Trending Games | Elder Scrolls Online | Guild Wars 2 | WildStar | Rift
Network: Gamertube FPSguru RTSguru
| 64 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
2/28/12 4:40:50 AM#41
Originally posted by Loke666
In order to be able to declare war and participate in a siege you must obtain a special drop from the raid boss on the third continent. Sieges only take place on the weekends and last for two hours. You can only have one attacking and one defending expeditionary force (guilds). Each side can currently have only 50 players participating (there are some rumors that if things go well that they will boost it to at least 100 vs. 100). If you're not signed up for the siege or if the player limit goes above the allotted amount you will simply be teleported back to the nearest resurrection shrine if you try to enter the siege area. (these are the rules/limitations in current CBT, but might change somewhat) -some might call it carebear, but i call it equity as we all know how giant guilds and alliances can ruin the game for others, this way more than few select zerg-guild will have an equal chance of gaining, owning and holding areas on the 3rd continent.
Thus eliminating faceroll zerg-guilds, 4am ninjacapping etc. Currently playing: FTB Ultimate Waiting for: Wildstar, ArcheAge, Class4. Dead and Buried: GW2, SWTOR, Darkfall, AO, AC2, Vanguard, CoH/V, EnB, EVE, Neocron, FE, EQ, EQ2, DAoC, FFXI, SWG, WoW, and billions of eastern junks! |
|
|
2/28/12 5:07:42 AM#42
Just to chime in on the whole sandbox-themepark thing: as far as I am aware a sandbox MMORPG offers more freedom, and more ways to play, over a typical MMORPG. Going by this, having themepark features actually makes ArcheAge more of a sandbox game than it would be without.
As long as the themepark features do not detract from the sandbox ones, the game is a sandbox, and technically not a hybrid. If they do detract however, then it is indeed a hybrid. Do they detract? I really have no idea…
Maybe my definition is incorrect though… I have been curious about this for a while: is there an “official” definition of what a sandbox MMORPG really is? Different people attach different meanings to the genre; what is the most commonly accepted concept?
Pretty sure I am right though; it’s all about freedom… What features does ArcheAge have that make it any less of a sandbox? Surely quests don’t count, so what is it?
|
|
|
2/28/12 5:18:13 AM#43
Originally posted by sbarra1x You are right, but it seems that saying "X is a sandpark because it has quests" is the only argument they have. Let's call things for what they really are, ArcheAge is a sandbox MMO, it's not a hybrid, we haven't seen an MMO with so many features since Ultima Online. By the definition of some people, UO is not a sandbox, EvE is a hybrid, etc etc etc. Nonsense, Lineage 2 is a themepark with sandbox elements, ArcheAge is a fully open world sandbox with no instancing, it can't get more sandbox than that.
|
|
|
2/28/12 5:34:59 AM#44
Originally posted by spaceport
Trolls are trolls and should be treated as such. I personally think sandboxes are such as EVE, SWG (rip), Darkfall, MO, UO etc, where you can make a lasting mark on the map/world, build cities/keeps/spacestations, plant stuff, harvest stuff, have open wolrd pvp (not necessarily FFA) etc. (you all know features im talking about) Having tab-targeting or quests or both doesn't make it any less sandbox, to me, it makes it even MORE of a sanbox, because you're given not only the sanbox stuff, but also some pre-scripted stuff, so you can freely choose wether to do this or that. The more options/choices given to the player, the merrier. Some fanboys and elitists just go beyond reason to determine what is which and what. Currently playing: FTB Ultimate Waiting for: Wildstar, ArcheAge, Class4. Dead and Buried: GW2, SWTOR, Darkfall, AO, AC2, Vanguard, CoH/V, EnB, EVE, Neocron, FE, EQ, EQ2, DAoC, FFXI, SWG, WoW, and billions of eastern junks! |
|
|
2/28/12 5:41:34 AM#45
Originally posted by sbarra1x The games is discribed by it's own devs as a combination of WOW and UO,that's tells you that it is both sandbox and themepark. I am looking forward to AA and GW2 is a filler for me so i don't hate AA but i'm just saying that it's a mixture of both. |
|
|
2/28/12 6:16:35 AM#46
Originally posted by Sylvarii
The way the dev team describe and market their game doesn’t necessarily define what type of game it actually is.
Let’s say hypothetically NASA somehow claim ownership of the sun. Now, they have all gone completely insane, and they decide to start offering space trips to the sun, branding it as a nice, warm n’ sunny getaway.
This is just how they choose to define and market it. In reality we know that the sun is a very deadly place, and you would die a horrible death before you get even remotely close.
|
|
|
2/28/12 6:19:58 AM#47
Originally posted by sbarra1x Your skill in Analogycraft has increased by 1. "There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer." |
|
|
2/28/12 6:35:20 AM#48
I don' t think I will ever understand the arguement that a quest (GOOD GOLLY MOLLY something to read and enjoy in a game) makes sadbox people so angry. Is it the direction, is being unable to be told what to do (no matter how little) really that big a problem for the average sb player? Just because a game has a story in no way can it not be a sandbox. This whole thread for me pretty much sums up why no-one wants to finance a AAA sandbox, you're all a bunch of whiny gits (and that's putting it politely) and if you actually took out everything everyone here is purporting to be 'themepark' you'd have no game at all. What you would have is a big community 3D modelling project. That's called 2nd Life.. |
|
|
2/28/12 7:06:18 AM#49
Originally posted by sbarra1x The feature speak for themselves,AA has themepark features and Sandbox.It has instances and normal quests givers like any other themepark mmo. The difference between a sandbox and a theme park MMO is related to choice, the nature of those choices, and the limitations placed on those choices Games like Wurm Online,A tale In The Desert and Xsyon are sandbox games.
|
|
|
2/28/12 7:21:46 AM#50
Ok you are just trolling now.
No, ArcheAge doesn't have instances like any other themepark MMO. In Themepark MMOs like WOW, RIFT, GW2 and SWTOR, everything is instanced. Not in ArcheAge, they closed the 2 instanced dungeons in the last CBT4, so again, NO instances, the game currently doesn't have any kind of instancing, and no loading screens. By your definition of a sandbox MMO, UO, EvE and SWG aren't sandboxes. This is getting ridiculous, ArcheAge is a sandbox MMO with quests, that's it, quests, it's not a themebox, a sandpark, it's a sandbox, sandboxes can have quests.
|
|
|
2/28/12 7:28:35 AM#51
ArcheAge is a hybrid mmorpg and the developers obviously played Darkfall and realized what needs to be changed to make their game successful, i.e. a Sandpark.
|
|
|
2/28/12 10:26:09 PM#52
I dont get this sandbox, themepark discussions... for me a sandbox is simply an overall feeling of freedom while a themepark set me on a straight course. I think Jake described AA as a themepark with sandbox elements and not the other way around however it seems more sandbox than themepark to me currently... |
|
|
2/29/12 1:01:01 AM#53
Originally posted by Kuro1n This is all i have been saying,it's how Jake discribes his own game and see it as.Yeah,AA has some great sandbox features and offers great freedom but so does Vanguard and would any of the people calling AA a true sandbox game describe Vanguard as such,nope they would not. Jake calls HIS game a themepark with sandbox features as does everyone over a source,only the mmorpg.com fanatics want to turn the game into Darkfall 2 lol. Ill take Jakes word over any of the blind anytime.
|
|
|
2/29/12 1:25:19 AM#54
Quibbling over meaningless definitions is largely pointless. Most people cannot provide a decent definition fro the terms they throw around, and even when one person does have a good solid definition, another persons will be different. So Themebox, Sandpark, Steaming Dish of Ramen Noodles, what ever you want to call it. The game will be what the game will be. It looks to have enough structured content to keep that crowd happy, and enough free-form content to keep the other crowd happy. Will the game be perfect? Not possible. Will the game be good enough and content rich enough to keep lots of people busy for quite some time to come? Hell yeah, sure looks to be! |
|
|
2/29/12 1:43:36 AM#55
What type of "HYBRID" is going to be ArcheAge, not a "ThemePark" with Sandbox features, may be a "Sand""Park"". But that ArcheAge is more "sandbox" than "themepark" cant be doubt. This video is for the last year, when Tencent announced that will be the publisher in China, and explains what type of mmo they wanna make. |
|
|
2/29/12 10:36:45 AM#56
Originally posted by CyclopsSlay I am just happy a game like AA is coming and hopefully to Europe. First stop Russia then ext stop Europe. Have a read of this and see what you think. Part 1 Words are hard. Here I am, a person who communicates continuously via the written word and is paid to craft words for others, and I know that despite my “expertise,” most of what I’ve written in my lifetime, if not all of it, can be misunderstood or interpreted from angles I did not imagine while writing. Jargon is both a boon and a bane: although it allows people from the same fields to quickly communicate complicated ideas, people from different fields may use the same word to mean different things. But the worst jargon comes in young fields, such as gaming criticism, where it seems assumed that “everyone knows” what it means without any discussion. So have I justified talking about the meaning of the word “sandbox” in gaming and in the growing lexicon of mmo jargon? Since I’m already writing this, I’ll go with the answer most convenient for me: yes. So how do we define sandbox? How is it being used out there? Searching google for “define sandbox mmo,” the first relevant hit I come across is this hub page. The author, Tahamtan, equates sandbox games with freedom of choice. He goes on to more details, including the claim that the players make the rules rather than developers, and specifics such as classless skill systems and customizable appearances, some of which I agree with and some seem optional at best and otherwise completely arbitrary. I strongly agree with the freedom of choice bit, but I don’t think that’s enough detail to eliminate games that are commonly called theme parks. I found a second blog post attempting to explain a personal definition of sandbox, but he focuses even more on the details than this first author. And most of those details are lifted straight from UO. UO is certainly a sandbox, at least everyone who has played it seems to think so, but I’m more interested in creating a definition of sandbox that includes any MMO generally agreed to be a sandbox (Ultima Online, SWG pre-NGE, Eve, Darkfall, Wurm Online, and such) while excluding any games generally agreed to be theme parks (WoW, Rift, Warhammer, etc.) Sandbox games can certainly be said to depend on freedom of choice, but to what extent is freedom of choice limited in a theme park? There’s a common argument about WoW that claims WoW offers choice despite generally being considered a theme park by most mmo bloggers and reviewers. And it is certainly true that there are options available in WoW. Although the most common path is to follow quests, players can choose to ignore the quests and grind mobs. Players could also put together a regular group to crawl instances or exclusively use the dungeon finder and complete instances with PUGs. At a certain point, though I cannot recall when, PvP becomes another viable option. Similarly, WoW does allow for players to choose the zones they visit. Once getting out of your racial start zone, there are frequently multiple options about where to go next. There is not a single clear path that forces everyone to be in the same zone for the same level like there is in Forsaken World. So with all these choices, why does the general consensus firmly place WoW in the theme park column? Because all of these choices come with obvious limitations. Although there are options about how to play, all of those options reach the same end: leveling your character and acquiring better equipment. No matter how someone plays WoW, the goal remains the same. Even when I imagine a player that gets joy primarily from exploration, visiting every in-game location still requires leveling up and getting new equipment. Locations are designed for certain level ranges, and while there may not be something stopping a player from visiting higher level zones, players are not able to explore and survive unless they are in the right range for that zone. The choice of where and how to level is governed by the character’s level throughout the game. No matter what a player focuses on, leveling and new equipment will either be the end result or a necessary step along the way. When I look at a sandbox, I find it more difficult to generalize all the goals with a single end as I have with WoW. Although I have heard it said that the goal is still more power, the difference is in the definition of power. In WoW, power will nearly always refer to character level and gearscore. Some might describe power as the amount of gold they possess, but again this goal is governed by character level (higher levels acquire more gold and more valuable crafting materials) and just like character level, there is even a cap that forces players to cease pursuing gold as a game goal. So far the difference between a sandbox and a theme park MMO seems related to choice, the nature of those choices, and the limitations placed on those choices. This is far from the complete definition I’m searching for that clearly defines sandbox while excluding theme parks. But this blog is the longest I’ve written so far, and if anyone is still reading I’m amazed and impressed. Next, I will take a closer look at how “gaining power” is not a sufficient generalization for goals in a sandbox, or at the very least, how many different ways one can define “gaining power,” all while continuing to work toward a meaningful definition of sandbox. Part 2
When I last left off exploring this commonly used bit of mmo jargon, I had decided that “the difference between a sandbox and a theme park MMO seems related to choice, the nature of those choices, and the limitations placed on those choices.” I had also implicated that it is not just any choice that distinguishes between these types of games but more the ends of those choices. In theme parks, any choice in how and where to play inevitably leads to the same end: increasing character level and acquiring new gear. On the other hand, sandbox goals could possibly all lead to progressing character power, but that a sandbox allows variability in the definition of character power, rather than defining the power of all players, regardless of play style, by their character’s level and gear. In order to be perceived as a sandbox, MMOs must leave a lot of what defines success and power up to the player community. This leads to another misunderstanding regarding the meaning of sandbox: I’ve seen it written in many comment sections, likely by players who have not enjoyed current or past sandbox offerings, that “sandbox is just another word for no content.” While I can, and certainly will before this series is over, debate what counts as content, I believe most people making this statement refer to quests and other such content that provides story. While many games thought of as sandboxes have lacked any dev-driven story-based missions, I do not believe this lack actually is necessary to remain a sandbox. However, for the game to feel like a sandbox, this content should be at most of equal importance to player-driven content. Of course, I’m left with the burden of explaining player-driven content in such a way that does not specify exactly what that type of content might be. I’m going to tentatively claim that player-driven content that enables players to personally define what is meant by power progression generally consists of game mechanics that allow players to permanently affect the game world for all players. This can be anything from player built towns to war over territory to obtaining and monopolizing a resource. Other players should be able to see what you have done and be affected by it. However, and this is a big however, player actions that have an effect on others does not, does not, does not require traditional combat PvP. I simply mean that the passage of player A through the game world has the potential to change what player B will find or do when she wanders through the same areas later. The world is not static, nor is it phased — whatever I see, you see, he sees, and she sees. Coming back to the metaphor of theme park versus sandbox, in an actual theme park I am free to enjoy the rides, but if I were to attempt to change or modify them in some way, I’m sure I’d be arrested for some sort of crime. On the other hand, when we give our children sandboxes, we encourage them to change its initial state, a smooth plane of sand, into whatever catches their fancy. When the streetlights come on, we will tell the child it is time to come inside, but otherwise, there is no point in which we say to the child “You’re done. You’ve won the sandbox. You’ve created all the castles you can create.” Children outgrow sandboxes, but they do not “finish the sandbox.” There is no defined end — success is defined by the child. And such is also true of character power in a sandbox. It will be defined differently by every individual depending on what segment of the game’s mechanics most interest the player. It might be traditional combat power, but it can also be social, political, or financial. There’s quite a bit for me to chew on here, never mind anyone reading along, so again I will stop and let it stew. Apparently, I am locking down my thoughts on the topic as I write them, so I will likely put all of these posts together in a more refined, united article with its own tab, eventually. Next time I will go back to freedom of choice and oppose it to another ill-defined bit of gaming jargon: “linearity.” That next entry will likely spend more time defining “linear” games than sandboxes. But someday I will get to a final definition of some kind, I swear. Part 3
As I mentioned elsewhere, Part 3 was intended to pick up right where Part 2 left off, but in the meantime, I’ve stumbled onto some of the same misconceptions repeatedly. I will come back to where that argument left off the next time I return to this idea. Instead, I’m going to do a quick bullet list.
I wanted a few more bullets, but these seem to be the most common objections to the idea of sandboxes that I see around the internet. When I read these objections, I hear in my head: “I played a sandbox MMO or two where [insert misconception from above is true] and I am incapable of understanding that what has been done is not all that can be done.” Once again, “anything is possible except staying static” is not an ending to the conversation, it’s the beginning. The inability to understand that is an unfortunate flaw of many gamers, most of whom will likely jump on an innovative game that does things they claimed would never happen without ever becoming aware they’ve been proved wrong. |
|
|
2/29/12 11:35:27 AM#57
Whew! Quite the read, but well worth it. I especially enjoyed the part : " Coming back to the metaphor of theme park versus sandbox, in an actual theme park I am free to enjoy the rides, but if I were to attempt to change or modify them in some way, I’m sure I’d be arrested for some sort of crime. On the other hand, when we give our children sandboxes, we encourage them to change its initial state, a smooth plane of sand, into whatever catches their fancy. When the streetlights come on, we will tell the child it is time to come inside, but otherwise, there is no point in which we say to the child “You’re done. You’ve won the sandbox. You’ve created all the castles you can create.” Children outgrow sandboxes, but they do not “finish the sandbox.” " ...as that neatly sums up what I feel is the core difference. Thank you. There is no hard, set in stone, ruleset stating 'this shall be Sandbox and no other!' and that is probably why so many people argue the terms. Again thank you. (That could almost be a degree dissertation, lol ) |
|
|
2/29/12 11:38:21 AM#58
What we need is some news that says this game is officially coming to the states sometime soon. If this game waits until 2013 to get here, it's going to have a lot more competition. |
|
|
2/29/12 4:32:24 PM#59
Originally posted by Fusion Pretty clever setup in my opinion ... |
|
|
2/29/12 4:33:43 PM#60
Originally posted by MindTrigger Like what? Only MMOs on my radar are The Repopulation, Planetside 2 , and this game. Don't really see any other competition getting my money when the rest are WoW clones on the horizon... |
|
Friends: vgchartz.com
Not a member? You can still subscribe to our newsletters and daily updates here!
May 22, 2013 10:02 PM
- Page Created in 0.953 seconds -
