ThorgrimLutgen Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I agree with all of that, me being of the "old generation" too (ah, the fond memories I have of playing neverwinter nights as my stone-dumb half-ogre following another adventurer group around saying "you purdy" to the only female in that group and valiantly charging into battle (and dying) to protect her... they ended up adopting me as their mascot despite me being alot lower level than them hehe) That said, the OP is still wrong. I have a horrible feeling I know you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OddballEasyEight Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I have a horrible feeling I know you! Heh, that'd be quite a coincidence, now wouldn't it? But since I only played neverwinter nights for a few weeks (well, online anyway) before moving on to... hmm... well, something, I doubt that we met Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grayseven Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 You know, that may very well be why Themeparks are more popular than sandboxes. The older players, the ones who cut their teeth on UO and the like, have simply grown up. They no longer have the ability to spend 8 hours a day online keeping up with an MMO that requires excessive time to just keep up with other players. The younger generation, having never had to wait an hour for dinner to be ready or 10 minutes for coffee to percolate, simply want "instant gratification" to go along with their instant rice and instant coffee. The CM would not be as successful as it is without that "want it now" attitude. Before the CM, you had to go out and do something to get what you wanted. Now, you can throw a couple hours wages at EA/BW and buy what you want. Players satisfied with this kind of action are not going to spend weeks and months gathering materials of a specific quality, crafting perfect sub components over a period of days to be able to craft other sub components which can then be used to craft a "best" item. They won't have spreadsheets and resource calculators and reams of paper with research to provide the maximum armor rating possible. Good businesses pick a market and provide the service that market demands. Current MMO demands by the majority are not for a sandbox MMO. Eve is probably the most successful sandbox but it survives with around 300k subscribers which is a drop in the bucket compared to what themepark MMO's like WoW have for sub numbers. What cracks me up most though, about calling SWG a sandbox, is that the only effect players had on the environment was placing structures on it. Be it a PvP base, a harvester or a Guild Hall in a player city, the entire "sandbox" feature of SWG involved structures. Eve is considered a sandbox but again, it is only a couple of features that are "player made" such as controlling sectors and having stations and the like. Structures and area control. EQNext...structures and players area control and the ability to "dig up" dynamic dungeons that may or may not despawn after a period of time. Seriously, sandbox gaming isn't that impressive and the more players a game has the more cluttered a sandbox games world will get, even if the game allows other players to destroy those player made structures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PavSalco Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Because Minecraft is simple and has a lot of available languages, so the youngest players from all over the world can play it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andryah Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 (edited) I think a hybrid would work best. The running theory inside some studios and from some MMO pundits is that Sand-Park is the next "break-out" feature for MMOs. It remains to be seen yet if there is foundation (or sand) underlying the theory. That said..... in principle... a game like SWTOR has some qualities that lend themselves to a move toward Sand-Park at some later date. The ability to instantiate separate planets with unique features (and perhaps rule sets) seems a natural for going Sand-Park. But that does not in any way mean Bioware agrees with the Sand-Park approach. It's risky since Sand-Park is largely unproven (commercially). Edited June 21, 2014 by Andryah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
errant_knight Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 There's nothing wrong with sandbox games, per se, but I tend to play them very casually, if at all. It's the depth of story that drew me to swtor and kept me from quitting after a few months as I have every other mmo I've played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphasgimaone Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 One error in logic persisting throughout this thread is the assumption that theme parks and sandboxes are mutually exclusive. They aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RakghoulsRTrolls Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 It's risky since Sand-Park is largely unproven (commercially). Pure conjecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odonoghuet Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I hate the blame on the 'Now' generation, because it isn't those young kids who are different to the older generation, society has evolved in how it takes entertainment. My seventy year old mother *****es when a browser takes more than a second to load a page. All action movies are formulated for early action because that is what viewers have previously enjoyed. Try finding a remote control for an entertainment unit that doesn't include fast forward. I don't see a generation or even society of demanding Now babies, I see a bunch of people wanting engagement on the subject they sought out. This is where Themepark wins because when I come to play an MMO based on an action and deep story IP, I don't want to have to research to understand what the very concept the game designers had for my characters place in the world, and I don't want free imagination dramatically outside of the themes of the IP. My experience of SWG was a confusing start on a space station doing lacklustre missions, then transporting to Tattooine and its endless abandoned housing, with a choice between lacklustre missions and really bad player created no story grind missions. Might be that sandbox elements could help this game be more enjoyable, but sandbox does not support good storytelling, and more people in these forums complain about wanting more story, not more sandbox. I'd rather hear about what people would want to do with their housing and player created missions and other sandbox elements, and how such would make it better, than simply demanding how this game needs it NOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsillah Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 One error in logic persisting throughout this thread is the assumption that theme parks and sandboxes are mutually exclusive. They aren't. Perhaps you are assuming that people are making that assumption. I certainly never said that they are mutually exclusive but I have said that I don't think BW would be very eager to add sandbox elements. Why not? Because this game wasn't meant as a sandbox game so it's not what attracted players to come here and play the game and so it would be an incorrect conclusion to say that a lot of players really want this. I am sure some do, but let me ask you. Do you really think that there are enough people who would want this AND use the features? If so, based on what? And if BW invested resources into this would you realy think that the sandboxers will not be complaining that it's not enough or not the right kind of sandbox content and the rest of us complaining that BW is using resources for something most players don't want? To me it seems that BW can only lose by going that way because I don't see that really that many people who play SWTOR want this and then it just seems like a waste of resources and a direction that BW can only lose with if they went that way. So it's not that it's mutually exclusive, I just don't think that there's enough reason for BW to go that way. This is not SWG 2. People need to understand that, because I get the feeling that it's not about sandbox in general but people wanting a SWG 2 and that's just not what SWTOR is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalfear Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 as i said Lord Sandbox fanatics will never admit the factual truth of sub lose and reason why the CU, Village, NGE were put into game. I didn't postulate anything I stated factual information straight from financial reports released to investors at that time. If that's not official enough for you Sorry cant help you out Thats always been the problem with the SWG debate When the real evidence and facts are put forth the deniers cover their eyes and ears and go "LALALALALA" refusing to hear the truth Then they turn around with the nonsense you wrote about no pop drop till CU and blah blah blah The real info out there if people go looking for it most just refuse to look and make their own theories and conclusions Truth is (from inverstor reports at time) SWG sold record levels of opening week sales and with in 3 weeks the subscription cancellation rate had already become noticable By 8 weeks in the sub cancel rate was worrisome SWG failed to retain the percentage of subs they had been targeting to retain from the get go. And thats when they started to look into bold changes based on feed back from the subscription base CU was made from thst very feedback Village was made in regards to subscribers complaining they couldnt get Jedi characters with out a huge grind NGE was a basic complete rewrite of everything because by that point Sony understood their sandbox experiment had failed badly. But what ever, im sure your opinion is more correct then Sony statements to investors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andryah Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 (edited) Pure conjecture. No, it's not. 1) Limited player base actually interested in sandbox (~5-10% of the total MMO market). We know this already, so please don't pretend otherwise. 2) No prior market data to demonstrate how the player base ACTUALLY takes to a mixed sandbox/themepark design. Not all the forum "promises" and "demands"... but what players actually will play beyond normal nomadic sniff and play. There is plenty of marketing speculation and conjecture.....but no hard data. 3) No compelling market driver, other then MMO companies seeking something new to breakout of the current MMO market feature set. Limited market for Sandbox aspects, no actual solid market data, uncertain if sandpark = a "breakout" or just another attempt to draw players with a gimmick. That is risky for any company, large or small, to sink a capital investment into. Note: I am NOT saying it cannot be successful, or create a new breakout change to the MMO market. I am simply stating that it's not an easy decision to make for a company as it is commercially risky to head into uncharted territory...especially for MMOs which are heavy capital investments. Separately... I see your member number --> 12952029, yet you use a number of the talking points so popular with the perpetual anti-SWTOR crowd and you do so with the familiarity of a SWTOR veteran. So with that... off to /ignore with you Edited June 21, 2014 by Andryah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andryah Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 (edited) So it's not that it's mutually exclusive, I just don't think that there's enough reason for BW to go that way. This is not SWG 2. People need to understand that, because I get the feeling that it's not about sandbox in general but people wanting a SWG 2 and that's just not what SWTOR is. /Agree. If the lions share of the MMO player base was serious about playing sandbox style.... then the various studios would have figured that out years ago and the market would be dominated by sandbox games. But it's quite the opposite in fact. So any sandbox content is a commercial risk on numbers alone. Which is not to say in any way that sandbox players do not deserve good sandbox games. They do. But they cannot stand on feeling entitled to have Bioware cater to their game play. And yes.... I agree with you...a lot of these discussions are heavily salted with SWG fans wanting their SWG back in a new and turbocharged format. Not going to happen with this MMO. As for SandPark.... I do think it is a viable model for a studio to embark on..... but it is more likely I think, given the commercial risks, for one or two studios to "baby step" their way into it to test, gather data, and refine the model... rather then massively reworking an existing MMO or designing a new one from scratch as SandPark. There is some player interest in blending the two models together.... but I bet in reality the interest is not all that strong...more of an argument by sandboxers to get sandbox in themepark MMOs. Edited June 21, 2014 by Andryah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vradic Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Perhaps you are assuming that people are making that assumption. I certainly never said that they are mutually exclusive but I have said that I don't think BW would be very eager to add sandbox elements. Why not? Because this game wasn't meant as a sandbox game so it's not what attracted players to come here and play the game and so it would be an incorrect conclusion to say that a lot of players really want this. I am sure some do, but let me ask you. Do you really think that there are enough people who would want this AND use the features? If so, based on what? And if BW invested resources into this would you realy think that the sandboxers will not be complaining that it's not enough or not the right kind of sandbox content and the rest of us complaining that BW is using resources for something most players don't want? To me it seems that BW can only lose by going that way because I don't see that really that many people who play SWTOR want this and then it just seems like a waste of resources and a direction that BW can only lose with if they went that way. So it's not that it's mutually exclusive, I just don't think that there's enough reason for BW to go that way. This is not SWG 2. People need to understand that, because I get the feeling that it's not about sandbox in general but people wanting a SWG 2 and that's just not what SWTOR is. Huh, we had the same Swg experience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordArtemis Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 (edited) Then they turn around with the nonsense you wrote about no pop drop till CU and blah blah blah...... But what ever, im sure your opinion is more correct then Sony statements to investors ...... http://oi59.tinypic.com/296g18w.jpg And my comments.... Game peaked shortly after launch, mid 2003 at 300k subs. Game lost 25k subs by early 2004, and hovered back and forth around 250k to 275k subs with the release of JTL late 2004. Not a sub hemorrhage by any definition of the word IMO. The CU came in early 2005 and caused subs to plummet below 200k. Before then subs had stabilized around 250k. Subs rebounded late 2005 to around 230k subs with the announcement of NGE, but then started a spiral to the bottom after a dismal reception. By mid to late 2006 SWG had bled from 70k to 120k in subs, to just above 100k subs after the middle of the year. Losses slowed to a more stable population until late 2007, from where (it is assumed, since Sony stopped releasing sub numbers at this point) the losses continued at a steady rate until the game closed in 2012. ...all facts that can be easily verified by official sources and those that compiled the subscriber reports from the actual official statements released by SOE. The graph, official statements, statements from actual devs involved in the game (posted verbatum many MANY times, including in this very thread) AND financial reports all clearly indicate your conclusions and postulations that the CU and NGE came about because they were losing subs are simply fallacious. Out of a measure of self respect I am going to close our mutual discussion with the statement that it is probably best for us to agree to disagree. I am disappointed that you would resort to sarcasm and insulting dialog. You certainly have the right to present any opinion you wish. I just fail to understand why you would wish to diminish the credibility of your opinion with diatribe. It certainly was not necessary...my opinion does not represent any threat to yours. I will let folks search for the info themselves and draw their own conclusions, as well as their opinions on your posts and mine on this subject. Edited June 22, 2014 by LordArtemis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts