Originally posted by Aermord

Its the same old story, you speak of the graphics and go all excited over players being able to switch sides and capture castles and keeps as if it's something 'new' or special. You speak of George R.R. Martin being involved in the project as a good thing. Trust me, it's not. He knows nothing about MMORPGs or games for that matter, just look at the Game of Thrones RTS that was released, he admitted as much on his website. Will HBO know? Or Bigpoint for that matter? - I think not.

There is a huge potential in Martin's story to make something truly big and different in a massive multiplayer online roleplaying game, but it will have to involve the word that seems to have been forgotten and watered down across the genre for years now - ROLEPLAYING!

In the books it's not the fighting thats important, it's the talking, the interaction between characters. In other words it is the game OF thrones where the characters use ALL means. It will be sickening to see when they implement quests in a game like this: "Go into the forest and kill ten wolves, kill 10 bandits, gather 15 logs of wood.. ooh how it will capture the spirit of the book and the show! It will be the same stupid stuff you see in -every other MMORPG- out there.

And the politics system? If you already went down the path of traditional WoW like MMORPGs then it will only be a watered down no good system. Developers have tried it before and failed every single time.

If they really want to capture the spirits of the book they should go down another path, but it's a path nobody dares to go because its untested waters. And why should they try to make something good (*cough* with permadeath *cough*) if you can stick with the old WoW model and be sure that the horde of zombies who wander around thinking that a MMORPG is only variations of that theme. It's not a theme park, you'll say. It's a sandbox! It doesnt matter, if the focus is on PVP on the battleground, guilds taking keeps and castles and if all the intrigue of the books and a good environment for -real- roleplay is forgotten, then it will still be the same old story.

Where are the people with true ambitions these days?

Where are the reviewers who wont swoon whenever they hear the words 'PVP', 'sandbox' and 'good graphics'?

And in a browser? Oooh.. We should be soo excited that it's in a browser? Sorry, I'll have to shake my head at that one, sit down and cry, and pray for a better world.

Anyone with true ambition and creativity had that beaten out of them in college.

Its funny how a browser game looks better than any sandbox released until now.

I loled at who the big houses were knowing how it all turns out.

If it's like the books you're better off just stickng to your own business.

Originally posted by 1carcarah1

Its funny how a browser game looks better than any sandbox released until now.

Originally posted by RefMinor

Originally posted by 1carcarah1

Its funny how a browser game looks better than any sandbox released until now.

 

Why, what does this look like?

  I'll ditto the request for screen shots. 

Originally posted by Venger

Originally posted by barezz

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?

 

Wow, no offense but really? I think what you guys are really looking for is a game not based around war and violence (think the SIMS mmo).  Even if you mostly PvE games like Wow and AoC are so much better on PvP servers IMO.  You should have to watch your back - after all these games are all about war.  I also feel like PvE only servers have really taken the instanced battlegrounds to a new level (sorry there is some puck in my mouth).

Non PvE is another way you dont have to interact with players, its another way MMO's are become Single player games with instanced grouping (pve and pvp).

    Now my comment above was not meant to be a jest.  If you dont like war and violence a sandbox game could be made where fighting or killing is not an option.  (the Sims or something like that - are there not korean sandbox games currently where people buy things get married etc..) 

Originally posted by AcmeGamer

Originally posted by RefMinor

Originally posted by 1carcarah1

Its funny how a browser game looks better than any sandbox released until now.

 

Why, what does this look like?

  I'll ditto the request for screen shots. 

 

 

Archage looks much better, but it wasnt released yet

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/121/1219721/a-game-of-thrones-mmo-20120229025727150-000.jpg

*Sees' its browser based and moves on*

Great news! The game can't come soon enough! Loved the books and the TV series! Now an MMO being developed!

Sweet!

Winter is coming.....

Also... Would it not be kinda... Unfair to the poor people choosing Stark... if they have any story progression in the game... .. . Just saying...

First BSG and now GoT.. how does Bigpoint Games manage to get these IP's just to ruin them?

Please do not judge the game model of "Sandbox" by piss poor companies like BigPoint making horrible messes of decent IPs.

This won't be a sandbox.

BigPoint will fail yet AGAIN with another large IP (look up BSG:Online, supposedly another "sandbox" by BigPoint).

The MMO market as a whole will reject them completely.

Hopefully BigPoint never gets another decent IP ever again.

:)

Looks awesome can't wait to try it!

Originally posted by Czanrei

Bigpoint = bad

Sandbox = good

Browser-based= bad

 

2/3 bad = bad

 

I'd add:

(VERY VERY likely) pay to win = bad

browser based = bad

and because its so bad that it deserves to count twice, BigPoint = bad

5/6 bad for me

not touching it with a hundred foot pole

looks good.:)

Browser games are the future in my opinion and unity already showed it.

Unity html5 w/e.. bring us those .

Sounds good, will wait for actual information to make any judgment.

Damnit. I read BigPoint and "not pay to win" and spit my coffee out. Sad that this IP is doomed to fail before it even gets started.

If hypothetically the scenery the political system etc etc will come true the game's success will be determined on one factor. Combat system. If it works its fluid and addicitve this game has a good chance to mark the mmorpg scenery like wow did on its own unique way ofc. Sandboxers could find find their wow and themepark lovers a good chance to try a quality sandbox mmorpg. Time will show as always what this game will be.

I don't knooooow, this whole thing smells fishy to me. Browser based? BigPoint?! What the hell is going on!