Originally posted by Neherun

I am starting to get worried that this potential sandbox masterpiece will be ruined by carebearism.

Oh, c'mon, you know they will have a PvP server.  Sandbox =/= PvP anyhow. I'm always amused by mentions of carebear though so thanks for that .

Originally posted by Gardavsshade

Originally posted by Lazzaro

http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/10/18/soe-live-2012-keynote-announcements/

Discuss

Smedley knows what the text book definition is, but Smedley doesn't comprehend what a Sandbox mmorpg is so there is no way he can make that statement and be taken seriously.

IMO his statements are all just PR and Advertising hogwash to make the StockHolder's happy. That's all.

Don't let yourselves get sucked into believing anything he says.

 Clearly im going to have to start a 12 step SWG program here to bring everyone back into the "light".

If below is any indication, i would imagine hes either turned a new leaf or your blowing smoke. I dont think ive ever seen a president of a company answer so many questions and not be in front of a judge.

https://twitter.com/j_smedley

There will be pvp free areas. There won't be full loot. You know, typical carebear fare. But I think we'll see better implementation of PVP than most expect, no it wont be the glory of the Dread Lord era UO, but it won't be vanilla EQ pvp afterthought mechanics.

Originally posted by Neherun

1. I am starting to get worried that this potential sandbox masterpiece will be ruined by carebearism.

Most PVP games are carebear compared to EQ's PVE raids. With our guild we spent 3 months trying to defeat The Beast in Underfoot, 5 days per week, with 54 people every night with most 90% raid attendance, each try accounts for about 3 hours or raiding, next to our regular raiding schedule. That's just one mob, some guilds spent a year on this single mob.

Using carebear in relationship to PVE is going to get laughed at on the EQ forums, just a warning, most PVP players are way more carebear than the PVE guilds from EQ. The EQ PVP server is one of the last in progression because most PVP players are casuals and they lack any discipline to attend raids or do theorising.

Originally posted by CalmOceans

Originally posted by Neherun

1. I am starting to get worried that this potential sandbox masterpiece will be ruined by carebearism.

Most PVP games are carebear compared to EQ's PVE raids. With our guild we spent 3 months trying to defeat The Beast in Underfoot, 5 days per week, with 54 people every night with most 90% raid attendance, each try accounts for about 3 hours or raiding, next to our regular raiding schedule. That's just one mob, some guilds spent a year on this single mob.

Using carebear in relationship to PVE is going to get laughed at on the EQ forums, just a warning, most PVP players are way more carebear than the PVE guilds from EQ. The EQ PVP server is one of the last in progression because most PVP players are casuals.

+1

Sandbox NOT = PvP and especially NOT = FFA PvP.

People who think Smedley doesn't know the definition don't quite know it themselves, apparently.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by CalmOceans

Originally posted by Neherun

1. I am starting to get worried that this potential sandbox masterpiece will be ruined by carebearism.

Most PVP games are carebear compared to EQ's PVE raids. With our guild we spent 3 months trying to defeat The Beast in Underfoot, 5 days per week, with 54 people every night with most 90% raid attendance, each try accounts for about 3 hours or raiding, next to our regular raiding schedule. That's just one mob, some guilds spent a year on this single mob.

Using carebear in relationship to PVE is going to get laughed at on the EQ forums, just a warning, most PVP players are way more carebear than the PVE guilds from EQ. The EQ PVP server is one of the last in progression because most PVP players are casuals.

+1

Sandbox NOT = PvP and especially NOT = FFA PvP.

People who think Smedley doesn't know the definition don't quite know it themselves, apparently.

 we may have to rewrite what a sandbox is if EQN has the terrain features that were talked about.

ShakyMO "Exactly, you can't have progression pve in a sandbox, its the opposite of sandbox.
EQ was a themepark
EQ2 was a themepark
EQ fans love progression pve.

Therefore EQN will have progression pve and will be a themepark. Although it may have some sandbox elements around crafting / housing / farming / Terra forming etc.. the very act of having the Linearality of a progression pve endgame (well endgame full stop) will make it not a sandbox."

UO had progression Pve,

SWG has progression pve,

Istaria has progression pve

Ryzom has very little pvp (pre-planned attacks on farms only), so it is essentially a pve sandbox (I don't think it's very sandboxy but I am of the minority with this one)

Most sandboxes do have a progression in pve.

Crafting is normally pve, building is normally pve, there are lots of ways to change the world that do not involve pve.

Pvp is not synonymous with sandbox

edit - but your right EQ was a themepark through and through, and I do not expectg EQnext to actually be a sandbox however it may be more sandboxy.

Originally posted by yorkforce

I think the fact he said sandbox 'style' is a prelude to a get-out-clause. This is hype talk to get people interested. The big AAA MMO companies are slowly coming around to the fact that players are wanting a proper sandbox mmo, just look at the top 5 development games on this site.

And people are finally waking up to the fact that the devs lie too. He better deliver on his promise because a lot of people aren't buying the lies anymore.

My money is on him lieing though until he can prove otherwise. I won't hold my breath.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by CalmOceans

Originally posted by Neherun

1. I am starting to get worried that this potential sandbox masterpiece will be ruined by carebearism.

Most PVP games are carebear compared to EQ's PVE raids. With our guild we spent 3 months trying to defeat The Beast in Underfoot, 5 days per week, with 54 people every night with most 90% raid attendance, each try accounts for about 3 hours or raiding, next to our regular raiding schedule. That's just one mob, some guilds spent a year on this single mob.

Using carebear in relationship to PVE is going to get laughed at on the EQ forums, just a warning, most PVP players are way more carebear than the PVE guilds from EQ. The EQ PVP server is one of the last in progression because most PVP players are casuals.

+1

Sandbox NOT = PvP and especially NOT = FFA PvP.

People who think Smedley doesn't know the definition don't quite know it themselves, apparently.

First: The definition of a "MMO carebear": " 1. Lightly derogatory term for an MMO player who avoids PVP combat, heavily preferring cooperative or solo PVE combat, chatting, or developing tradeskills/running quests. Depending on the game and the individual, this PVP avoidance can show up in several ways: by playing on strict non-PVP servers; by avoiding PVP areas or declining duels; or, by avoiding or condemning PVP players. Philosophically, they often cite unbalanced combat systems, overpowered guilds, ebayed characters, and ganking as reasons to prefer less aggressive play. The mindset can be self-sustaining in several ways: high-level "care bears" may have avatars that are tailored for PVE, not PVP; they may not network with skilled PVP players; or, they may morally refuse to learn aggressive PVP tactics. As an insult, the term applies less to players who merely prefer PVE to PVP and more to individuals who question the basic legitimacy of PVP or who greatly overreact to their avatars' deaths."

Second, I don't know where you are coming from, but Sandboxes core principle is freedom of choice. And not allowing to attack anyone, at anytime, let it be PC's or NPC's, is against this principle. I don't mind if PvP is disallowed on half of the servers, call them "PvE" servers if you like. In my mind, artificial restrictions make the sand leak out of the box. Also, RPG's, especially MMORPG's without death penalties are extremely boring (Usually RPG's are permadeath, with the option to load your game). This justifies player item drops upon death. And to PvE raiding, if you fail to down a boss for months, then what? What did you lose? Some gold thats value has been inflated? How about building a city for months and then losing it within 48 hours, have you ever experienced that? Also, "hardcore PvE only" players calling people carebears amuses me. Its like Unreal Tournament players who play against godlike bots laughing at those who play is at as an e-sport.

MMORPG AI is inferior to human mind.

EQ was not a theme park, it was not  a sandbox! What it was was an open world to explore. We did not make the cities, we did not  create huge castles, we adventured, we explored, and we did it in groups (mainly) while socializing, yes we raided, but we were not guided on rails with quest boxes and advanced map tools that lead us thru a theme park like game. Hell we didnt even really have mapping when it first launched we had /loc...

so people get it right and stop calling EQ something it wasn't , and that goes both ways.

[quote]Originally posted by Zekiah
[b][quote] Originally posted by yorkforce I think the fact he said sandbox 'style' is a prelude to a get-out-clause.[/b][/quote]

Prolly. That did seem like an unnecessary tacked on portion. "style"

---

Originally posted by cybertrucker
EQ was not a theme park, it was not  a sandbox! What it was was an open world to explore. We did not make the cities, we did not  create huge castles, we adventured, we explored, and we did it in groups (mainly) while socializing, yes we raided, but we were not guided on rails with quest boxes and advanced map tools that lead us thru a theme park like game. Hell we didnt even really have mapping when it first launched we had /loc...

so people get it right and stop calling EQ something it wasn't , and that goes both ways.

---

EQ started as a psudo sandbox and became a terrible themepark as the expantions came out.

Originally posted by Zekiah

Originally posted by yorkforce

I think the fact he said sandbox 'style' is a prelude to a get-out-clause. This is hype talk to get people interested. The big AAA MMO companies are slowly coming around to the fact that players are wanting a proper sandbox mmo, just look at the top 5 development games on this site.

And people are finally waking up to the fact that the devs lie too. He better deliver on his promise because a lot of people aren't buying the lies anymore.

My money is on him lieing though until he can prove otherwise. I won't hold my breath.

Well there isn't enough information to prove it either way so the only thing you are expressing is your fear of dissapointment. When people grow up they start to learn they can be excited about something prior to proof knowing the outcome. Until more information comes available you can either continue expressing your insecurity or you can sit back and wait for information.

I simply say this because personally I would feel like a bit of a pansy crying on the forums about being afraid a game lets you down 2 years in the future. I think we can all agree that there is no certainty of success for any mmo.

Originally posted by pvpirl

 

---

Originally posted by cybertrucker
EQ was not a theme park, it was not  a sandbox! What it was was an open world to explore. We did not make the cities, we did not  create huge castles, we adventured, we explored, and we did it in groups (mainly) while socializing, yes we raided, but we were not guided on rails with quest boxes and advanced map tools that lead us thru a theme park like game. Hell we didnt even really have mapping when it first launched we had /loc...

 

so people get it right and stop calling EQ something it wasn't , and that goes both ways.

---

 

EQ started as a psudo sandbox and became a terrible themepark as the expantions came out.

And that did  not happen untill MUCH later ie LDoN and Omens of War expansion.  I would never consider EQ  a sandbox either. It was not. What EQ "was", was an open world. One that is by and far more challenging then almost any present day modern MMO is     currently, and that goes for theme park or sandbox

Well my two copper is,

Smedley is saying the right things. Nice to hear people in the industry at least talking about getting itself out of the WOW clone rut. That is the most important thing I got out of this.

They are trying a "sandbox style" game. I like this idea.

It is going to be free to try, so I am sure I will try it.

If it is a fun game I will play it and likely pay some cash.

If it is not a fun game I will not play it. That simple.

Cautiously optimistic is the route I am going, but happy to hear some changes in the pardigm are in the pipeline.

Originally posted by paulytheb

Well my two copper is,

Smedley is saying the right things. Nice to hear people in the industry at least talking about getting itself out of the WOW clone rut. That is the most important thing I got out of this.

They are trying a "sandbox style" game. I like this idea.

It is going to be free to try, so I am sure I will try it.

If it is a fun game I will play it and likely pay some cash.

If it is not a fun game I will not play it. That simple.

Cautiously optimistic is the route I am going, but happy to hear some changes in the pardigm are in the pipeline.

I am a pragmatist so I have the same opinion but I also wish to see the side affects of such a major release. It's success or failure will have a direct result on the direction of future mmos. I certainly would love to see an enjoyable game I can play myself but even moderate successes with some of the many sandbox style mmos being developed right now will impact the direction of mmo development for years. This interests me greatly.

Originally posted by pvpirl

 

---

Originally posted by cybertrucker
EQ was not a theme park, it was not  a sandbox! What it was was an open world to explore. We did not make the cities, we did not  create huge castles, we adventured, we explored, and we did it in groups (mainly) while socializing, yes we raided, but we were not guided on rails with quest boxes and advanced map tools that lead us thru a theme park like game. Hell we didnt even really have mapping when it first launched we had /loc...

 

so people get it right and stop calling EQ something it wasn't , and that goes both ways.

 

---

 

EQ started as a psudo sandbox and became a terrible themepark as the expantions came out.

It was themepark through and through.  Yes you could go lots of places, you could in vanilla wow too.

But all monks were the same, all warriors the same...  The classes were completely linear.  Completely loot driven game, crafts were crap compared to loot.  Zones were still designed for particular levels, start out close to city and gradually move further away. 

And the big one.  Absolutely no way to impact the world either by territory control, crafting, building, terraforming, questions.. nothing nada zip.

A themepark through and through.

Exploring, socializing... that can and does happen in every game. 

And personally as far as EQ going sandbox is interesting, what I am even more interested in will be finding out if they are going to truly be making it challenging, and a more social game?  One that promotes grouping? one that isn't bogged down with dumb quests located on the in game maps? Are they going to to try and achieve the depth of the original with things like complex factions? Are they going to bring back the immersion like truly dark nights and dark dungeons? Are they going to have utility spells and buffs or are they going to try to water the game down so everyone is equal in all aspects? 

These are the things that really I'm hoping to see. Being able to build a player city would be icing on the cake. But if the cake is dry or stale and tastes like all the other cakes, then what's the point?