Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Why hasn't this happened?


Page 4 of 5 « First < 2 3 4 5 >

Jenzali's Avatar


Jenzali
08.06.2012 , 12:54 PM | #31
Quote: Originally Posted by Sarfux View Post
FUN sandbox game
"Sandbox" is mostly a buzzword. Because for most people, a sandbox isn't fun. The latest generation of MMO players are more interested in increasing their online ego (gear-based progression) and having instant, antisocial gameplay at a click (group finders, PvP queues).
Dashto Vant - Arsenal Mercenary - The most dashing bounty hunter in the galaxy.

TUXs's Avatar


TUXs
08.06.2012 , 01:04 PM | #32
Quote: Originally Posted by Gungan View Post
You mean like Planetside 1/2? Or EVE?

Planetside 1 came out way before the internet could handle it.

I think Planetside 2 is going to be awesome. Constant compeitive warfare. Don't bother with that game if you're a PVEer though.
Never played PS1, but PS2 does look amazing...and I HATE SOE!
All warfare is based on deception • If his forces are united, separate them • If you are far from the enemy, make him believe you are near • A leader leads by example not by force
My referral code: here ↔ What you get: here (1 FREE transfer • 7-day FREE sub • FREE Jumpstart and Preferred Bundles)

Arkerus's Avatar


Arkerus
08.06.2012 , 01:05 PM | #33
Quote: Originally Posted by Jenzali View Post
"Sandbox" is mostly a buzzword. Because for most people, a sandbox isn't fun. The latest generation of MMO players are more interested in increasing their online ego (gear-based progression) and having instant, antisocial gameplay at a click (group finders, PvP queues).
This is pretty much it. The community doesn't want to admit this:


No mass marketed game is going to come out soon that is pure "sandbox" because sandbox games only appeal to a minority of people. By and large sandbox games are fun only to those who enjoy that type of environment.

This is the cold hard truth people. You're not going to see a sandbox game come from AAA publisher because sandbox games don't have mass appeal.

If you want a sandbox core game, you will have to look at the indie and minor publishers doing the work.

You want Star Wars? You get themepark.
Hooning in the rex : http://youtu.be/xtXUM6yPMCY

vincent-'s Avatar


vincent-
08.06.2012 , 01:09 PM | #34
Quote: Originally Posted by Sarfux View Post
Hmm..maybe I just didn't play long enough. I just couldn't stand the running of characters in that game lol. I just couldn't...they ran like ducks or something. Was SWG really like that? I didn't play much. Just a little.
Sigh.......Emu is somewere load it up and have a blast. Also no company will take that risk they want easy quick cash.
"Bang bang, shootin' blanks every day."*chk chk chk*
Well, I tried.

Kalfear's Avatar


Kalfear
08.06.2012 , 01:09 PM | #35
Hasnt happened because contrary to a vocal board presence saying otherwise

There is no money in such a design for the design studio!

There is a niche sandbox game coming out though called Arch Age.
Not a AAA MMORPG and doesnt have the budget of a TOR or ESO or even GW2
But it does advertise full sandbox design as a few have been asking for

If your looking for more then that though,
not going to happen any time soon as the style has proven unprofitable over all.
In regards to lessening F2P and Preferred restrictions
In GAMING, as in LIFE,
You get what you pay for
No game restriction is so dire that $15.00/month will not eliminate it

Sarfux's Avatar


Sarfux
08.06.2012 , 01:20 PM | #36
Well I guess we will have themepark then thanks for your feedback guys!
Always be who you are, not what the galaxy wants you to be

CosmicKat's Avatar


CosmicKat
08.06.2012 , 01:26 PM | #37
What would seriously revolutionize the MMO industry is for someone to remake launch-day Everquest with a modern graphics engine and the "downtime" drastically reduced, but otherwise unchanged from the day it launched.

But... it will never happen because the accountants control the industry and they wouldn't know a good game from tax software.

Instead prepare for even more dumbed down EQ clones, or what the masses call "a WoW clone". Those are killing the industry and will one day kill it outright.

SRTtoZZ's Avatar


SRTtoZZ
08.06.2012 , 01:32 PM | #38
Yea its called Ultima Online but that got ruined by EA after they bought out Origin. The game had no levels just skills and there was zero end game. All you did was live your life in the world of Brittania and there was NOTHING like it and never will be again.

Darka's Avatar


Darka
08.06.2012 , 01:35 PM | #39
SWG had most of that, they also forgot the Star Wars part too though,
The game had some massive issues ( and people think TOR has problems, it was nothing compared to SWG)
Thankfully, the people in SWG made that game such a great experience.
The Defender Program est 2006 Presents
THE UNCIVILLISED SWOOP CLUB
@Darkatron @DefenderProgram @Uncivillised on Facebook/Twitter
Owner of the Hat'o'Awesome

CosmicKat's Avatar


CosmicKat
08.06.2012 , 01:35 PM | #40
Quote: Originally Posted by Arkerus View Post

You want Star Wars? You get themepark.
I've taken more than my share of shots at Bioware for the mindlessness of TOR but really, Star Wars IS mindless, silly sci-fi.

Expecting deep thought to be required in a Star Wars product is like expecting a remake of Happy Days to be a gritty, R-rated examination of youth in the 50's.
Page 4 of 5 « First < 2 3 4 5 >

Closed Thread
STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
Terms Archive | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | FAQ | EUALA | Rules of Conduct | Online Safety | Contact Us
LucasArts, the LucasArts logo, STAR WARS and related properties are trademarks in the United States and/or in other countries of Lucasfilm Ltd. and/or its affiliates. © 2011-2012 Lucasfilm Entertainment Company Ltd. or Lucasfilm Ltd. All rights reserved. BioWare and the BioWare logo are trademarks of EA International (Studio and Publishing) Ltd. EA and the EA logo are trademarks of Electronic Arts Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.