Originally posted by stevebmbsqd

You just descibed pretty much every MMO out there.......

No. Generally, in most MMOs, there are a few max level zones with appropriate level content and the rest of the zones are useless since they do not offer any challenge due to being lower level.

Due to downscaling, all of GW2's world will remain viable, once your character is max level. You're not going to be locked into a few endgame zones and instances. You can go anywhere and the game will still remain fun and challenging. Which is how UO was PvE wise.

Originally posted by Bladestrom
Eve doesn't have stat progression, it has lateral skill and gear progression. It is almost identical to gw2

Lol...wtf?

Eve almost identical to GW2...

Eve is a great game, yes.  It is hard, unforgiving and has significant vertical progression in PvP through the skill system.  Ever tried 1v1 your 1 day old character against a 100mil sp character even in a supposedly equivalent ship eg tier 1 frig?  You wont last long.  Or tried flying a Titan day 1 or month 1 or even year 1?  This wont happen either.  Hint the Titan is more powerful than the frig.

Then we have the consequences of Pvp in Eve - you lose, you lose your ship, you don't just respawn and resume in the same gear - your gear is gone.  Earn some more isk and try again.

So how exactly are the two games almost identical?

PS oh and most people also think that the supercaps are ugly, so Eve really has a negative cosmetic progression in it too ...

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Distopia

Originally posted by BadSpock

People who played games like UO and SWG "back in the day" instead of playing games like EQ and then all of its clones really can understand "GW2 endgame" a whole hell of a lot easier.

It was fairly easy to "max out" a toon in games like UO and SWG in terms of raw stats - so what did you do?

First of all the "end game" was not "maxing out" your toon - there really wasn't an end-game it was a journey and about the journey not the destination.

You built stuff, collected stuff, faught people for the sake of fighting them - took control of things for the sake of controlling them... saught ways to make yourself look unique or acquire rare trophies and items to display proudly for your friends and strangers.

You built community and relationships with people and ran and/or participated in events the community constructed.

These "other" MMO players just don't understand why you would spend X amount of time for a cool looking hat if the hat didn't give you any stat bonuses.

Or why you would "waste time" sitting in an inn playing chess.

It's sad. Very, very sad.

I'm not seeing how GW2 relates though as UO and SWG were about communities providing long-term content, as well as the skill grinding being a path to your "end-game" profession and activity same with EVE. GW2 is still a content based game. The goal is to consume the content, not build the content, it doesn't offer that IMO.

A lot more in common with UO/SWG than WoW/EQ is my point.

Not seeing these similarities to sandbox games.  GW2 is a lot more similar to that other game you over hyped back in November.

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Distopia

Originally posted by BadSpock

People who played games like UO and SWG "back in the day" instead of playing games like EQ and then all of its clones really can understand "GW2 endgame" a whole hell of a lot easier.

It was fairly easy to "max out" a toon in games like UO and SWG in terms of raw stats - so what did you do?

First of all the "end game" was not "maxing out" your toon - there really wasn't an end-game it was a journey and about the journey not the destination.

You built stuff, collected stuff, faught people for the sake of fighting them - took control of things for the sake of controlling them... saught ways to make yourself look unique or acquire rare trophies and items to display proudly for your friends and strangers.

You built community and relationships with people and ran and/or participated in events the community constructed.

These "other" MMO players just don't understand why you would spend X amount of time for a cool looking hat if the hat didn't give you any stat bonuses.

Or why you would "waste time" sitting in an inn playing chess.

It's sad. Very, very sad.

I'm not seeing how GW2 relates though as UO and SWG were about communities providing long-term content, as well as the skill grinding being a path to your "end-game" profession and activity same with EVE. GW2 is still a content based game. The goal is to consume the content, not build the content, it doesn't offer that IMO.

A lot more in common with UO/SWG than WoW/EQ is my point.

Not seeing these similarities to sandbox games.  GW2 is a lot more similar to that other game you over hyped back in November.

Well, the model is basically dead center between a sandbox and a themepark. It has aspects of both in its core design.

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Distopia

Originally posted by BadSpock

People who played games like UO and SWG "back in the day" instead of playing games like EQ and then all of its clones really can understand "GW2 endgame" a whole hell of a lot easier.

It was fairly easy to "max out" a toon in games like UO and SWG in terms of raw stats - so what did you do?

First of all the "end game" was not "maxing out" your toon - there really wasn't an end-game it was a journey and about the journey not the destination.

You built stuff, collected stuff, faught people for the sake of fighting them - took control of things for the sake of controlling them... saught ways to make yourself look unique or acquire rare trophies and items to display proudly for your friends and strangers.

You built community and relationships with people and ran and/or participated in events the community constructed.

These "other" MMO players just don't understand why you would spend X amount of time for a cool looking hat if the hat didn't give you any stat bonuses.

Or why you would "waste time" sitting in an inn playing chess.

It's sad. Very, very sad.

I'm not seeing how GW2 relates though as UO and SWG were about communities providing long-term content, as well as the skill grinding being a path to your "end-game" profession and activity same with EVE. GW2 is still a content based game. The goal is to consume the content, not build the content, it doesn't offer that IMO.

A lot more in common with UO/SWG than WoW/EQ is my point.

Not seeing these similarities to sandbox games.  GW2 is a lot more similar to that other game you over hyped back in November.

 

Read the post by Distopia on the top of page 66 of this thread if you need help understanding what he meant.

Originally posted by Xzen

 

 

Read the post by Distopia on the top of page 66 of this thread if you need help understanding what he meant.

"Originally posted by Distopia

 

I guess I can see what you guys are saying here, that there's no single goal to do at end-game and they leave the choice up to the player on what to do."

There are a lot of themeparks that allow multiple goals at end-game - this does not make them sandboxes, or even sandparks.  Sandboxes are defined by players creating the content rather than the game developers providing the content.  Even Wow allows multiple goals at endgame.

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by Xzen

 

 

Read the post by Distopia on the top of page 66 of this thread if you need help understanding what he meant.

"Originally posted by Distopia

 

I guess I can see what you guys are saying here, that there's no single goal to do at end-game and they leave the choice up to the player on what to do."

 

There are a lot of themeparks that allow multiple goals at end-game - this does not make them sandboxes, or even sandparks.  Sandboxes are defined by players creating the content rather than the game developers providing the content.  Even Wow allows multiple goals at endgame.

No one is saying that GW2 is a sandbox or even a sandpark. The point remains that there are sucessful games around that do not have a stat grind as end game.

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by Xzen

 

 

Read the post by Distopia on the top of page 66 of this thread if you need help understanding what he meant.

"Originally posted by Distopia

 

I guess I can see what you guys are saying here, that there's no single goal to do at end-game and they leave the choice up to the player on what to do."

 

There are a lot of themeparks that allow multiple goals at end-game - this does not make them sandboxes, or even sandparks.  Sandboxes are defined by players creating the content rather than the game developers providing the content.  Even Wow allows multiple goals at endgame.

I can agree I don't view this game as much of a sandbox at all but it does give you more options to explore and play the way you want than any themepark I can remember playing. 

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by Xzen

 

 

Read the post by Distopia on the top of page 66 of this thread if you need help understanding what he meant.

"Originally posted by Distopia

 

I guess I can see what you guys are saying here, that there's no single goal to do at end-game and they leave the choice up to the player on what to do."

 

There are a lot of themeparks that allow multiple goals at end-game - this does not make them sandboxes, or even sandparks.  Sandboxes are defined by players creating the content rather than the game developers providing the content.  Even Wow allows multiple goals at endgame.

I can agree I don't view this game as much of a sandbox at all but it does give you more options to explore and play the way you want than any themepark I can remember playing. 

Fair enough.

Originally posted by Xzen

 

No one is saying that GW2 is a sandbox or even a sandpark. ...

Well I am glad that YOU are not claiming it to be a sandpark because that is obviously not correct, however we have posts like this,

"Originally posted by BadSpock
 

A lot more in common with UO/SWG than WoW/EQ is my point."

I don't remember too many posts about UO/SWG fondly remembering the fact that there is no gear grind at end game, but rather I do see posts about the sandbox environment afforded by these games, so it is an easy conclusion to come to that the point of this comparison is an inference that the game in question is supposedly a sandbox.  Certainly when Eve is added to the mix you have a Sandbox game that very few people will complete the skills before moving on (even many years later), so it is also not true that the game (Eve) is great because of no end game stat (skill) grind.

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by Xzen

 

No one is saying that GW2 is a sandbox or even a sandpark. ...

Well I am glad that YOU are not claiming it to be a sandpark because that is obviously not correct, however we have posts like this,

"Originally posted by BadSpock
 

 

A lot more in common with UO/SWG than WoW/EQ is my point."

I don't remember too many posts about UO/SWG fondly remembering the fact that there is no gear grind at end game, but rather I do see posts about the sandbox environment afforded by these games, so it is an easy conclusion to come to that the point of this comparison is an inference that the game in question is supposedly a sandbox.  Certainly when Eve is added to the mix you have a Sandbox game that very few people will complete the skills before moving on (even many years later), so it is also not true that the game (Eve) is great because of no end game stat (skill) grind.

I think that you're a bit confused. The game does have certain things in common with certain sandbox games. In particular in how the whole game world is your playground and how the game is centered more around exploration and interacting with other players.

My favorite thing about UO and one that makes it and EVE superior MMOs, in my opinion of course, is the simple fact that some of the best gear was crafted. It was easily accessible and kind of evened out the playing field. This, in combination with gameplay centered around exploration, is why I absolutely love GW2.

GW2 is not a true sandbox but it's does a damn good job at conveying the illusion of a living world with amazing attention to detail. That, to me, is enough. As a sandbox fan, I'm still waiting to sink my teeth into ArcheAge but for now, GW2 has some pretty decent sandbox elements.

Originally posted by Kuppa

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by Celcius

I don't have long since I have a night class soon, but basically read into what I am saying: You say that your opinion on GW2 is the only valid opinion based upon your own view of what games should have. Regardless of number of people who say things on internet forums: it is still an opinion. You are now trying to defend TSW because I was attacking it. You don't like that and pretend to make up statistics based on poor data just to back it up. (Number of registered users on a website as a sample size, you can't be serious) GW2 has no statistical data yet to prove either way other then data like what you have posted. So really there is no win here. Its all opinion. 

The FACT is that GW2 does have an endgame. You just don't like it so you don't count it as end game. By your logic TSW has no end game as well because I do not consider what they have end game. Funny that even on the TSW forums I totally destroyed your arguments --based on opinions as facts-- (the ones you LOVE to bring up) and alot of people backed me up there as they do here. I don't have to make a signature about what I am saying since you will regret it and feel guilty about saying it in the first place. 9/5/12 if there is not a 10 man and 20 man raid you were wrong. Mark the day. I don't have to wait long though considering that you claimed Funcom will announce 750k subs in 2 days. Can't wait !;)

I never said that nor did I create this thread. 

 

I love cosmetics, but cosmetics only as endgame progression? That's thin and stretching it to call it endgame.

pvp, and actually done well.

look at my sig. gg.

Originally posted by heartless

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by Xzen

 

No one is saying that GW2 is a sandbox or even a sandpark. ...

Well I am glad that YOU are not claiming it to be a sandpark because that is obviously not correct, however we have posts like this,

"Originally posted by BadSpock
 

 

A lot more in common with UO/SWG than WoW/EQ is my point."

I don't remember too many posts about UO/SWG fondly remembering the fact that there is no gear grind at end game, but rather I do see posts about the sandbox environment afforded by these games, so it is an easy conclusion to come to that the point of this comparison is an inference that the game in question is supposedly a sandbox.  Certainly when Eve is added to the mix you have a Sandbox game that very few people will complete the skills before moving on (even many years later), so it is also not true that the game (Eve) is great because of no end game stat (skill) grind.

I think that you're a bit confused. The game does have certain things in common with certain sandbox games. In particular in how the whole game world is your playground and how the game is centered more around exploration and interacting with other players.

My favorite thing about UO and one that makes it and EVE superior MMOs, in my opinion of course, is the simple fact that some of the best gear was crafted. It was easily accessible and kind of evened out the playing field. This, in combination with gameplay centered around exploration, is why I absolutely love GW2.

GW2 is not a true sandbox but it's does a damn good job at conveying the illusion of a living world with amazing attention to detail. That, to me, is enough. As a sandbox fan, I'm still waiting to sink my teeth into ArcheAge but for now, GW2 has some pretty decent sandbox elements.

Don't think it is me who is a bit confused,

Xzen: "No one is saying that GW2 is a sandbox or even a sandpark."

Aerowyn: "I can agree I don't view this game as much of a sandbox at all..."

It is ok to like themeparks or even just one particular themepark, really it is.  It just is a bit silly to hype something up on the basis of something it isn't though.  That is my point.

Originally posted by ElSandman

 

Don't think it is me who is a bit confused,

Xzen: "No one is saying that GW2 is a sandbox or even a sandpark."

Aerowyn: "I can agree I don't view this game as much of a sandbox at all..."

 

It is ok to like themeparks or even just one particular themepark, really it is.  It just is a bit silly to hype something up on the basis of something it isn't though.  That is my point.

 

 

 

well it really depends what you consider core aspects of a sandbox game.. to me its "non dev controlled player created content" others may have other definitions of what they feel are core sandbox elements. I consider skyrim a themepark but has free roam and meaningfull exploration and many many options much like GW2. 

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by ElSandman

 

Don't think it is me who is a bit confused,

Xzen: "No one is saying that GW2 is a sandbox or even a sandpark."

Aerowyn: "I can agree I don't view this game as much of a sandbox at all..."

 

It is ok to like themeparks or even just one particular themepark, really it is.  It just is a bit silly to hype something up on the basis of something it isn't though.  That is my point.

 

 

 

well it really depends what you consider core aspects of a sandbox game.. to me its "non dev controlled player created content" others may have other definitions of what they feel are core sandbox elements. I consider skyrim a themepark but has free roam and meaningfull exploration and many many options much like GW2. 

Which is funny because I consider Skyrim to be a sandboxy game.  I guess mainly because I don't account for player created content so much as I have limited experience with that.

So, considering my thoughts on Skyrim, I would say that GW2 is a themepark with many sandbox elements.  Since it shares many concepts of gameplay with Skyrim and other sandbox type games (basically freedom of movement and choice), I don't think that's too far off the mark.  I will agree though, that to call GW2 a sandbox game isn't correct even by loose definitions.

Originally posted by evolver1972

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by ElSandman

 

Don't think it is me who is a bit confused,

Xzen: "No one is saying that GW2 is a sandbox or even a sandpark."

Aerowyn: "I can agree I don't view this game as much of a sandbox at all..."

 

It is ok to like themeparks or even just one particular themepark, really it is.  It just is a bit silly to hype something up on the basis of something it isn't though.  That is my point.

 

 

 

well it really depends what you consider core aspects of a sandbox game.. to me its "non dev controlled player created content" others may have other definitions of what they feel are core sandbox elements. I consider skyrim a themepark but has free roam and meaningfull exploration and many many options much like GW2. 

Which is funny because I consider Skyrim to be a sandboxy game.  I guess mainly because I don't account for player created content so much as I have limited experience with that.

 

So, considering my thoughts on Skyrim, I would say that GW2 is a themepark with many sandbox elements.  Since it shares many concepts of gameplay with Skyrim and other sandbox type games (basically freedom of movement and choice), I don't think that's too far off the mark.  I will agree though, that to call GW2 a sandbox game isn't correct even by loose definitions.

it all depends who you talk to and where you look when discussing sandbox games but here's one definition

Definition - What does Sandbox mean?

Sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish.

A sandbox game is also known as an open-world or free-roaming game.

going by this GW2 follows a very sandbox route as in red but then follows the themepark route in the next sentance. I many ways it is a open world free roaming game and in many ways it's not so its sort of on that line. As a game like skyrim I will agree is more of the complete open world free roaming type. But as i said I feel in skyrim you are still strung along by the will of what is created by the developers and not allowing you to really change the world as I point in blue... so a lot is up for interpretation

Eventually, necessary end-game gear-grinds that only serve to lead to more necessary gear-grinds with no end in sight burn out even the most dedicated players. 

Originally posted by BadSpock

Oh, if people would have only played UO instead of EQ and all the clones of EQ (WoW, Rift, TSW, AoC, TERA etc. etc.) were instead UO clones (EvE, SWG)

we'd be able to explain GW2 "end game" so much easier...

Some people just - don't - get it.

If you extend the usual consensus of sandbox to include exploration elements (as being a significant determiner) then realistically all these WoW, Rift, TSW, AoC, TERA also have this significant sandbox element.

If you take Aerowyn's definition "non dev controlled player created content" - which is where I am coming from, then none of the above are sandboxes and nor is GW2.  GW2 is far closer to WoW, Rift, TSW, AoC, TERA  than it is to EvE, SWG.

Unless there is some other major feature that changes this balance that you think I am missing??

Originally posted by ElSandman

Originally posted by BadSpock

Oh, if people would have only played UO instead of EQ and all the clones of EQ (WoW, Rift, TSW, AoC, TERA etc. etc.) were instead UO clones (EvE, SWG)

we'd be able to explain GW2 "end game" so much easier...

Some people just - don't - get it.

If you extend the usual consensus of sandbox to include exploration elements (as being a significant determiner) then realistically all these WoW, Rift, TSW, AoC, TERA also have this significant sandbox element.

If you take Aerowyn's definition "non dev controlled player created content" - which is where I am coming from, then none of the above are sandboxes and nor is GW2.  GW2 is far closer to WoW, Rift, TSW, AoC, TERA  than it is to EvE, SWG.

Unless there is some other major feature that changes this balance that you think I am missing??

i'd look at my post right above this.. it's pretty big grey area when you are talking sandbox

Originally posted by Meleagar

Eventually, necessary end-game gear-grinds that only serve to lead to more necessary gear-grinds with no end in sight burn out even the most dedicated players. 

Agreed. Even if the gear grind treadmill is an economically viable alternative for most devs, it does not necessarily mean it is the best option for the players.

Some devs make games in order to make money while other devs make money in order to make games.

I know I'll get a lot of negative responses (including some hate) for saying this, but I believe Anet makes money in order to make games (just my opinion). Considering Anet's payment model (they could have easily gone the sub route and many of us would have still payed for it), their gameplay options (instead of essentially making a wow-clone, in many respects they're "doing their own thing") and their "Manifesto", it lends me to believe that Anet devs are making money in order to make games instead of making games in order to make money.

P.S. A good example of a company that makes games in order to make money, in my humble opinion, would be EA. Notice I did not say Bio/EA; I believe that Bio once (and may still) made money in order to make games. I know Bio is essentially owned by EA, but I digress.