Going on to mention swtor made him feel part of a larger story worried me a bit, as I thought that since I'd finished it in two weeks (was hoping it would last a lot longer, 5 years in development for 2 weeks of story?) it wasn't really such a winning choice in a game designed to provide longevity - especially as in swtors case the rest of the game is a shallow bare bones clone.

I'd had hopes for this game considering his gaming background, and apparently doing it out of passion rather than purely in search of profit but I'm starting to worry they just plopped down a block of WoW shaped game and said 'Right, so how do we push *this* further?', rather than choosing their own jumping off point based on the history of mmos & rpgs and even some creativity.

Yeah it's a big assumption on my part, and I'd love to be surprised, but as all we really get these days are homages to WoW in one form or another, I was seriously hoping for an experience that was more than another WoW with a gimmick or two tacked on.

You know, a new game for a change. Or even a clone of anything else as a worst case scenario.

I'm not a sandbox purist but I certainly appreciate freedom in MMOs as without a doubt they've created the most memorable experiences for me, but the main gist of this was.1) Don't get your hopes up regarding any amount of freedom 2.) An appreciation for swtors limited story telling with no longevity in someone that probably has a very large say in how the game evolves is a warning flag. 

I fully admit this is mostly me playing devils advocate, but as this games been on my radar for years I'm naturally concerned (considering how little we've seen of anything) that in the end it's just going to be another clunky (if Reckoning is any indication - I liked it and loved the world a lot, but that was in spite of it's clunky controls rather than because of them) WoW clone/task hub grind.

We *reeaally* don't need another one of those.

Please tell me there's a reason to keep paying attention, and if you could answer 'How?' to the below quote it would be greatly appreciated.

''What if we made you feel different, special? Then made the world something epic and awesome, then made you important in that, then made you matter in the future of that.



All of that wrapped up in an extremely polished and fun game...''

I've personally felt more important in games pre-WoW, where there was room to let the stories of my friends and I unfold, rather than having something pre-canned shoved down my throat (Oh, and now every single other player of the same class also has that exact same personal story shoved down theirs). So we're all wearing the same quest rewards, all identical, and all had identical experiences. Plus we all know exactly where we'll be, what we'll be doing and what we'll be wearing in two weeks because the linear themepark games are so carefully mapped out in terms of progression that there are no happy surprises anymore. No thanks. Sure that's a lot easier to develop for, but seriously, does that sound appealing? Does that sound like a good place for people in a creative field to end up in?

 I would love to be completely wrong and find out I've completely misinterpreted everything, I'd seriously appreciate nothing more regarding this game. But as it stands, this game may be slipping out of my top 3 to watch for the first time in years. 

A great game is a great game regardless of my preferences, I'm open to trying new things, I would love something new right about now. What I'm not open to is another linear task hub grind in a fantasy world devoid of any risk or danger in which everyones a winner every second of every day, we have enough of those. I don't care what gimmick or two get tacked on, I'm not interested.

In the end, I'd love to not be disappointed, but I'll stop holding my breath now.

(Edit: Wow that sounded so harsh on a second reading. Keep in mind, as I said, I'm mostly playing devils advocate and voicing my fears based on primarily my blind assumptions.)

First of all its REALLY nice to see a game developer team who come clean on what their game won't be.

TOR failed to do that, most of newly released games fail to do that, so its nice to seesomeone who can still see the customers through all the pr pollution and does not try to rely on promises they can't keep.

That said, there's nothing wrong with traditional mmo classes or combat. 

Its part of the reason why MMO genre is MMO genre.

Having all those nasty and big "the new thing" mmos out there is good. But it is nice that for at least once we are getting an "oldschool mmo" that is not trying to be "uber edgy action" and might possibly reinvigorate and reinvent the genre of traditional mmo games. 

Sure "traditional mmo" includes WOW. But it also includes Everquest. DAOC, Lord of The Rings Online and dozens of other flavors. 

If Project Copernicus manages to invent a new flavor of a traditional mmo, I am all for it. 

Originally posted by KingGator

Originally posted by Razeekster

You guys are bashing a game that hasn't even come out yet based on a guys words. So sure it may be the same as other mmos, but why does that mean it's going to be a bad game? Something like EverQuest sounds pretty great to me. It means the  graphics will be way better and therefore much more fun to play.

 

My first mmo was eq1, curt was a huge fan, I am sure his mmo will resemble eq1, and I am ok with that as I was a fan as well.

hes an even bigger wow fan

KOA looks like WOW for gods sake.

Originally posted by ShakyMo

Originally posted by KingGator

Originally posted by Razeekster

You guys are bashing a game that hasn't even come out yet based on a guys words. So sure it may be the same as other mmos, but why does that mean it's going to be a bad game? Something like EverQuest sounds pretty great to me. It means the  graphics will be way better and therefore much more fun to play.

 

My first mmo was eq1, curt was a huge fan, I am sure his mmo will resemble eq1, and I am ok with that as I was a fan as well.

hes an even bigger wow fan

KOA looks like WOW for gods sake.

The first thing I thought when I playes it was "It's like WoW, without all the goddamn people!"

I will say that if the MMO uses KoA's combat system I will like that at least. But the rest..meh.

Originally posted by ShakyMo

Originally posted by KingGator

Originally posted by Razeekster

You guys are bashing a game that hasn't even come out yet based on a guys words. So sure it may be the same as other mmos, but why does that mean it's going to be a bad game? Something like EverQuest sounds pretty great to me. It means the  graphics will be way better and therefore much more fun to play.

 

My first mmo was eq1, curt was a huge fan, I am sure his mmo will resemble eq1, and I am ok with that as I was a fan as well.

hes an even bigger wow fan

KOA looks like WOW for gods sake.

I don't quite think so, but if it does what's wrong with that?

It sounds to me like he plans a sandbox - themepark hybrid.  I find that interesting.  I also appreciate that he comes out right from the beginning and says what the game won't be.  Part of having a goal, plan, and a good design is knowing what you will and won't be doing.  It sounds to me like they have a good idea of what they want to make and are inviting those with similar tastes to come along and letting those who don't move on.  Too bad more devs and studios don't do this rather than convince me their game is the second coming cancer cure and that I must absolutely play it (read waste $80 and a month of my time).

I think it is kind of weird to come out and say all the things it won't but not put a carrot on what it will be. Marketing is probably not happy with that message. Even if that is not the what he intended, that is how it sounds like.

Not going to right off a game that has no info on it yet, but it does make me more cautious because all i am hearing is the things its not going to be and to not bother with the game if i don't like. Very defensive and negative tone to that message.

Originally posted by Yeandra

I think it is kind of weird to come out and say all the things it won't but not put a carrot on what it will be. Marketing is probably not happy with that message. Even if that is not the what he intended, that is how it sounds like.

Not going to right off a game that has no info on it yet, but it does make me more cautious because all i am hearing is the things its not going to be and to not bother with the game if i don't like. Very defensive and negative tone to that message.

I agree, especially considering that aside from some vague concept art, the names of people attatched to the project, and a single player game, that was somewhat lacking, set in the same world, we've seen nothing - after how many years? I might be wrong, but wasn't it 2007 that we first heard of Project Copernicus?

Now we know it won't have combat as we see it in Reckoning, so what's left that sets this game apart? Even Reckoning overall looked decidedly influenced by World of Warcraft, but somewhat less professional in a few small areas. 

Obviously there are quite a few waiting to see what exactly they're bringing to a field saturated with clones, that's soon to be populated with Guild Wars 2 and a new WoW expansion amongst other new releases, that will make it worth any consideration. 

That we've heard nothing but clarification regarding what it won't deliver is troubling - and it's slated to release this year?

How many times have we shaken our heads trying to fathom the thought process that leads to yet another WoW clone linear task hub grind, only to arrive at money as the perpetuator of rehashed crap in the name of profit? I assumed as the game evolved as the project of someone with apparently very little monetary motive that we'd see a project born of honest passion. If that was me and I was truly proud of what we'd created, I would probably be a bit more forthcoming regarding what players can expect, rather than what we're failing to deliver. Surely it must be something new? Anyone not purely out for profit above all else wouldn't waste time offering us a different shade of what we already have a hundred times over. Although that's likely wishful thinking.

It's all a bit worrying really. I'm interested to see more but bracing myself for the gut wrenching deflation that comes with finding out it's truly another WoW clone after all - BUT with rifts/voice-overs/public quests/any other ultimately inconsequential gimmick tacked on.

One last edit: If, however, this game does result in a situation similar to Reckoning in which I did feel I could, to some extent, just stumble into mini adventures, a large part of me will be appeased. I just can't tolerate another led by the collar game that plays like a tutorial from start to finish. That is of course if the combat isn't as easy as it was in Reckoning - seriously, fights I'm guaranteed to win even on the hardest setting are *not* fun for long, it's like playing with cheats enabled.

First off, EQ is a themepark, it was the first one, many developers have expanded upon the original design quite a bit, but still they all have their beginnings based in EQ.

If any of you played Curt's single player rpg you will get the flavor of what his company is probably doing with the MMO.  The single player game was not good at all.

Did not expect a sandbox, but what he is describing is another themepark, there are far too many of them out there now.  Jumping into such a crowded market with a product that does not really differentiate itself is just dumb.  

Curt's description of UO's skill system was ignorant.  Sure there was some less than useful skills, but there were plenty of different builds that were very playable.   He condemns a skill system when he does not understand how it works.

He can go ahead and make his better EQ, but it has already been done many times before.  It is just very disappointing another opportunity to expand the genre will not happen.

After their sad attempt at a single RPG i would not take anything these guy say seriously.

Originally posted by Ozmodan

First off, EQ is a themepark, it was the first one, many developers have expanded upon the original design quite a bit, but still they all have their beginnings based in EQ.

If any of you played Curt's single player rpg you will get the flavor of what his company is probably doing with the MMO.  The single player game was not good at all.

Did not expect a sandbox, but what he is describing is another themepark, there are far too many of them out there now.  Jumping into such a crowded market with a product that does not really differentiate itself is just dumb.  

Curt's description of UO's skill system was ignorant.  Sure there was some less than useful skills, but there were plenty of different builds that were very playable.   He condemns a skill system when he does not understand how it works.

He can go ahead and make his better EQ, but it has already been done many times before.  It is just very disappointing another opportunity to expand the genre will not happen.

I wouldn't put EQ into the main stream themepark catogory,it was not WOW.EQ was also a skilled based MMO with feature you would not find in a themepark mmo today.

Sometimes i wonder if the people calling EQ a themepark actually played the game.

Dropping items on the ground,compas,sence heading,kick and many more skill based skills.Getting quest in EQ was far from themepark.

I can say 100% that everyone who tried old school EQ now would be lost to the point of giving up.What quests their was would make most rage quit just trying to figure out how to actually get the quest of an npc without asking another player.

I could go on and on..

Originally posted by Sylvarii

Originally posted by Ozmodan

First off, EQ is a themepark, it was the first one, many developers have expanded upon the original design quite a bit, but still they all have their beginnings based in EQ.

If any of you played Curt's single player rpg you will get the flavor of what his company is probably doing with the MMO.  The single player game was not good at all.

Did not expect a sandbox, but what he is describing is another themepark, there are far too many of them out there now.  Jumping into such a crowded market with a product that does not really differentiate itself is just dumb.  

Curt's description of UO's skill system was ignorant.  Sure there was some less than useful skills, but there were plenty of different builds that were very playable.   He condemns a skill system when he does not understand how it works.

He can go ahead and make his better EQ, but it has already been done many times before.  It is just very disappointing another opportunity to expand the genre will not happen.

I wouldn't put EQ into the main stream themepark catogory,it was not WOW.EQ was also a skilled based MMO with feature you would not find in a themepark mmo today.

Sometimes i wonder if the people calling EQ a themepark actually played the game.

Dropping items on the ground,compas,sence heading,kick and many more skill based skills.Getting quest in EQ was far from themepark.

I can say 100% that everyone who tried old school EQ now would be lost to the point of giving up.What quests their was would make most rage quit just trying to figure out how to actually get the quest of an npc without asking another player.

I could go on and on..

 

Of course it was a themepark.  You went from level appropriate area to level appropriate area to kill things.  Then once you hit level cap you tried to get better gear or go to the high level zones later on to grind aa.  The level appropriate areas overlapped quite a bit more than in todays games and EQ had a ton of different places to level at, but you still have level appropriate areas to level in.  There was no building anything permanent, it had a very robust crafting system and that was the closest thing the game had to a sandbox element.  It was not a skill based game, it was level based.  You did get better as you used your weapons or magic or other abilities, but that would be like saying vanilla wow was skill based because you had to level your weapon skill.

After Kingdoms of Amular, there's no way i'd touch anything by these yo-yo's.

If I'd wanted a singleplayer WoW, I'd have just solo'ed WoW and got the real experience.

Well, the thing is, sandbox games *have* been done, and they haven't revolutionized the industry.

UO was sandbox. EQ practically steamrolled it.

SWG was sandbox. WOW steamrolled it.

And all of them were as high-profile games as they came in their time. The industry seems to keep going right back to theme parks - so we'll probably just have to accept that the general MMO playerbase leans towards themepark gameplay... Here's hoping it's also OK with a balanced mix of both.

About Copernicus... I like what I've read there. I don't care about sandbox per se, I care about the feeling of a world. If the game manages to do that without being a sandbox, I'm OK with that. I also have no problems with levels or classes, I just want them to mean something - so hopefully no 4-day rush to cap and no mirror classes. :)

Basic mmo with a twist of lemon. I have heard this before but I just can't remember where....

If themeparks were all as loose and open as EQ then I wouldn't feel trapped when playing them.

There were level appropriate areas, but there was no linear path between the vast number of them scattered all around the world. To me, it was undoubtedly more sandbox as your entire experience wasn't dictated at all, I could level up multiple times by randomly exploring places and not repeat areas.

Let's not forget the large level range EQ content allowed for, which added to the open feeling. It was no where near as limited in regard to character level as many games.

So while EQ did have areas with level ranges, those ranges were so large that if you found yourself there, you most likely could take part in the content.

It was a very loose theme park at most, but the unguided open ended world certainly made for a more sandbox experience.

The world was there, the content was there, but players had a lot more choice in how & when they approached it than in standard 'themeparks'. In fact it was probably more sandbox with some themepark components. 

Originally posted by solarine

Well, the thing is, sandbox games *have* been done, and they haven't revolutionized the industry.

UO was sandbox. EQ practically steamrolled it.

SWG was sandbox. WOW steamrolled it.

And all of them were as high-profile games as they came in their time. The industry seems to keep going right back to theme parks - so we'll probably just have to accept that the general MMO playerbase leans towards themepark gameplay... Here's hoping it's also OK with a balanced mix of both.

About Copernicus... I like what I've read there. I don't care about sandbox per se, I care about the feeling of a world. If the game manages to do that without being a sandbox, I'm OK with that. I also have no problems with levels or classes, I just want them to mean something - so hopefully no 4-day rush to cap and no mirror classes. :)

 

I don't know if it's fair to compare a buggy, unpolished game that had serious issues to one that's highly regarded as the most polished game in MMO history and turn around and declare that  one was more successful because it was linear rather than open ended.

That just doesn't seem like a realistic assessment of their strengths and weaknesses.

I could easily say that SWG was more successful than Alganon because it was a sandbox rather than a themepark, but I wouldn't for a second believe that was the real reason.

I would also doubt too many people that chose EQ over UO or UO over EQ would site 'Sandbox' or 'Themepark' as the reason. One was first person, one was top down, one was strongly PvP one was strongly PvE. I'd bet those reasons would be sited as stronger influences than sandbox or themepark, which hadn't even been fully defined at that time anyway.

Originally posted by niceguy3978

Of course it was a themepark.  You went from level appropriate area to level appropriate area to kill things.  Then once you hit level cap you tried to get better gear or go to the high level zones later on to grind aa.  The level appropriate areas overlapped quite a bit more than in todays games and EQ had a ton of different places to level at, but you still have level appropriate areas to level in.  There was no building anything permanent, it had a very robust crafting system and that was the closest thing the game had to a sandbox element.  It was not a skill based game, it was level based.  You did get better as you used your weapons or magic or other abilities, but that would be like saying vanilla wow was skill based because you had to level your weapon skill.

I guess it all depends on how you describe things. I would rate none of the MMO's before WoW a themepark MMO, while WoW and a lot of other MMO's after WoW were definitely themepark MMO's.

It was skill based in the sense that you had to know your spells well and had to be able to do teamwork well even in the simpler, basic encounters, because you could die really fast otherwise. Encounters brought you closer and faster to losing your health points than WoW or a lot of MMO's after WoW. That's why you had to pay more attention to the fights, they were more challenging and being skilled did make a difference in either dying or staying alive.

EQ also had no real quest leveling like WoW styled themepark MMO's are known for. Sure, there were quests, but even sandbox MMO's have some quests.

EQ was harsh for the newcomer, there was no tutorial, no question marks or easy map that would guide you from quest hub to quest hub, and death was unforgiving, losing XP and having to run from your last bind point all the way to where you died in order to get your equipment back. Basically, you got dropped into the game and from there on you had to figure out what you wanted to do and where you wanted to go.

Those are all traits that are uncharacteristic or lacking at all in themepark MMO's as we've gotten to know them since WoW.

Besides, I have never heard anyone call EQ a themepark MMORPG when it launched and the years after its launch. WoW was the first MMORPG where I started to hear that term, and more and more often since then.

Curt may have been an EQ fan but he is on record saying he prefers WoW and thinks it was a better game and more fun.

Copernicus is going to be another WoW clone. Its going to be generic (like KoA Reckoning) and dull. Book it

Originally posted by BilboDoggins

Curt may have been an EQ fan but he is on record saying he prefers WoW and thinks it was a better game and more fun.

 

Copernicus is going to be another WoW clone. Its going to be generic (like KoA Reckoning) and dull. Book it

KoA being generic and dull is an opinion.

Also why can't we just stop using the term WoW clone?    As its inaccurate and lends nothing to a description of a game.

I personally think kingdoms is a great game, it is what Fable always should have been, it takes elements that WORK from many games and puts them together in its own way, with a great story and riveting game play.

Does it reinvent the wheel?  No.

Does it make a great wheel?  Yes.

I find many reviewers can't wait to step themselves from having fun with prejudiced ideas and quick to judge attitudes.