Originally posted by Amaranthar

Originally posted by MMOwanderer
Pretty much sums up what i want. I want the world to actually have some interesting background, lore, npc's, mobs, bosses and general characters, quests, story, etc, but still allow us to affect and be affected by it and others player's actions. But for now, since Smed on gave vague clues of the game, i'm not holding my breath.

Really? In a game with the power gaps of a Themepark, and you want player's actions to affect other players?

When the hell did i ever say anything about power gaps? I didn't meantion anything about the progression system. 

MMOExposed- Who said anything about FFA PVP. We have no idea what the game's going to be like. 

Originally posted by MMOwanderer

Originally posted by Amaranthar

Originally posted by MMOwanderer
Pretty much sums up what i want. I want the world to actually have some interesting background, lore, npc's, mobs, bosses and general characters, quests, story, etc, but still allow us to affect and be affected by it and others player's actions. But for now, since Smed on gave vague clues of the game, i'm not holding my breath.

Really? In a game with the power gaps of a Themepark, and you want player's actions to affect other players?

When the hell did i ever say anything about power gaps? I didn't meantion anything about the progression system. 

MMOExposed- Who said anything about FFA PVP. We have no idea what the game's going to be like. 

Well, the OP was about wanting a "hybrid", and you said that's what you want. And a hybrid has Themepark in it, so levelling through content for level based rewards.

But I take it that's NOT what you want? (That's why I asked.)

Originally posted by MMOExposed
The Free For All PvP will ruin the game.

There is no way every instance of the this game will have free for all pvp or ever have it. SOE is rethinking how they want to make EQ but not ignoring the core audience for it. It is certain imo they will have all the pve and pvp options across the board for all players. EQ is too large of an IP to specialize for one audience. It is not a niche product.

Also, I have to mention again that a sandbox game is not defined by every single system within it. They have core fundamental systems that make it a sandbox. Others are optional and continue the definition into hardcore concepts but do not take away from the core concept of the sandbox. This is why we keep seeing the terms hardcore and hybrid thrown about. Frankly few here have any clue what so ever on how to discribe what a sandbox is. I would venture that most posting here haven't really ever played a true sandbox or are calling upon their 1-2 weeks of sampling older games like Eve or SWG all the way back to UO or pretending they even played them to begin with.

Many are arguing that if the game has classes and not purely skill based it isn't a pure sandbox. That is complete and total bullshit. The character system is only a sandbox system if it affects the rest of the game. That can be done to either skills or classes. The choice you make for the character alone is not sandbox. How your character then affects the game through interactions with other systems is where it slowly becomes sandbox. Your dynamic within a group and combat is not sandbox as this occurs in every game. How combat affects the game is sandbox and independent on how the character was built. A sandbox is not a collection of mini-systems or mini-games (which is what characters have pretty much become in themepark games), it is how the entire collection of systems interact with each other.

Likely the main cause for sandbox failures is the same issue themepark games have had: they become templated and assumptions are made based on the premise you cannot deviate from the template. EQNext will cater to all the playstyles supported in their original game so not to alientate their core audience but in order to make it a sandbox they have to combine each old and new system into a synergistic final product. That is the essence of a sandbox. It could be done in many different ways and NOT defined by "It's a fantasy game therefore must be a large seemeless world, skill system, ffa pvp, full loot, etc, etc. Those type of narrow minded players are as detrimental to the genre as developers are for following industry templates.

Considering WoW is an EQ clone, I don't think it's possible for Sony to make a "WoW clone."

Anyway, I really hope EQ Next isn't player created content. I could live without trips to "XXDomino's Incredible Dungeon Supreme 250tokens/30mins." I want to be immersed in the game world, as I once was with EQ; when players have the power to alter or add to the game world, that becomes impossible, as people are incredibly stupid and generally uncreative.

Imagine you're walking out into Qeynos Residential District, and in the middle of these medieval themed homes, there's a Starship Enterprise... Sure it's funny and shows clever manipulation of the tools available in game, but it ruins the game world...

How about poorly written, incredibly easy, exploitable player made quests? Walk 10 steps to your right and get 100 quest tokens... No thanks. If this kind of stuff is what mmorpg.com people consider a sandbox, count me out.

My biggest concerns are limited character progression and "forced solo" gameplay. It should be far more lucrative to group than to solo, but, short of the maxed level play, that does not seem to be the case in any game anymore.

Originally posted by MMOExposed
The Free For All PvP will ruin the game.

Any arguments for that? I believe FFA PvP is a necessary tool of any "sandbox". As FFA PvP translates to freedom, it doesn't mean everyone will attack anyone, at everytime. Assuming actions lead to consequences. Nowadays when I see people hating any forms of PvP, I automatically think they are too attached to their characters, which is usually the case when asked to elaborate, they all report hating walking few minutes back to a corpse and possibly losing something.

---

Originally posted by Neherun

Assuming actions lead to consequences.

---

This is easier to say than pull off thus FFA PVP usually does kill the game for many.

Not to say that FFA PVP gets more than often tagged along with stupid ideas like alignment system or player self-policing...

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by Neherun

Assuming actions lead to consequences.

---

 

This is easier to say than pull off thus FFA PVP usually does kill the game for many.

Not to say that FFA PVP gets more than often tagged along with stupid ideas like alignment system or player self-policing...

Player self-policing worked well in Shadowbane, where people had balls.

Other than that, the regular alignment system never works, just because the penalties aren't severe enough.

Originally posted by Neherun

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by Neherun

Assuming actions lead to consequences.

---

 

This is easier to say than pull off thus FFA PVP usually does kill the game for many.

Not to say that FFA PVP gets more than often tagged along with stupid ideas like alignment system or player self-policing...

 

Player self-policing worked well in Shadowbane, where people had balls.

 

Other than that, the regular alignment system never works, just because the penalties aren't severe enough.

 

 

Yep that's why shadowbane was so successful . 

---

Originally posted by Neherun

Player self-policing worked well in Shadowbane, where people had balls.

---

You mean where everyone else was driven off the game? That is how it "works" for all games...it annihilates their player base.

Alignment system never works because:

1) It presumes a state of consequence that can be reverted - you can work your penalty off.
2) It does nothing for victims.

Originally posted by Amaranthar

Originally posted by MMOwanderer

Originally posted by Amaranthar

Originally posted by MMOwanderer
Pretty much sums up what i want. I want the world to actually have some interesting background, lore, npc's, mobs, bosses and general characters, quests, story, etc, but still allow us to affect and be affected by it and others player's actions. But for now, since Smed on gave vague clues of the game, i'm not holding my breath.

Really? In a game with the power gaps of a Themepark, and you want player's actions to affect other players?

When the hell did i ever say anything about power gaps? I didn't meantion anything about the progression system. 

MMOExposed- Who said anything about FFA PVP. We have no idea what the game's going to be like. 

Well, the OP was about wanting a "hybrid", and you said that's what you want. And a hybrid has Themepark in it, so levelling through content for level based rewards.

But I take it that's NOT what you want? (That's why I asked.)

Of course not. Sorry, if i didn't make myself clear. I pointed out in my own post that i don't mind quests, story, etc. Never talked about the kind off progression system.

Trust me, if there's one thing i don't want is a zoned world with different level ranges instead of a "go in any direction" kind of game.

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by Neherun

Player self-policing worked well in Shadowbane, where people had balls.

---

 

You mean where everyone else was driven off the game? That is how it "works" for all games...it annihilates their player base.

Alignment system never works because:

1) It presumes a state of consequence that can be reverted - you can work your penalty off.
2) It does nothing for victims.

 i agree, it should be a one way street, and a painful one at that. If fact it should be so painful that most wouldnt even consider it. Exceptions would be for wartime states and lawless areas.

Originally posted by pvpirl

It will be.

EQ1 and SWG and PS2 are going to hatch a baby.

EQ1 and Vanguard and SWG and EQ2 (player made content system) and PS2 are going to have a baby.

---

Originally posted by rungard

i agree, it should be a one way street, and a painful one at that. If fact it should be so painful that most wouldnt even consider it. Exceptions would be for wartime states and lawless areas.

---

Penalty severity is non-factor, secondary at best.

Regardless how severe the penalty is, it won't fix basic issue with any alignment system:

Aggressor needs a chance to fail and lose, and victims needs tools or mechanics that protects them.

No alignment can ever address those issue and fix that broken formula.

Originally posted by cybertrucker

Originally posted by Neherun

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by Neherun

Assuming actions lead to consequences.

---

 

This is easier to say than pull off thus FFA PVP usually does kill the game for many.

Not to say that FFA PVP gets more than often tagged along with stupid ideas like alignment system or player self-policing...

 

Player self-policing worked well in Shadowbane, where people had balls.

 

Other than that, the regular alignment system never works, just because the penalties aren't severe enough.

 

 

Yep that's why shadowbane was so successful . 

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by Neherun

Player self-policing worked well in Shadowbane, where people had balls.

---

 

You mean where everyone else was driven off the game? That is how it "works" for all games...it annihilates their player base.

Alignment system never works because:

1) It presumes a state of consequence that can be reverted - you can work your penalty off.
2) It does nothing for victims.

Shadowbane's level of succeeding on the market and people leaving the game had little to do with its system, the games "politcal siege warfare" as a concept was endorsed by most. Also, it wasn't the rough world where the weaker got stomped that turned people off. It was the horrific graphics from the 90's, the extremely horrible standard UI, the amount of bugs in the game, the lag and simple lack of polishing that alianated players from the game.

It still is considered the best player vs. player scene by many.

Like many of MMORPG's, Shadowbane didn't have millions of dollars spent into marketing, same applies to many MMORPG's. I still find it funny that people think the success of themeparks is their systems themselves. Its the amount of capital used for marketing. Using an old IP can directly be translated to a marketing scheme in business world.

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by rungard

i agree, it should be a one way street, and a painful one at that. If fact it should be so painful that most wouldnt even consider it. Exceptions would be for wartime states and lawless areas.

---

 

Penalty severity is non-factor, secondary at best.

Regardless how severe the penalty is, it won't fix basic issue with any alignment system:

Aggressor needs a chance to fail and lose, and victims needs tools or mechanics that protects them.

No alignment can ever address those issue and fix that broken formula.

 i dont believe you to be correct here. If we choose a good/evil alignment with a one way street path to the evil side we can achieve a working alignment system.

you do it by introducing a gods system where players choose a god who "protects" them or gives them power. When you choose a "good god" you gain access over time to skills and abilities that protect the player from "evil" players. This could include item soul binding, untouchable planar storage bags, ressurection options, evil detection and tracking powers and other neat powers that reduce the effect of evil players on your character. So you could defend yourself in many ways if you were good.

for evil you dont get any protections as they would be seen as weak, so you get access to additional powers instead. You sacrifice safety for power and live the hardcore life. Expensive resurections, no ability to soulbind items, no safe storage, kos in guarded areas etc.

The short answer is it will be. It may lean more toward sandbox though. A true sandbox would be boring as hell that is why we've never seen one in the MMO genre. All games are hybrids as "Sandbox" and "Themepark" are two extremes on each end of a very broad spectrum. All games fall into this spectrum at various places but absolutely none are at either end.

Bren

---

Originally posted by Brenelael

A true sandbox would be boring as hell that is why we've never seen one in the MMO genre.

---

Seems like www.eveonline.com passed unnoticed by you for almost a decade...

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by Brenelael

 

A true sandbox would be boring as hell that is why we've never seen one in the MMO genre.

---

 

Seems like www.eveonline.com passed unnoticed by you for almost a decade...

I've played EVE quite a bit and although it is close it still isn't a true sandbox. There are NPC given missions in EVE. This is a Themepark feature. Like it or not even EVE has a few Themepark features and is a Hybrid.

Bren

---

Originally posted by Brenelael

I've played EVE quite a bit and although it is close it still isn't a true sandbox. There are NPC given missions in EVE. This is a Themepark feature. Like it or not even EVE has a few Themepark features and is a Hybrid.

 

Bren

---

There are no hybrids...meaningless term.