Originally posted by Lissyl

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by Kyleran

I despise those moderator created mega threads, and eschew them if at all possible.

Of course you do, you firmly believe in forum PvP, and starting your own thread is the highly preferred way to troll.

While I'll not take a stance regarding whether the OP is a troll or not...the mega-threads are pretty rough to actually participate in because of so many previous posts.

Anyhow.

I often see people hearken back to UO.  It's practically a requirement these days, and I'm pretty sure I've 'heard' from more UO vets than people who actually ever played the game, if you know what I mean.  But the demographic has shifted a lot since then.  I think the pvp is the problem - I know for certain it keeps myself and every other RL gamer I know out of plenty of games, and drives us away from many others.  Games that, with even some modicum of proper supervision, would be wonderful games for us.  I'm not talking about removing pvp as a functional entity, but things like 'any level any zerg' and that are hardcore turnoffs.  Twinking is another no-factor (of course, that falls under gear grind...but in a very specific way).

 

Someone, somewhere, has to have a more coherent system of pvp than 'kill the lowbie take the loot'.  Once that is found, I think you'll see a lot more people who would be interested in trying a sandbox. 

This.  I would be curious to see how a sandbox pvE game would do, or a snadbox game that had consensual VS forced PvP.  Pre CU SWG was that by design and it did pretty well, it was due to idiotic management and LA decisions that the NGE happened.  Even then, the game still had more "Pve" sandbox features such as the crafting, player cities, entertainer class, etc that it was able to survive the NGE and do fairly well.

I see sandbox game after sandbox game do poorly and one of the common factors seems to be this open world full loot pvp.  I know everyone loves to chest thump and talk about how great UO was, but I sure would be interested to see how a sandbox game that didn't force PvP on everyone would do.

Not saying to not have it, but make it a PvP on/off switch (naturally with some kind of timer or something to prevent exploits).  The biggest arguement I see against this kind of feature is usually "but then no one would ever turn it on QQ".  Honestly if that is the case, what does that say about the majority of players and open world PvP?

Sandbox design isn't the issue, the open world non consensual PvP part is.

Originally posted by Isasis

Every Sandbox released is quickly kicked to the ground and called terrible for having the exact things they want and they demand another with the exact same things again. People love sandbox, but when they can't get to the top in it, they will quickly ditch it. Its like capitalism, only a few make it up top and the rest have to suffer with being a nobody. No one likes that.

Actually, from my perspective you are totally wrong.  The reasons I have walked away from the very few actual sandboxes that have released, such as Xyson, had more to do with the games never reaching a very playble state due to budget problems with indy developers.  The games often launch buggy, and incomplete.  In the case of Xyson, the actual sandbox part of the game was very well done, but there was no "game" there because the developer neglected to put in meaningful goals and combat.

Originally posted by Kenze

Originally posted by Gibbonici

Originally posted by FredomSekerZ

Originally posted by Slampig

Originally posted by Gibbonici

Originally posted by Kenze

heres my problem with sandbox mmo's.. in my experience ..

sandbox=pvp=chaos=excitement

themepark=pve=order=tedium

  

 

I fixed that for you.

By the way, I'm not a PvPer as a rule.

Way to impose your point of view, thanks for speaking for all of us...

Just like Kenze was doing?

 

Exactly my point.

your point is rather dull.. how could you possibly take what i said as "imposing"  the first line i clearly said

heres my problem with sandbox mmo's.. in my experience ..

My mistake, I had you confused with the OP.

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by Kyleran

I despise those moderator created mega threads, and eschew them if at all possible.

Of course you do, you firmly believe in forum PvP, and starting your own thread is the highly preferred way to troll.

You wound me madam.   While I am a proponent of good discussion, or even bad discussion for that matter, starting new theads is something I rarely ever do and I doubt any that I did could be construed as trolling, whatever the heck that term really means.

However I am more than happy to pile in on any good scrum.

Originally posted by Kenze

heres my problem with sandbox mmo's.. in my experience ..

sandbox=pvp=chaos=willynilly

themepark=pve=order=structure

 

 

Sadly some PVE games had a lot of teeth but that was in the days where real challenge existed. A sandbox does not need to be PVP based and the minute someone releasees a decent one it will be a massive success.

Originally posted by Isane

Originally posted by Kenze

heres my problem with sandbox mmo's.. in my experience ..

sandbox=pvp=chaos=willynilly

themepark=pve=order=structure

 

 

Sadly some PVE games had a lot of teeth but that was in the days where real challenge existed. A sandbox does not need to be PVP based and the minute someone releasees a decent one it will be a massive success.

I think that will be true.

Originally posted by ReallyNow10

Originally posted by Theocritus

      I've been trying to get into WUrm Online lately, and even though it is a sandbox it just feels wierd....WHile I can do anything I want, by the time I log out I've accomplished little to nothing......I think the reason why so many people like themeparks more is you can log in for an hour and accomplish something....Pretty much every sandbox I've tried it takes hours to do anything.

Sandbox, themepark, all are good, but

THIS IS THE PROBLEM...

tutorial prison---->linear quest hub 1---->cutscene--->linear quest hub 2--->cutscene---linear quest hub 3--->cutscene---final baddy showdown--->cutscene (you're-the-hero-who-saved-the-world) (reroll and repeat with next character)

I swear, I have played lots of games on this website, but do not feel like I have played a true MMORPG since 2002.

If it is fun, why would anyone care if it is a "true" MMORPG?

If it works, and people are enjoying the game, it is NOT a problem.

I think what I want is a little bit of both.

The problem here isn't that sandbox MMOs aren't what players want, it's that "sandbox" really means nothing.  You probably can't get 10 "sandbox" players in the same room and have them agree on what they want in a sandbox MMO.  At least with most themeparks, while you probably can't get complete agreement with what everyone wants, there's a general expectation as to what constitutes a themepark game.

With sandboxes, you have people who want things that are diametrically oppsed to what other people want.  You have people who want mandatory permadeath, FFA PvP, forced grouping, housing, you name it.  And you have people who absolutely do not want any of those things.

It's like putting your nose up at cars.  All cars are boring.  Motorcycles are where it's at.  But saying you like motorcyles doesn't really explain to anyone what you want.  Do you want a street bike?  A chopper?  Offroad?  Touring?  The options go on and on and just saying "motorcycle" doesn't mean anything, any more than just saying "sandbox" means anything.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by ReallyNow10

Originally posted by Theocritus

      I've been trying to get into WUrm Online lately, and even though it is a sandbox it just feels wierd....WHile I can do anything I want, by the time I log out I've accomplished little to nothing......I think the reason why so many people like themeparks more is you can log in for an hour and accomplish something....Pretty much every sandbox I've tried it takes hours to do anything.

Sandbox, themepark, all are good, but

THIS IS THE PROBLEM...

tutorial prison---->linear quest hub 1---->cutscene--->linear quest hub 2--->cutscene---linear quest hub 3--->cutscene---final baddy showdown--->cutscene (you're-the-hero-who-saved-the-world) (reroll and repeat with next character)

I swear, I have played lots of games on this website, but do not feel like I have played a true MMORPG since 2002.

 

If it is fun, why would anyone care if it is a "true" MMORPG?

If it works, and people are enjoying the game, it is NOT a problem.

That design is NOT working, hence these big AA and AAA titles that splash and crash.  You'd think after numerous tries, game management would get the message.  No real replay value in a single player story, not much anyway.

As many have stated before me, The only sandboxes to come out besides Eve have been low budget or rushed by indie devs. For example, Mortal Online, Dawntide, Xsyon, and Darkfall. Now lets name how many AAA themepark mmos have failed either to rushed to release or same old same old themepark BS, Lotro, Warhammer, Aion, and most notably SWTOR. I think once a AAA publisher says "ok heres the money, make the "sandbox" mmo you want and if it works we all win" and when that happens and it actually works then we shall see the mmo genre change.

Originally posted by DSWBeef

As many have stated before me, The only sandboxes to come out besides Eve have been low budget or rushed by indie devs. For example, Mortal Online, Dawntide, Xsyon, and Darkfall. Now lets name how many AAA themepark mmos have failed either to rushed to release or same old same old themepark BS, Lotro, Warhammer, Aion, and most notably SWTOR. I think once a AAA publisher says "ok heres the money, make the "sandbox" mmo you want and if it works we all win" and when that happens and it actually works then we shall see the mmo genre change.

If your going to use the term "failed" you need to define what it means because I'm pretty sure most/all of those themepark games made their money back and than some.  None of them managed to get even close to pulling WoW levels of subs so if that's how you define failure than yea I guess that's right although the same can be said for every sandbox game including EVE.

To say players don't really want sandbox games probably isn't looking at the whole picture either. 

I guess no one likes pizza because there's a pizza place a few blocks from me that really sucks.  It's aweful...so no one likes pizza.

Originally posted by Isasis

Every Sandbox released is quickly kicked to the ground and called terrible for having the exact things they want and they demand another with the exact same things again. People love sandbox, but when they can't get to the top in it, they will quickly ditch it. Its like capitalism, only a few make it up top and the rest have to suffer with being a nobody. No one likes that.

Are you a "nobody" in this arqument? And what would you equate themeparks to, since they give you everything without earning it?

So let me get this straight. You, the "gamer" are given a stick and is expected to slay the dragon. Because YOU don't want to put in the time, effort, and sacrifice, YOU want to hold everyone else back down to your level for the sake of being "fair". YOU look down upon those that choose to sacrifice the time and energy to venture out, collect mats, bring them to town for a blacksmith to forge a sword to fight the dragon with, correct?

If life was a "themepark", we wouldn't have the USA, space exploration, satelites, cell phones, the combustible engine, air conditioning, central heating, indoor plumbing, computers, etc etc. Unless "devs" allowed it. And since when did the "devs" suddenly care about YOU?

I'm glad "sandbox" exists. It gives some people pride and sense of accomplishment that others can never claim, which makes it even better.

I've pretty much given up on MMOs, especially themeparks, and am spending a silly amount of time playing DayZ which is the only game to press those buttons since the early days of MMOs. Another 30,000 unique players joined over the weekend bringing it's player base up to 300,000.

Not bad for an unfinished, buggy alpha mod on a relatively obscure milsim that very few people bought in the first place. Even more so for having no advertising or big name studio behind it and only being publicly available for a couple of months.

Add in the fact that it's harsh, brutal and very often totally unfair, with no dev-set goals beyond staying alive, I'd say there is an appetite for sandbox games, even ones with full loot PvP.

Of course its not for everyone, just like sandbox games and themeparks too for that matter, but it is for a lot of people. DayZ currently has more players than quite a few AAA themepark MMOs. Food for thought, I think.

Originally posted by Gibbonici

I've pretty much given up on MMOs, especially themeparks, and am spending a silly amount of time playing DayZ which is the only game to press those buttons since the early days of MMOs. Another 30,000 unique players joined over the weekend bringing it's player base up to 300,000.

Not bad for an unfinished, buggy alpha mod on a relatively obscure milsim that very few people bought in the first place. Even more so for having no advertising or big name studio behind it and only being publicly available for a couple of months.

Add in the fact that it's harsh, brutal and very often totally unfair, with no dev-set goals beyond staying alive, I'd say there is an appetite for sandbox games, even ones with full loot PvP.

 

Of course its not for everyone, just like sandbox games and themeparks too for that matter, but it is for a lot of people. DayZ currently has more players than quite a few AAA themepark MMOs. Food for thought, I think.

 

 

Agreed. I threw in the towel on MMOs. Started playing DayZ as well. Put my monthly sub fee towards a gym membership.

MMOs, are not MMOs that we once played. It's a co-OP/Single player game now with a monthly fee, or worse, cash shops. I don't understand the need to stand in a lobby (city or hub) and wait for a LFG que to pop, which instances you to the dungeon, by-passing 99% of the world. Only to level cap so you can sit in a lobby (city or hub) to wait for a que to pop, instancing you to a pre-manufacture pvp room to cap nodes for 15 minutes.

DayZ is the most fun I've had in a long time.

Originally posted by Gibbonici

I've pretty much given up on MMOs, especially themeparks, and am spending a silly amount of time playing DayZ which is the only game to press those buttons since the early days of MMOs. Another 30,000 unique players joined over the weekend bringing it's player base up to 300,000.

Not bad for an unfinished, buggy alpha mod on a relatively obscure milsim that very few people bought in the first place. Even more so for having no advertising or big name studio behind it and only being publicly available for a couple of months.

Add in the fact that it's harsh, brutal and very often totally unfair, with no dev-set goals beyond staying alive, I'd say there is an appetite for sandbox games, even ones with full loot PvP.

 

Of course its not for everyone, just like sandbox games and themeparks too for that matter, but it is for a lot of people. DayZ currently has more players than quite a few AAA themepark MMOs. Food for thought, I think.

 

 

DayZ is a mod though isn't it?

It isn't a sub-based game.

I can compare players on Angry birds or FIFA or COD or Counter Strike with  'AAA themepark' MMOs but I don't think I'll get any 'Food for thought'.

Originally posted by Isasis

Every Sandbox released is quickly kicked to the ground and called terrible for having the exact things they want and they demand another with the exact same things again. People love sandbox, but when they can't get to the top in it, they will quickly ditch it. Its like capitalism, only a few make it up top and the rest have to suffer with being a nobody. No one likes that.

A socialist way of thinking. No different than communist. 

Originally posted by Isasis

Every Sandbox released is quickly kicked to the ground and called terrible for having the exact things they want and they demand another with the exact same things again. People love sandbox, but when they can't get to the top in it, they will quickly ditch it. Its like capitalism, only a few make it up top and the rest have to suffer with being a nobody. No one likes that.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by Gibbonici

I've pretty much given up on MMOs, especially themeparks, and am spending a silly amount of time playing DayZ which is the only game to press those buttons since the early days of MMOs. Another 30,000 unique players joined over the weekend bringing it's player base up to 300,000.

Not bad for an unfinished, buggy alpha mod on a relatively obscure milsim that very few people bought in the first place. Even more so for having no advertising or big name studio behind it and only being publicly available for a couple of months.

Add in the fact that it's harsh, brutal and very often totally unfair, with no dev-set goals beyond staying alive, I'd say there is an appetite for sandbox games, even ones with full loot PvP.

 

Of course its not for everyone, just like sandbox games and themeparks too for that matter, but it is for a lot of people. DayZ currently has more players than quite a few AAA themepark MMOs. Food for thought, I think.

 

 

DayZ is a mod though isn't it?

It isn't a sub-based game.

I can compare players on Angry birds or FIFA or COD or Counter Strike with  'AAA themepark' MMOs but I don't think I'll get any 'Food for thought'.

Like he said, it's alpha testing. I'm willing to bet that this turns into a full-blown stand-alone game in the end and not just a mod.

Secondly, CoD doesn't require you to hunt down a pig in the woods, kill it, and skin it. Oh, don't forget, you need a hatchet to chop wood and matches to start a fire to cook. The left-overs can be stored in your tent in the mountains where you and your friends camp and patrol and raid the nearby town, city, or airfield for supplies.

Not trying to be a jerk, but dude, you should check it out. It's not what you descibe.