Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by azzamasin
Thats why all sandboxes inevitably fail.  Promise to much and deliver a hodge podge of a mess.

Hmm this sandbox I'm playing has twice as many players as WoW.

wushu isnt a sandbox and im so dissapointed in how many people just dont know what a sandbox is.

also wushu was quite dead while i was in, for a game with twice as many...oh wait your probably counting all the free chinese players in china...twice as many free players then im sure.

Sandboxes are a hodgepodge mess (eve excluded) because all major development studios are an have been going after WOW for the last decade, and failing.

Only people who care about sandboxes are indy developers who bite of WAY more than they can chew, and often launch years before they are ready to keep their funding.  Its sad i know.  Sandbox deserves a few more large budget games, at least one.

Originally posted by Crunchy222

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by azzamasin
Thats why all sandboxes inevitably fail.  Promise to much and deliver a hodge podge of a mess.

Hmm this sandbox I'm playing has twice as many players as WoW.

wushu isnt a sandbox and im so dissapointed in how many people just dont know what a sandbox is.

 

also wushu was quite dead while i was in, for a game with twice as many...oh wait your probably counting all the free chinese players in china...twice as many free players then im sure.

 

Sandboxes are a hodgepodge mess (eve excluded) because all major development studios are an have been going after WOW for the last decade, and failing.

Only people who care about sandboxes are indy developers who bite of WAY more than they can chew, and often launch years before they are ready to keep their funding.  Its sad i know.  Sandbox deserves a few more large budget games, at least one.

Blantant lies. It's okay though. Massively, IGN, MMOhut, Ten-ton hammer, and mmoprg.com all disagree with you.

edit- Forbes disagrees too.

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by Crunchy222

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by azzamasin
Thats why all sandboxes inevitably fail.  Promise to much and deliver a hodge podge of a mess.

Hmm this sandbox I'm playing has twice as many players as WoW.

wushu isnt a sandbox and im so dissapointed in how many people just dont know what a sandbox is.

 

also wushu was quite dead while i was in, for a game with twice as many...oh wait your probably counting all the free chinese players in china...twice as many free players then im sure.

 

Sandboxes are a hodgepodge mess (eve excluded) because all major development studios are an have been going after WOW for the last decade, and failing.

Only people who care about sandboxes are indy developers who bite of WAY more than they can chew, and often launch years before they are ready to keep their funding.  Its sad i know.  Sandbox deserves a few more large budget games, at least one.

Blantant lies. It's okay though. Massively, IGN, MMOhut, Ten-ton hammer, and mmoprg.com all disagree with you.

 

edit- Forbes disagrees too.

Must have missed all that sandbox getting lost in wushus linear storyline quest hub mechanics. 

Yeah all those sources are wrong.  Sorry.

Just because they let you choose your skills doesnt make it a sandbox.

Sandbox is a new buzzword unfortunately, and many are going to try to use it to their advantage.  Snadboxes do not have linear storylines and quest hubs...nor do they have NPC factions you have to join, while participating in their NPC storyline spying ect....  i dont care what a financial magazine says....and gaming magazines are almost always wrong about everything...

keep livin the dream though if it suits you i guess.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by paulytheb

 

Tell me again how big a failure Eve is.

Let see .. it was released what .. 7-8 years ago .. and it is stuck at what ... less than 500k players after all these years.

Even MMO failure like TOR has more players .. and sold 2M boxes in its first month.

And this shows how little you know about MMO's...as sub numbers aren't the absolute deciding factor in the quality and success of a game. It's been running with increasing sub numbers (P2P mind you) for 7 or 8 years tells it's success alone...as most of the types last 6 months to maybe a year or so these days before merging servers, going F2P, or shutting down all together.

They may get high sub numbers...but only briefly before falling apart.

The biggest problem with newer MMOs is that they want to appease everyone.  In doing this, then end up appeasing noone.  You will never get a PvE lover to play well with a PvP lover.  It's a totally different mindset.  You may find some people that like to do both, they're out there, but in my experience the majority of players are one way or the other.  I personally am a PvE player, but I do like to PvP.  I will never play a game that is PvP focused for very long.  

DAoC is the only game that was largely catagorized as PvP, but I find that kind of PvP different than what we have in today's games.  In DAoC, you had to fight for your PvE content and bonuses.  Which made me want to PvP.  Even while playing PvP, the little things counted in DAoC.  Not being able to see who you're fighting was actually a big bonus to me.  If you think about it, that adds alot to immersion, since irl you almost never know who you're fighting other than thier affiliation and sometimes you don't even know that.  Fighting over actual "property" that you felt was yours, and really it was if your guild owned the keep, was also a big bonus.  Someone would attack my guild's keep and it made me feel obligated, even though I don't really like to PvP, to show up and rain blows down upon people trying to take what was ours.

I think companies would do alot better if they focused on one aspect of a game.  I can think back to a handful of titles to say I'm proud to say I played (and I've played pretty much ANY MMO since 1991, at least a month) and had a great time doing so.  Almost every single one of them was focused on something specific.  For me personally, the focus of the games are PvE.  Neverwinter Nights, Everquest, Final Fantasy 11, World of Warcraft, Rift, and Dark Age of Camelot are my top picks out of the numerous MMOs I've played.  Almost all of them are focused on PvE.  They do have PvP, but it's not the big focus imho.  One of those games, WoW, has done a great job of mixing PvE and PvP, that noone else can seem to duplicate (and they've all tried). 

World of Warcraft is really like two separate games really.  There's the PvE side of WoW, with the storyline, questing, and raids.  There's the PvP side of WoW, with the battlegrounds, arenas, and Open World.  Yes there is Open World PvP, and not always on PvP servers.  WoW seems to put as much attention to one side as the other.  All others seem to focus more on one side or the other.

Rift, another game I am currently playing, has PvP, but I haven't done more than maybe 5 battlegrounds or PvP rifts.  In my opinion, Rift is a PvE game and PvP was an afterthought.  I know they have focused alot into the PvP side of things, but most people I know don't even touch it.  It's not to say it isn't bad, it just seems the crowd that Rift draws is PvE oriented.

Originally posted by Gravarg

The biggest problem with newer MMOs is that they want to appease everyone.  In doing this, then end up appeasing noone.  You will never get a PvE lover to play well with a PvP lover.  It's a totally different mindset.  You may find some people that like to do both, they're out there, but in my experience the majority of players are one way or the other.  I personally am a PvE player, but I do like to PvP.  I will never play a game that is PvP focused for very long.  

 

DAoC is the only game that was largely catagorized as PvP, but I find that kind of PvP different than what we have in today's games.  In DAoC, you had to fight for your PvE content and bonuses.  Which made me want to PvP.  Even while playing PvP, the little things counted in DAoC.  Not being able to see who you're fighting was actually a big bonus to me.  If you think about it, that adds alot to immersion, since irl you almost never know who you're fighting other than thier affiliation and sometimes you don't even know that.  Fighting over actual "property" that you felt was yours, and really it was if your guild owned the keep, was also a big bonus.  Someone would attack my guild's keep and it made me feel obligated, even though I don't really like to PvP, to show up and rain blows down upon people trying to take what was ours.

 

I think companies would do alot better if they focused on one aspect of a game.  I can think back to a handful of titles to say I'm proud to say I played (and I've played pretty much ANY MMO since 1991, at least a month) and had a great time doing so.  Almost every single one of them was focused on something specific.  For me personally, the focus of the games are PvE.  Neverwinter Nights, Everquest, Final Fantasy 11, World of Warcraft, Rift, and Dark Age of Camelot are my top picks out of the numerous MMOs I've played.  Almost all of them are focused on PvE.  They do have PvP, but it's not the big focus imho.  One of those games, WoW, has done a great job of mixing PvE and PvP, that noone else can seem to duplicate (and they've all tried). 

 

World of Warcraft is really like two separate games really.  There's the PvE side of WoW, with the storyline, questing, and raids.  There's the PvP side of WoW, with the battlegrounds, arenas, and Open World.  Yes there is Open World PvP, and not always on PvP servers.  WoW seems to put as much attention to one side as the other.  All others seem to focus more on one side or the other.

 

Rift, another game I am currently playing, has PvP, but I haven't done more than maybe 5 battlegrounds or PvP rifts.  In my opinion, Rift is a PvE game and PvP was an afterthought.  I know they have focused alot into the PvP side of things, but most people I know don't even touch it.  It's not to say it isn't bad, it just seems the crowd that Rift draws is PvE oriented.

hear ye, hear ye! :D

wow was such a great game sniff.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by supertouchme
in mmo circles, "innovation" and "convenience" are virtually synonymous. people clamor for things like LFD and instant travel options but those things aren't necessary for creating a worthwhile mmo and they even detract from the experience in some cases. i've actually heard people claim that swtor failed simply because it didn't have lame fucking "quality of life" features. this genre is in a sad state and needs to be blown up.

"sad" from your point of view. "Convenience" is good, from my point of view.

LFD/instance travel .. .is a preference. I prefer the. You don't.

In fact, TOR will be a much better game if it is made an online RPG, instead of a MMO.

EXACTLY.

So for once give us ONE game that doesn't cater to YOU.

Your people and my people are different. We both are interested in DIFFERENT games. I've been saying this for a long time. We need to distinguish between the sub genres of "MMORPGs" what you want is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from what we want. Fair and simple.

This is marketing; no one is going to say this game is not for you. The aim of marketing is to increase sales not decrease them. MMOs are no different from any other product in this regard.

If you want to know what’s really on offer, read between the lines. If you want to never be disappointed don’t pre-order.

Well, when I chose Vanguard as my next MMO, all I really wanted is a classic fantasy MMO with a huge world. Turns out that Vanguard offered (and offers) a TON more than that.

Originally posted by nilden
It's not about how many features a game has it's about how good they are.

Not even that.

Its about how fun it is to play the actual game as a whole.

Features can contribute to this. But badly implemented features can be perfectly okay as long as they arent in the way of having fun.

Originally posted by Scot

[...] If you want to never be disappointed don’t pre-order.

Well, about that one: I never preordered, and yet I was disappointed by Guild Wars when I finally bought it. I grant you its a great game on some levels, but yet I was bored out of my mind in a matter of days.

Originally posted by paulytheb

Originally posted by azzamasin
Thats why all sandboxes inevitably fail.  Promise to much and deliver a hodge podge of a mess.

Oh, give it a break already. You don't like sandboxes. We get it.

 

Tell me again how big a failure Eve is.

Well he's actually correct. (And I am an avid fan of sandboxes.)

Not all sandboxes collapse on that aspect, but a good many do fail because of a lack of budget/time and they release with a sandbox that usually lacks toys, and in some extreame cases... the very sand itself.

Originally posted by Kazuhiro

Originally posted by paulytheb

Originally posted by azzamasin
Thats why all sandboxes inevitably fail.  Promise to much and deliver a hodge podge of a mess.

Oh, give it a break already. You don't like sandboxes. We get it.

 

Tell me again how big a failure Eve is.

Well he's actually correct. (And I am an avid fan of sandboxes.)

Not all sandboxes collapse on that aspect, but a good many do fail because of a lack of budget/time and they release with a sandbox that usually lacks toys, and in some extreame cases... the very sand itself.

It applies to all games, not just sandbox games. If SWTOR proved anything it's that even a near-limitless budget cannot overcome spreading your gameplay out too thin. The perfect example was the space mini-game. It was a complete waste of development money that could have been spent on making other things better. People notice when gameplay has no depth.