The MMO genre needs to stop looking backwards.

[Rischie]

The game that you are talking about a sandbox /themepark hybrid is already being made and is due to release in 2012 , as the NDA is already lifted .

 

 

 

 

120 possible classes as you can either pick a class archtype or create a custome class .

build a house furnish it , hire npc guards for it build a castle for siege a fleet of ships, for naval combat .

 

Able to chop down trees , grow new ones no two servers will be the same as you can build anywhere ,

 

A seamless world no loading screens and world larger then all of WOW combined including all expansions .

 

Think I just found my new game. Bye swtor, hello arch!

[IIII-IIII-IIII]

Think I just found my new game. Bye swtor, hello arch!

 

That looks like a pile of hot garbage, to be honest.

[Sparklehorse]

Nice ideas Op but you missed the whole part about sandboxes being the original mmo's and then being replaced by the themepark.

 

Maybe I'm just old but themepark was the evolution of sandbox. People have neither the time, nor the patience to play sandbox games anymore and to imply that sandboxes are the evolution of theme parks is sorta...well...backwards.

 

I suggest you go play Eve. Fully player controlled content. It truly is a sandbox game and it fills a niche quite nicely and that is exactly what sandbox games are now.

 

Niche games.

 

We'll be waiting here for you after you get your face smashed in by the sociopaths in Eve with a big furry wookie hug!

[Llann]

EA GAMES *does not* innovate. Ever.

 

That would be financially risky. Why make something new when you can copy it from somewhere else?

[Rischie]

I think I am just going to chime in here and say as a pvper in this game (don't worry about yelling at me to just cancel my account, already ahead of you) that my money in this game is worthless to me.

 

I don't know if anyone really sees that as a problem, but I just thought I would point it out, that i really do not need in game money. I get badges that let me get pvp gear, I get bags that give me first aid stuff. Crafting does not concern me because I have all the gear I want through pvping.

 

So all that's left to do is smash buttons. Which, contrary to popular belief is not the only thing we pvpers like to do. The occasional crafting would not be that bad, but there is no incentive to do it.

 

Where as the OP has clearly pointed out, having a mix hybrid can clearly have its benefits.

[nschlan]

OP - agree with you completely, we need games like that *cough*GW2*cough* (well, any game that does what the OP is talking about would be awesome.)

[Uben]

EA GAMES *does not* innovate. Ever.

 

That would be financially risky. Why make something new when you can copy it from somewhere else?

 

THIS is financially risky. Lets not shoot for the model that ropes in the PvE players, the raiders, the PvP players, the casuals, the hardcores, the role players, the crafters, the armchair politicians, the social bees, the hunters, the gatherers, the explorers, the builders... ect. Let's instead shoot for a total niche crowd like the Single player RPG enthusiasts who care mostly about canned static story lines. Lets throw 150 mil at that small crowd instead.

 

It is quite a gamble.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Uben

[nschlan]

THIS is financially risky. Lets not shoot for the model that ropes in the PvE players, the raiders, the PvP players, the casuals, the hardcores, the role players, the crafters, the armchair politicians, the social bees, the builders... ect. Let's instead shoot for a total niche crowd like the Single player RPG enthusiasts who care mostly about story lines. Lets throw 150 mil at that small crowd instead.

 

It is quite a gamble.

 

You're quite right and from a business stand point that makes perfect sense, but look at all the MMOs out there. WoW pretty much has a monopoly on that model, no one will ever beat them with it. If the risk pays off, that game can be the "next WoW" (so to speak).

[Uben]

Everyone thought Ford would always dominate the market at one time. They had the model T. Even Ford thought they would never have to change. Until the other companies started offering other designs for people who wanted other than the model T.

 

 

Imagine now if Ford ONLY sold sedans. Would they be able to compete with GMC selling SUVs, trucks, busses, semis, sports cars...ect? Probably not. GMC would have more of the market by offering a choice to more of the demographic.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Uben

[nschlan]

Everyone thought Ford would always dominate the market at one time. They had the model T. Even Ford thought they would never have to change. Until the other companies started offering other designs for people who wanted other than the model T.

 

 

Imagine now if Ford ONLY sold sedans. Would they be able to compete with GMC selling SUVs, trucks, busses, semis, sports cars...ect? Probably not. GMC would have more of the market by offering a choice to more of the demographic.

 

Problem is, no MMOs out right now are doing anything new. And that's not what the OP is talking about. He isn't saying ONLY offer X.

Edited February 8, 2012 by nschlan

[Uben]

Problem is, no MMOs out right now are doing anything new. And that's not what the OP is talking about. He isn't saying ONLY offer X.

 

I am not aiming at him. I am spring-boarding to reach the other eyes that adamantly defend the current model and direction TOR has taken.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Uben

[Force_Me]

One issue I see with MMOs is that Americans, in general, are independent-minded. Why do MMOs work "better" in Asia? Because Asians have a sense of community in real life.

 

I am the "typical" independent American. I want to accomplish things myself; I don't like to be put in a box and told, "you have to do it this way"; I don't like having to rely on annoying, immature, selfish people to complete a task. That is why "forced" grouping will never work in America. Don't punish players for helping each other without being grouped. Let grouping happen spontaneous and dynamicly. I would bet that more people would cooperate if it wasn't forced or punished.

 

A note about combat progression. I remember when I tried to get my daughter to play an MMO, her first question was, "do I have to fight all the time to progress?" When she found out that she did, she didn't play.

 

Anyway, how does a company get Americans to cooperate in a game when we won't in real life?

 

Even if a miracle occurred and a game was created that accomplished true community cooperation, unfortunately, if the game allowed non-combat players to progress and be rewarded financially (in game), guess what? Some A-holes would exploit the system!

 

I like the idea of having a "true" community in a game, where there are a myriad of professions and progression could happen other than being combat-related. I'm just not sure how, or if, it would work in America.

[FIume]

is OP not just describing age of empires?

[SlickDevlan]

It's a long post. Don't read it if you don't want to.

 

---

 

The hybrid, and even the hybrid that leans sandbox, really is the direction that MMOs should be headed in, as much as it might make a vocal minority scream in fury. What we're seeing in TOR is the net result of collective burnout with these games. The theme park has become so predictable in nature that you can take MMO player X and insert him into theme park Y, and within minutes he has not only mastered the basics, but is (if he hasn't taken to the forums to moan about the predictably dry nature of the starting zone) racing headlong towards the completely hollow endgame.

 

If I were designing an MMO from the ground up today, I'd be looking at a couple of things:

 

1) The trinity system isn't a realistic representation of combat. I'm not saying that everything should be a twitch system. However, if we were to envision a genuine approach to going out and fighting, say, a dragon, you're probably not lining up one or two huge, slow guys in plate armor to shout obscenities at the beast while 18 other people poke it in the behind with sticks and spells. Can you imagine this working in real life? Can you imagine the dragon not immediately turning around and gobbling up half the raid, saving the 'tough nut' warriors for the end? A real-life pack of wolves might not be sentient on the level of humans, but they know to prey on the weak and the young -- they always always ALWAYS pick the soft target. It's difficult to stomach the idea that a dragon wouldn't have a similar basic understanding of the nature of the world.

 

Real-life (and believable fantasy) combat relies on two mechanics -- avoidance, and mitigation, and the latter can only take you so far when that dragon lowers its forearm to crush you. Ergo, a bigger reliance on dodging and movement is needed. Additionally, all members of a group should be required to be more self-reliant about their own survival -- the age of the dedicated healer, whose sole job is to stand behind the lines showering players with mystical white light -- needs to come to a close. Not only do healers remain a woefully underplayed class in every theme park MMO, they a) lack believability, and b) lack an epic feel for a majority of gamers. Personally, I look at MMO healers as cads who would rather stare at a series of bars all game than actually swing their sword, and I am hardly alone in this. I would never play one, and that's never going to change.

 

2) The rise of social media has made gaming far more popular than it ever was before, but not all gaming appeals to all people. The thing about MMOs is that their original intent was to allow gamers to live their story in fantastic environs. But not everyone's story need revolve around combat -- a lot of people might get their kicks out of homesteading, farming, milling, weaving, serving as a castle steward, a politician, etc.

 

The problem with themepark games is there really is only one avenue to power, and it involves slugging it out in combat, either with players or PCs. In this sense, the 'promise' of the genre has been betrayed, and folded into a single, generalized mechanic -- kill or quit. When I look at the rampant success of social games that involve no combat -- titles like The Sims and Farmville and Minecraft -- I see a vast, untapped resource of potential MMOers who might pay $15 a month to own, say, a tavern, or an inn, or work as a famous musician. And if you did a good enough job integrating all these working parts into a system where they were all required for a faction to prevail in warfare, then I really think you'd be talking about the game that would be the 'next WoW.'

 

3) Finally, there is a lack of personal investment and personal loss in game worlds that is draining the life out of the genre. An example of personal investment could be anything: from a house that you own in a town, to a small fort that you and a few friends defend, to a starship crewed by an entire guild.

 

Let's look at WoW: when you go into an Alterac Valley and you lose after 25 minutes, what happens? Are the Frostwolves finally driven from Alterac once and for all? Are the resources of the valley now directed to the benefit of the Alliance? Does anyone even give a damn who wins or loses? The thing about instanced everything; about a game world that neither rewards nor punishes for victory and defeat, is that you wind up with a lot of people who don't really give a crap what happens anywhere.

 

In SWG, players could build towns, fortresses, etc. And if those bases -- which you had worked hundreds of hours to earn -- were destroyed by the enemy, they were gone. You'd have to go farm up another one. Now, the 'modern MMOer' might find such a concept ludicrous, but, if done correctly, loss can actually spurn an increased sense of investment in the gameworld. If my little fort gets torched, I am a) going to defend the hell out of my next one, and b) want to get revenge on the people who did it. When you lose a WZ, do you really sit around brooding about the fact that the Imperial transport on Alderaan got shot down? Do you mourn the deaths of the hundred or so invisible NPCs who manned that ship? Of course not. You don't care, and the game doesn't even want you to care.

 

In our fictional MMO, let's say you and your guild stumble onto a narrow valley, surrounded on three sides by high mountains, and fed by a fast-flowing river. There is land to till, and space enough for several villages. You set about ordering the land immediately, but as your investment in the region grows, you begin to worry increasingly about jealous outsiders who would raid or conquer your budding kingdom. You build a series of outlying forts to warn of oncoming armies, and then construct a mighty citadel in an easily-defensible high spot. It has taken a lot to accomplish all this, and maybe, one day, you'll lose it all. But you'd fight like hell to prevent that from happening.

 

Would you fight like hell to avoid queuing up for Boarding Party for the thousandth time? I think not.

 

---

 

And there you have it. I don't believe sandbox MMOs are the future -- people require a degree of structure. There will always be a large crowd of folks who like to raid, and like mindless PvP, and don't derive any enjoyment out of the non-combat elements that the genre could offer. But as a game designer, I would be looking to incorporate all crowds, and I think there's room enough in these games to please everyone.

 

The problem is that the investors behind these $100 million dollar goliaths are only concerned with the bottom line, and as they see it, 'if Blizzard did it, so can we.' The problem is, 'Blizzard did it' 7 years ago, and even if the genre hasn't moved on, people have. People have learned to burn through content far faster than it can be released; people have learned to race to the level cap, only to find that the bulk of the game's resources have been squandered on what will wind up being (if a player sticks with a main) the shortest portion of the content. It is a system that cannot endure forever -- it should only take one $100 million dollar MMO flop to call the system into question, yet in the past 5 years, we've seen game after game tank when the 'tried and true' method failed to prove lasting.

 

The first major company to realize this, and to design a game that lets go of so many of these dusty old habits and design a quality, hybrid product, is going to make WoW -- even at its apex -- look like a complete joke.

 

1- So everyone should be a tank with a little healing while dpsing? Gotcha...

 

2- I think you wildly overestimate the number of people that want to play "Star Wars: The Musical" or "Star Wars: Business Tycoon". There probably is a market for that, but to waste the amount of time and resources to add it to a game like this isn't worth it.

 

3- I agree that more investment should be brought into the game, but what you're asking for is not very realistic. Many, many more people simply wouldn't be involved with something like a fort if it was going to be destroyed, and for most people it would be destroyed simply because those other guys simply have more guys...

 

Now something like WAR's RvR system might work, but like WAR's it would need to be a temporary loss. This still doesn't solve the problem of the haves and have nots.

 

 

EVERY company on Earth is concerned with the bottom line. If they aren't, they are not for profit companies that tend to not make video games. I'm willing to bet any amount of money that they have a better idea what their market wants and what the market will bear than you do. You also need to consider that what you're asking for will take MORE time and MORE money to accomplish and for minimal gains if any.

[Mavajo]

To all you reading-impaired people in here yelling "BUT I DON'T LIKE SANDBOX GAMES" and "THERE ARE SANDBOX GAMES OUT THERE" -- yes, the OP undertstands that. He wasn't saying future MMOs need to revert to being sandbox.

 

Rather, he was saying something that is quite correct -- MMOs need to start incorporating sandbox elements.

 

One of the major flaws in current MMOs is that people run out of stuff to do. And so the devs have to keep churning out patches. Well, if you incorporate sandbox elements, then that gives the game more replayability. In theory, a well made sandbox area in a game can occupy players in perpetuity -- because the players are able to advance the game themselves. The onus on the devs to churn out new content ASAP is no longer so burdensome.

 

Obviously, the main linear thrust of the game will still be theme park. But then you could have other areas in the game, particularly at "end game", that incorporate sandbox elements. So in essence, you wouldn't be replacing anything with sandbox elements -- the sandbox elements would be added in addition to all the other things that make current MMOs enjoyable. People who love the themepark aspects could continue playing MMOs just as they currently do, and completely avoid the sandbox elements if they so desire.

[Mavajo]

1- So everyone should be a tank with a little healing while dpsing? Gotcha...

 

Your reading comprehension is terrible. Honestly, you should be embarassed that you even typed that.

 

He was in no way implying that every character should occupy the tank role. Rather, he was implying that rather than end-game content being predicated on having unavoidable damage that healers must heal the rest of the raid through in order to survive, that all damage should be avoidable -- and the onus would be on individual players AVOIDING the damage, rather than passively absorbing it while another player stands in the back and heals them.

 

I think it's a great idea, and something I've pondered myself.

[solidkjames]

I'd have to agree with OP's basic premise. If Minecraft's surprising rampant success doesn't tell the AAA dinosaurs something about how they're doing business, well, they just aren't paying attention.

 

There's a whole horde of people (to the tune of millions) interested in online multiplayer consisting of minimal or no combat.

 

And that is what Titan and the next gen games will be. Something far more social and casual. This is going to be the last big Triple A old school MMO that is succesful for this very reason, people get burnt out.

Edited February 8, 2012 by solidkjames

[Blackardin]

In the same sense, WoW wouldn't have become a behemoth if it released as themepark as it is today.

 

Actually, wow's success was due to the "theme park" setting that it maintained up until just after Nax. It failed in the last few expansions when it went hard core and introduce completely unforgiving fights and changed the lock-out system. The vast majority of guilds burnt out trying to complete the content, the hard core players did it in a few weeks and moved on.

 

Theme park is what will maintain the bulk of your demographic. It is what most players seek in a game, distraction from life, not a means by which to "challenge themselves". Success is built upon a platform of effort and success, not challenge and failure.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Blackardin

[mangarrage]

I more or less agree but th title I kind of do not.

 

I think the game makers do need to look back, however they should ignore everything in the last 8 years and look further back.

The originals had it right

eq had raiding right

daoc had pvp (rvr) right

 

Sure you have to ease of of the grinding concept and I get that.

 

But games have to increase the time to max level, but at the same time make it enjoyable

 

SWTOR could have been alot longer to level and I would have enjoyed it just as much

 

When I heard 300+ hours I thought that was decent, however in reality it is about 1/2 that and I am talking about not spacebarring at all, it even less if you did that

 

Just look what fast levelling does to games

Ruins crafting and the economy-why buy a level 20 item when youre going to be 24 in a few hours?

So much time is spend on early zone development and in this game story and you spend almost no time in zones at all. the 2 opening planets, quesh, corelia (due to not needing to play out the whole planet) are just a flash. Hoth/Tatoonie huge planets but you use about 1/50h of the planet per side

So many things just utterly wasted when the levelling curve is so fast

and unfortunately a ton of resources go into making these planets which even an average player can finish in one session if they wanted to

[Amenian]

Any game that flushed my hundreds of hours of work on a fort down the tube because of the actions of some gamers who happened to be better than me is a game I wouldn't be playing much longer. I'm pretty positive I'm not alone in this.

[Mavajo]

Any game that flushed my hundreds of hours of work on a fort down the tube because of the actions of some gamers who happened to be better than me is a game I wouldn't be playing much longer. I'm pretty positive I'm not alone in this.

 

And that's why you could have sandbox areas without PvP. This isn't some insurmountable problem you've discovered.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Mavajo

[gurugeorge]

Everyone thought Ford would always dominate the market at one time. They had the model T. Even Ford thought they would never have to change. Until the other companies started offering other designs for people who wanted other than the model T.

 

 

Imagine now if Ford ONLY sold sedans. Would they be able to compete with GMC selling SUVs, trucks, busses, semis, sports cars...ect? Probably not. GMC would have more of the market by offering a choice to more of the demographic.

 

But that's precisely what BW are doing.

 

I've seen a lot of the critics pooh-pooh the VO storylines and dialogue. But having such a typical BW experience WHILE GROUPED is indeed the kind of new niche you are talking about. It's not a negligible factor at all, it's where SWTOR's originality and market niche are.

 

IOW, SWTOR is aiming to open up its own market. The fact that the hataz thought BW was competing with WoW is what stumped them with the one month prediction, and it's what's going to keep stumping them until they realize what BW have actually done, and who their real target audience was: i.e. a cross section of gamers who have either disliked MMOs up till now (including WoW), or tried them but not liked them, plus obviously people who like Star Wars, or people who are new to gaming altogether, and particularly families, couples, etc. (hence the grouped dialogue experience).

 

Just as Blizz werent' just directly competing with EQ, but trying to open up a whole new audience to the joys of MMORPG-ing, so is BW, in its own way - sure, it's nice to get WoW-ers in, but as these forums are shown, they're too finicky to rely on. More reliable and more likely to stick are the thousands of MMO "virgins" who will be attracted to the title, and who know nothing of what's expected of endgame PvP and PvE, etc., etc.

 

What's fooled people is the WoW-like nature of the MMO element of SWTOR. It seems to be that way because it looks like BW is competing directly with Blizz, but it's actually that way simply because Blizz found out long ago that those conventions are easy for people to get into in an MMO, and BW saw no reason to reinvent the wheel, since they weren't out for innovation in that area anyway.

[Tic-]

Any game that flushed my hundreds of hours of work on a fort down the tube because of the actions of some gamers who happened to be better than me is a game I wouldn't be playing much longer. I'm pretty positive I'm not alone in this.

 

And herein lies the problem in my opinion...

 

some people think that themeparks must have epics, rails, quest hubs, etc.

 

sandboxes must have pvp where people take all your stuff and knock down your house/

 

when they don't, developers aren't "doing it right"

 

why does everything need to be so black and white?

 

bleh

Edited February 8, 2012 by Tic-

[Kozzmozz]

Nice ideas Op but you missed the whole part about sandboxes being the original mmo's and then being replaced by the themepark.

 

Maybe I'm just old but themepark was the evolution of sandbox. People have neither the time, nor the patience to play sandbox games anymore and to imply that sandboxes are the evolution of theme parks is sorta...well...backwards.

 

I suggest you go play Eve. Fully player controlled content. It truly is a sandbox game and it fills a niche quite nicely and that is exactly what sandbox games are now.

 

Niche games.

 

We'll be waiting here for you after you get your face smashed in by the sociopaths in Eve with a big furry wookie hug!

 

I never understood the fuss about eve. always eve eve eve. Has anyone looked at that game? to me a battle looks like a contest who will drop down first from an epileptic seizure.

being a spaceship, that must be great...

[Lethality]

I never understood the fuss about eve. always eve eve eve. Has anyone looked at that game? to me a battle looks like a contest who will drop down first from an epileptic seizure.

being a spaceship, that must be great...

 

Look past the game... see the world.