Yes, it is really the lack of alternatives that is the problem, not the themeparks in themselves.

The fact that almost all MMOs are so similar annoys a lot of people and while you can make themeparks very different in quality and mechanics few studios bother.

Most people doesn´t actually care if a game is a themepark or a sandbox, they just want a good game. Which is hard enough to find.

Originally posted by Loke666

Yes, it is really the lack of alternatives that is the problem, not the themeparks in themselves.

The fact that almost all MMOs are so similar annoys a lot of people and while you can make themeparks very different in quality and mechanics few studios bother.

Most people doesn´t actually care if a game is a themepark or a sandbox, they just want a good game. Which is hard enough to find.

Its not that they're similar, most aren't, but people who don't like them bunch them up under same label ("x-clone"). Smart people know that Rift is not the same as WoW, but people that dislike both don't bother making any distiction.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by Wolfenpride

Can't be that bad since people keep playing them.

But yes, I have been staying away from most modern themeparks. They're focusing to much on soloplay.

Aion - Free to play

AoC - Free to play

STO - Free to play

CO - Free to play

LOTRO - Free to play

EQ2 - Free to play

DCUO - Free to play

WAR - Free to play

I mean sure.... people play themeparks in there current state, but not enough seem to stick around for the game to be profitable off of subs.

But nah, I'm just playing devils advocate here. I'm actually looking forward to a themepark GW2 :P

Your post is a commentary more on a shift in pereferred payment method than it is on preferred type of game.

If they weren't all converted to f2p because they failed to perform as pay to plays maybe. It's not like they said, well the f2p model is better so we will switch. Players were leaving and revenue was dropping.

Many didn't find most themeparks worth paying for, but many don't mind playing if they are free.

I can't speak for the other games, but in the case of LOTRO they actually did make the decision to switch because free to play was gaining traction in NA/EU markets. LOTRO was designed and sold with free to play in mind.

Again, you're still pointing out that it was the business model not the game that caused the change, because if the games were a failure they would still be a failure after the shift to free to play. In some cases they are, in others (ex: EQ2, LOTRO, Aion) it was obvious that the target audience preferred the microtransaction model over subscription. Your point would be made by a list of games that closed, not by a list of games that are doing better under a different business model.

 

Nah, LOTRO was losing subs and competition was growing. A few heavy titles were on the way and they made the switch to f2p to compete. If they could have continued making a profit with the pay to play model they would have.

And I'm glad they are doing better because they were all on the verge of shutting down without the switch. At least in the NA/EU market.

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by Loke666

Yes, it is really the lack of alternatives that is the problem, not the themeparks in themselves.

The fact that almost all MMOs are so similar annoys a lot of people and while you can make themeparks very different in quality and mechanics few studios bother.

Most people doesn´t actually care if a game is a themepark or a sandbox, they just want a good game. Which is hard enough to find.

Its not that they're similar, most aren't, but people who don't like them bunch them up under same label ("x-clone"). Smart people know that Rift is not the same as WoW, but people that dislike both don't bother making any distiction.

They still uses a lot of the same mechanics, trinity combat, questing, skills go on cooldown, levels and a whole other bunch of similarites. They are different as well, Rift have just 4 classes with a lot of customization to mention one thing but you still find so many similarites compared to the differences.

Being the same is not the same as similar, but a Wow player recognizes almost everything in Rift and learn the games really fast.

Compare it to pen and paper RPGs that uses a myriad of different mechanics.

My point is that themeparks should try ut more new things, that would lower the themepark hate a lot.

You don´t have to use any special mechanics for a themepark at all. You don´t really need levels, trinitty combat, classes or whateverand it is a lot easier to find something you like if they are doing different things instead of basically the same.

They aren't bad they are just tired and worn out.  They need something fresh, something to stimulate the sub genre.  It's all subjective though.  I've been playing MMOs since birth of Ultima Online so my opinions are purely anecdotal.  When I think "MMO" or want to play one I think of a seemless open world ready to explore, ready to socialize, no rules, just a virtual world with endless possibilties and options.  Call that what you want. 

Themeparks have always been a hard sale to me.  I never really understood why they were even called MMOs, or even had a monthly fee.  To me they are just glorified singleplayer experiences, with the option to play with some friends.  I can do that in a coop RPG or FPS with no monthly charge and without all the down time and waiting around.

No they are worse than bad utterly boring rubbish is best description for them .

Originally posted by Kitane

heh

Don't go by these forums. These forums have far too many nutbars that throw about the "sandbox mmo" term, but neglect the basic fact that a "sandbox mmo" simply isn't viable. It simply can't attract enough subscribers.

These people are hanging around the wrong genre, simple as that.

Utter nonsense swg was doing fine until they tried to change it into a wow clone .

Originally posted by GPrestige

So, after frequenting these forums I get the impression that people are not happy with themepark MMOs. [...]

SOME people here are sandbox fans, yes. Their main pastime on this site: complaining that theres no good sandbox around. Except maybe EVE. And the original Ultima Online. And there was, once, the original SWG, before the NGE disaster ...

... personally I have informed myself about SWG and found out pretty fast that I would never have wanted to play it, NGE or not. EVE is just nothing that makes me really interested in the first place. As a singleplayer where I could explore a huge galaxy, preferably as a Jedi or something - sure. But a huge economy simulation ? Ugh, thanks but no, thanks. And Ultima Online has hopelessly outdated graphics anyway.

I play games for entertainment. Not for having another job - one is enough, thanks. I want a nice story told to me. Thus I prefer themeparks.

Originally posted by GPrestige

When it comes down to it, do you think that themepark MMOs are boring in general, or that they could be good, but are just executed poorly?

I prefer themeparks over sandboxes, but yes, what I get described here about some themeparks is frightening. I certainly dont want "gaming on rails". If I want that, I could play Tomb Raider, I dont need a MMO for that.

I want themeparks like Vanguard: many different quest areas at any level, and a huge gameworld to explore. Quite frankly VG has still not enough of the later, for my taste.

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by Wolfenpride

Can't be that bad since people keep playing them.

But yes, I have been staying away from most modern themeparks. They're focusing to much on soloplay.

Aion - Free to play

AoC - Free to play

STO - Free to play

CO - Free to play

LOTRO - Free to play

EQ2 - Free to play

DCUO - Free to play

WAR - Free to play

I mean sure.... people play themeparks in there current state, but not enough seem to stick around for the game to be profitable off of subs.

But nah, I'm just playing devils advocate here. I'm actually looking forward to a themepark GW2 :P

WAR is not Free to play.....

Originally posted by GPrestige

So, after frequenting these forums I get the impression that people are not happy with themepark MMOs. I personally have begun to get bored of certain aspects of the themepark-style MMO, such as repetitiveness... but I do not hate it like I see a lot of people here do.

What I want to know is if people actually HATE themepark MMOs, or they are just sick of seeing that a majority of MMOs coming out fit into that category. A lot of MMOs that have been released in the last few years seem to have something wrong with them, but the themepark complaint seems to only be pre-release. Post-release, people completely forget about it, and start to complain about something else.

 

When it comes down to it, do you think that themepark MMOs are boring in general, or that they could be good, but are just executed poorly?

That is the problem..you base your opinion of multi million MMO business and what is in demand or not on basis of these forums.

I think a lot of people dont hate every possible themepark. But the problem is that they are all the same. And also that some general MMORPG features that could be part of a Themepark are missing. Because those features are not mainstream enough, not streamlined enough, are to harsh, to hardcore or to tedious and so on... The games are really action multiplayer games and not true MMORPG:s.

I still think a Themepark can be a good game.

Originally posted by manakana

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by Wolfenpride

Can't be that bad since people keep playing them.

But yes, I have been staying away from most modern themeparks. They're focusing to much on soloplay.

Aion - Free to play

AoC - Free to play

STO - Free to play

CO - Free to play

LOTRO - Free to play

EQ2 - Free to play

DCUO - Free to play

WAR - Free to play

I mean sure.... people play themeparks in there current state, but not enough seem to stick around for the game to be profitable off of subs.

But nah, I'm just playing devils advocate here. I'm actually looking forward to a themepark GW2 :P

WAR is not Free to play.....

Is it really worth having more than level 10 twinks?

Originally posted by Kitane

heh

Don't go by these forums. These forums have far too many nutbars that throw about the "sandbox mmo" term, but neglect the basic fact that a "sandbox mmo" simply isn't viable. It simply can't attract enough subscribers.

These people are hanging around the wrong genre, simple as that.

The thing is, developers aim too high for subscriber numbers. Games like Darkfall have a tiny population in comparison to the AAA themeparks, yet it is making a profit.

I think a sandbox  should require much less developer resources to create as you don't have to focus on story and quests. You just create a world and players do their own thing. And if you attract only 100k players, then you run it on just a few servers and let it chug along.

I predict that in 10 years time, when we have 3 gazillion MMOs out there, developers will have to be content with a smalled sub base in any case.

Originally posted by tuppe99

Originally posted by Kitane

heh

Don't go by these forums. These forums have far too many nutbars that throw about the "sandbox mmo" term, but neglect the basic fact that a "sandbox mmo" simply isn't viable. It simply can't attract enough subscribers.

These people are hanging around the wrong genre, simple as that.

The thing is, developers aim too high for subscriber numbers. Games like Darkfall have a tiny population in comparison to the AAA themeparks, yet it is making a profit.

I think a sandbox is should take much less resources to create as you don't have to focus on story and quests. You just create a world and players do their own thing. And if you attract only 100k players, then you run it on just a few servers and let it chug along.

I predict that in 10 years time, when we have 3 gazillion MMOs out there, developers will have to be content with a smalled sub base in any case.

It depends upon investment and yes DF is a low budget sandbox. If there was a demand for AAA Sandbox title you think developers wouldn't make it? who would want to sink millions into a project only because some people complain on forums about themepark MMOS?

Low budgest and shoddy production values is what we get with sandbox titles. MO is barely surviving, DF is going down under to re surface as DF 2.0 which is tryign to attract more casual players. Earth Rise was shut down. Ryzom has been re surrected twice..Xyson is barely surviving and so many other sandbox titles which are just forgotten.

Prime another example of 3 faction sandbox titles which couldn't even complete its development and is dead even before release. How many examples do players need to see the obvious truth?

Eve Online is the only exception to the rule but then again it is not your typical sandbox run  of a mill MMO.

Originally posted by Hurvart

I think a lot of people dont hate every possible themepark. But the problem is that they are all the same. And also that some general MMORPG features that could be part of a Themepark are missing. Because those features are not mainstream enough, not streamlined enough, are to harsh, to hardcore or to tedious and so on... The games are really action multiplayer games and not true MMORPG:s.

I still think a Themepark can be a good game.

A true MMORPG is themepark. If you're talking about RPGs.  There are only 2 popular sandbox games, and neither of them would be considered an RPG if you took the multiplayer aspect away.

If you were playing a solo game, and the whole game was about building a house or a city, guess what, u're not playing an RPG, youre playing either a simulation or a strategy game.  This is like complaining about having more jumping puzzles in the game or the game should be more like a platform game.  

I keep hearing people say "i want to write my own story".  HOw in the world are you writing your own story building a house, what story did u write?  U got wood to build a house it got stolen?  That sounds like an awful story compared to i slayed the big ole dragon and saved the world. 

Originally posted by Chrome1980

It depends upon investment and yes DF is a low budget sandbox. If there was a demand for AAA Sandbox title you think developers wouldn't make it? who would want to sink millions into a project only because some people complain on forums about themepark MMOS?

Low budgest and shoddy production values is what we get with sandbox titles. MO is barely surviving, DF is goign down udner to re surface as DF 2.0 which is tryign to attract more casual players. Earth Rise was shut down.

Eve Online is the only exception to the rule but then again it is not your typical sandbox run  of a mill MMO.

Wondering what your typical sandbox run of the mill MMO would be? I think the point of sandbox is they don't have to follow a set rule, offering content a and content b. As to your other question who would want to sink millions into a sandbox project? CCP, again. World of Darkness Online if it comes out (hope!).

Originally posted by Adamantine
EVE is just nothing that makes me really interested in the first place. As a singleplayer where I could explore a huge galaxy, preferably as a Jedi or something - sure. But a huge economy simulation ? Ugh, thanks but no, thanks.

Originally posted by Emwyn

Originally posted by Chrome1980

It depends upon investment and yes DF is a low budget sandbox. If there was a demand for AAA Sandbox title you think developers wouldn't make it? who would want to sink millions into a project only because some people complain on forums about themepark MMOS?

Low budgest and shoddy production values is what we get with sandbox titles. MO is barely surviving, DF is goign down udner to re surface as DF 2.0 which is tryign to attract more casual players. Earth Rise was shut down.

Eve Online is the only exception to the rule but then again it is not your typical sandbox run  of a mill MMO.

Wondering what your typical sandbox run of the mill MMO would be? I think the point of sandbox is they don't have to follow a set rule, offering content a and content b. As to your other question who would want to sink millions into a sandbox project? CCP, again. World of Darkness Online if it comes out (hope!).

A typical sandbox would be FFA pvp set in fantasy settings (add permadeath to it if you so desire)...and that is why EVE is a success because it is not a sandbox RPG in traditional sense.

Yes CCp with already one successful sandbox MMO under their belt who are again not making a typical FFA fanatsy sandbox with WOD.

Originally posted by Emwyn

Originally posted by Chrome1980

It depends upon investment and yes DF is a low budget sandbox. If there was a demand for AAA Sandbox title you think developers wouldn't make it? who would want to sink millions into a project only because some people complain on forums about themepark MMOS?

Low budgest and shoddy production values is what we get with sandbox titles. MO is barely surviving, DF is goign down udner to re surface as DF 2.0 which is tryign to attract more casual players. Earth Rise was shut down.

Eve Online is the only exception to the rule but then again it is not your typical sandbox run  of a mill MMO.

Wondering what your typical sandbox run of the mill MMO would be? I think the point of sandbox is they don't have to follow a set rule, offering content a and content b. As to your other question who would want to sink millions into a sandbox project? CCP, again. World of Darkness Online if it comes out (hope!).

Originally posted by Chrome1980

Originally posted by Emwyn

Originally posted by Chrome1980

It depends upon investment and yes DF is a low budget sandbox. If there was a demand for AAA Sandbox title you think developers wouldn't make it? who would want to sink millions into a project only because some people complain on forums about themepark MMOS?

Low budgest and shoddy production values is what we get with sandbox titles. MO is barely surviving, DF is goign down udner to re surface as DF 2.0 which is tryign to attract more casual players. Earth Rise was shut down.

Eve Online is the only exception to the rule but then again it is not your typical sandbox run  of a mill MMO.

Wondering what your typical sandbox run of the mill MMO would be? I think the point of sandbox is they don't have to follow a set rule, offering content a and content b. As to your other question who would want to sink millions into a sandbox project? CCP, again. World of Darkness Online if it comes out (hope!).

A typical sandbox would be FFA pvp set in fantasy settings (add permadeath to it if you so desire)...and that is why EVE is a success because it is not a sandbox RPG in traditional sense.

Yes CCp with already one successful sandbox MMO under their belt who are again not making a typical FFA fanatsy sandbox with WOD.

To be honest I am bored to tears with fantasy if you mean knights, dwarves, elves etc. SWG where did that fit in? RPG doesn't = fantasy.