue phrases were [surrounded by brackets] and you couldn't just click through them like these new games? Yea...

On top of their overly simplistic questing system, they put way too many in the game, and made the rewards so good that they became a way for gamers to Powerlevel and Twink themselves that people do nothing BUT click through them in a hurry as they are trying to maximize their XP/Items recieved per hour...

WoW and other games have refined nothing. They have done nothing but created a culture of gamers that are all about advancing as fast as possible. They have created a whole market of solo gamers that are exactly what this genre ISN'T for, but because they are able to make easy games that cater to those players and disguise them as MMORPGs, they keep churning them out.

That is why the MMORPG genre is full of crappy games, because there is too little refinement actually going on and too much copy/paste and reuse of old code (love the pet bugs that were in WAR, that were carbon copies from DAoC, but maybe that was just a coincidence).

AoC tried to refine melee combat, but failed. Vanguard did refine spell casting. DAoC created RvR and Lineage II refined Mass PvP. But seriously, with the way that game developers are actually thinking these days... There really isn't much refinement to be done because they are not innovating anything at all. WAR has no innovation in it, and neither did WoW.

Damn... yeah, I completely agree with you.

But as long as people buy the games, they will keep pumping out the same stuff over and over again. People must like it, look at WoW. Why could it be so successful? MMORPGs weren't for a wide audience, but WoW managed to gather a total of 11 million subscribers (While half of it consists of chinese farmers, but yeah, still 5mil subs if you don't count them.). Can you actually believe that WoW has over the half of total MMORPG subscribers? I don't understand what people find so shining about that game, and probably never will do.

The classic Elite from 1982, and Grand Theft Auto are probably the most nonlinear games.

They are single player games though.

Mix them up, make it multiplayer, bingo, the best mmorpg ever?

Star Trek online or Stargate worlds could be it

Originally posted by demented669

people think this game is a mmoRPG and it is not at all it is a MMO action game.

it is more like a 3rd person action adventrue game then RPG, am i the only one that can see this >?

why keep trying to say it's a MMORPG is like saying a apple is like a orange cause there both round.

No your not the only one that thinks this.

I agree with your statement that it is not mmorpg, or is at least on the border of not being one.

It has to be described as such by EA to warrent a subscription fee.

If the genre carries on in this direction the next generation of this type of game will cleary not be a mmorpg.

Originally posted by Hawkaron

What do you think about the linear aspect of WAR? Like or dislike?

I like freedom and immersion in a game world, and really enjoy exploring the world.

Linear game design is a hit against freedom as you are sort of herded, volunarily maybe, maybe not, in a set direction.  Also, when a game is linear it is easier to figure out and there is much less exploring, therefore immersion takes a hit.

Personally, I think "linear" is a shortcut in MMO design.  I imagine, taken to extremes, linear PVP games might develop into just one zone, one arena really, saving the playerbase the "discomfort" of having to move around in and discover the world.

Originally posted by rishaki

Originally posted by Sweeet

The linear aspects only apply to PVE. They are virtually non-existent in RvR. 

I must have done at least 100 scenarios during the OB and not one was ever the same. Different team make-ups, different levels of skill, different tactics - the list goes on.

RvR in WAR is one of the most dynamic and diverse aspects I've ever seen in an MMO - I'm truly loving it.

 

 

Your wrong. This has more to do about combat than the aspects of global pvp in the game. Its only in a game with true open world pvp where the freedom is given to the players to fight for any objective or anyone we got a sandbox pvp game. This game got allredy set objectivs, the variables is much less and the reward is allredy at a vendor to be bought. In a open pvp world the reward could be whatever of many objectives you choose to fight for, objectives made by your allies to reach your own set goal. Here the goal is  to advance in rvr rank which will award you new items. The only variable here is sucess or failiur, skill or no skill and rank of items. The open world pvp is  restricted to certin zones here which adds towards the carebear layout that has been flurishing latly. Sc will soon be as grindish as wow BG, there is not much diffrent in the objectives of these two, only thing diffrent is classes and layout of combat in this game.

Are we talking about the same thing here? I'm talking about gameplay. The PVE gameplay is liniar beyond a doubt - RvR on the other hand, never ceases to amaze me.

Yes it may become grindish doing the same objective over and over again - but RvR gameplay liniar? Never. There are many ways to customize your classes gameplay through ability's, tactics, morale...and everybody plays differently.