This is such a difficult question to answer without playing the game. We will see how it turns out once game is released.

Originally posted by InFaVilla

Originally posted by Dredphyre

GW2 will b teh Messiah of MMOs. Repent nao!

Does that mean we have to cancel all our current subscriptions and preorder GW2?

Indeed. Not only that, brother, the features that you've panned in other MMOs are now sancrosanct:

1. Made for Consoles is okay now
2. Loading screens are fine too
3. Story is now okay to have
4. Launcing without PvP servers is fine
5. Tokens for loot instead of actual loot = win

Originally posted by Dredphyre

Originally posted by InFaVilla

Originally posted by Dredphyre

GW2 will b teh Messiah of MMOs. Repent nao!

Does that mean we have to cancel all our current subscriptions and preorder GW2?

Indeed. Not only that, brother, the features that you've panned in other MMOs are now sancrosanct:

1. Made for Consoles is okay now
2. Loading screens are fine too
3. Story is now okay to have
4. Launcing without PvP servers is fine
5. Tokens for loot instead of actual loot = win

I could go on.  

 

 

 

 

Welcome to MMORPG.com. ENjoy your stay;)

Originally posted by Dredphyre

Indeed. Not only that, brother, the features that you've panned in other MMOs are now sancrosanct:

1. Made for Consoles is okay now
2. Loading screens are fine too
3. Story is now okay to have
4. Launcing without PvP servers is fine
5. Tokens for loot instead of actual loot = win

I could go on.  

Could dissect this and say why these features are good for GW2 and the way GW2 is using them makes sense etc... but I doubt it'd make a difference.

Enjoy playing what you like playing.

OP: I sure hope its a new breed, anything but the status quo and I'm on board - because of WoW's success the genre has grown very stale and repetitive.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Dredphyre

Indeed. Not only that, brother, the features that you've panned in other MMOs are now sancrosanct:

1. Made for Consoles is okay now
2. Loading screens are fine too
3. Story is now okay to have
4. Launcing without PvP servers is fine
5. Tokens for loot instead of actual loot = win

I could go on.  

Could disect this and say why these features are good for GW2 and the way GW2 is using them makes sense etc... but I doubt it'd make a difference.

Enjoy playing what you like playing.

IMO that can be said for just any MMO that the way they used it is good for them and makes sense.

Originally posted by Bigdaddyx

Originally posted by BadSpock

Could disect this and say why these features are good for GW2 and the way GW2 is using them makes sense etc... but I doubt it'd make a difference.

Enjoy playing what you like playing.

IMO that can be said for just any MMO that the way they used it is good for them and makes sense.

I would disagree.

There are a lot of bad design decisions made that make no sense and are not good for a game.

not new breed, just not WoW clone. 

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Bigdaddyx

Originally posted by BadSpock

Could disect this and say why these features are good for GW2 and the way GW2 is using them makes sense etc... but I doubt it'd make a difference.

Enjoy playing what you like playing.

IMO that can be said for just any MMO that the way they used it is good for them and makes sense.

I would disagree.

There are a lot of bad design decisions made that make no sense and are not good for a game.

And those bad designs suddenly make sense with GW2? sorry but it is not that simple.

Originally posted by smh_alot
Ok, I get the excitement of the article writer, but I don't get the sandbox comparison. In what way does GW2 use sandbox specific elements?? Now Arche Age, THAT I can understand that people describe it as a themepark/sandbox hybrid, with sandbox features like building your own houses, towns, keeps and ships and such. But GW2, nope, not really: best description imo would be themepark 2.0 or next-gen themepark. But still very solidly in the themepark or dev content driven branch of things.

From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.

Exploration + content.

Originally posted by BadSpock

3 faction open world PvP which doesn't divide server/guild/friend alliances

PvE themepark with many sandbox properties I miss from old UO days (only true sandbox)

action oriented combat

You know?

The more I look at GW2, the more I think it is really the evolution of Ultima Online.

Ultima Online, at its prime before the "2nd generation" games 2003-2004 was I think at its best post Renaissance pre Age of Shadows.

Similarities?

Minimal grind.

No PvE end game.

PvP from day one in a seperate world, faction vs. faction vs. faction with territorial control.

focus on skill > gear

PvE world focused on exploration, cooperation, without limited by strict group size or role/class restrictions.

I mean, the 2nd generation sandboxes like EvE really followed the pre Renaissance UO model - which was very niche.

Other sandboxes like FFXI and SWG followed more of the EQ1 model with tons of grinding.

No game has really followed the UO post Renaissance model.

And I'd argue, until now with GW2. That's why I'm excited about GW2.

Looks to bring back a LOT of great memories from post-Trammel split UO, which (IMO) was the greatest MMORPG of all time.

One thing it is missing? Housing.

I mean, yeah we have our personal instances but... there was just something so fun and cool about UO housing, putting all your stuff on display, having a shared space for your friends/guildies...

I didn't like the urban sprawl that kind of ruined many of the "wild" places in Brittania, but housing is really the only big thing for me that I feel GW2 is missing.

Is this supposed to be a sarcastic post? Or are you seriously comparing GW2 to being UO?

These two games have nothing in common, UO being a pure sandbox and GW2 being a pure themepark, like comparing a youghurt to wheatbread.

Originally posted by Bigdaddyx

Originally posted by BadSpock

I would disagree.

There are a lot of bad design decisions made that make no sense and are not good for a game.

And those bad designs suddenly make sense with GW2? sorry but it is not that simple.

All systems in a MMORPG are related. You can't just pluck feature X from game Y and put it into game Z.

All systems and features must work well in concert with each other to be "designed well."

Originally posted by Fusion

Is this supposed to be a sarcastic post? Or are you seriously comparing GW2 to being UO?

These two games have nothing in common, UO being a pure sandbox and GW2 being a pure themepark, like comparing a youghurt to wheatbread.

Nope, very serious.

I don't define sandbox as "being able to build stuff and having FFA PvP."

I define sandbox as minimal grind, emergant game play, limit on restrictions.

Just like Skyrim is a sandbox RPG in comparison to something like Mass Effect.

Skyrim still has quests and a main story and levels/skills... obviously single player and no PvP... but it's no less a sandbox.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by smh_alot
Ok, I get the excitement of the article writer, but I don't get the sandbox comparison. In what way does GW2 use sandbox specific elements?? Now Arche Age, THAT I can understand that people describe it as a themepark/sandbox hybrid, with sandbox features like building your own houses, towns, keeps and ships and such. But GW2, nope, not really: best description imo would be themepark 2.0 or next-gen themepark. But still very solidly in the themepark or dev content driven branch of things.

From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.

Exploration + content.

 

Your description describes most mmorpg's I've played the only difference would be in ones perception of "fun".  One might not think it fun to ignore the "tunnels" in games like WOW,TOR,STO,LOTRO and the like but it's possible to do and to be honest I've often thought of alot of the supposed sandboxes that way, no they don't give you things like quests and the like as a reason to go out and explore and I've never found that to make the game fun at all.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by elocke

I've been saying all along that HYBRIDs(sandparks) are the kick in the pants this genre needs to thrive and survive.  So glad to FINALLY get games that are doing it.

I think GW2 is more of a Themebox than a Sandpark.

 

True, but it has sandbox elements, as the article pointed out.  Even a little makes it hands above the latest games we've seen of late.

More a case a new breed of quality MMORPG + value for money MMORPG.

4. Separating PvP from PvE and having instant access at any time and any "level" with any server. 3 Factions ffs!! Why has it been so long? Having several types - team and faction.

I don't think those are revolutionary or actually sandboxy that much, just very good design ideas that cooperate with each other packaged in THE 2nd to none presentation for mmorpgs.

I mostly agree with you except it's a shame you did not mention GW2's potential for e-sports like instanced pvp, with it's emphasis on equality, skill, action and watching the screen instead of the UI.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by smh_alot
Ok, I get the excitement of the article writer, but I don't get the sandbox comparison. In what way does GW2 use sandbox specific elements?? Now Arche Age, THAT I can understand that people describe it as a themepark/sandbox hybrid, with sandbox features like building your own houses, towns, keeps and ships and such. But GW2, nope, not really: best description imo would be themepark 2.0 or next-gen themepark. But still very solidly in the themepark or dev content driven branch of things.

From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.

Exploration + content.

 

Originally posted by raistlinm

Originally posted by BadSpock

From what I gather - GW2 feels a lot like a Skyrim kind of sandbox.. sure, there are quests and some guidance and a main plot line, but you can also just pick a direction and wander out and find all kinds of fun stuff to do, that is actually worth while.

Exploration + content.

Your description describes most mmorpg's I've played the only difference would be in ones perception of "fun".  One might not think it fun to ignore the "tunnels" in games like WOW,TOR,STO,LOTRO and the like but it's possible to do and to be honest I've often thought of alot of the supposed sandboxes that way, no they don't give you things like quests and the like as a reason to go out and explore and I've never found that to make the game fun at all.

You are right, in the sense that you don't really get quests that tell you to go places in GW2 (except for a few of the ones that the Scouts will tell you about) so in reality it is more like all the quests are out in the world and don't require you to run back to town afterwards.

So is it sandbox? Really depends on how you define sandbox. It's much more themepark then say EvE, but it's far more sandbox then say TOR.

I like to call it a Themebox.

Heavier on the themepark side, but with a more sandbox feel to it.