Corpsecrank

I think that the point of playing with other people should be about playing with other people, not grinding or just fighting npcs.

 

Exactly. I feel like the player interaction in games has been lost. Not because players don't want to interact but because developers do not facilitate interaction well at all these days.

The demand for any game is there. It just needs to be done right.

You could have a 3d world with a fixed camera to give it a top-down look. You don't need to rely on 2d unless you find a practical purpose for it over 3d.

Determining what makes the game worth creating is more important than whether or not someone would want to play it. The game is to be created, not sold. If all you want is money there are probably much better avenues to earning money.

A descendent of UO with RTS elements added and a world that players actually discover is something I have had in concept mode for a while. The desire for a game like it is there, but it is all in the implementation. One small error in design could break the whole thing.

You misunderstand what I mean by 2d. I am talking about a 3d world in 2d perspective. Meaning it would actually be built using 3d models and textures with a locked overhead view like you said. Rather than being a 2d game built using flat images.

A lot of the design concepts from UO are lost with today's games I think. To this day there are unique aspects that have yet to be used again.

I have no desire to create a new UO I want to kind of make that as clear as possible. If I get to the point of making something it will be wildly different from UO but should still encompass the same general feeling players got from UO if that makes sense.

Anyhow I can't get off of the idea of making this type of game. It has little to do with making money and everything to do with creating a game that people actually enjoy. As if we have never heard that said before eh. In this case I am a gamer who is simply disappointed with games in the current market and I know there are others who have the same sentiment but I am also able to do a great deal of the work towards making a game and because of that I have a pretty strong desire to see this game happen at some point. Even if that means throwing a lot of money at it to make this happen.

There are many ways to secure funding these days. I give only minor thought to that at the moment. Right now I would like to continue research and start laying out some kind of roadmap for the project. Simply jumping in head first without any direction would be foolish. If I can focus on single tasks things will progress and stay on track. So again right now just getting as much information from as many sources as I can before moving forward.

Alright well as I see where this is going I suppose I should be more specific.

The answers given so far are actually insightful.

I played ultima online for a very long time. That is the best sandbox example I have at the moment for the style I would shoot for. Minecraft is also sandbox and is practically the definition of it except that is not exactly what I am talking about.

I don't want to give the impression that I would be creating a medieval style rpg sandbox mmo. After all the game may not be set in that particular time period at all. It may not even have the type of elements expected. By that I mean it may include objects from multiple time periods or even fictional time periods.

I guess I envision a game that puts players in control of a character within an open world that allows players to choose what they want to be and what they want to do. The fact it is so open is actually what makes the replay value almost infinite. No set story no treadmill questing. I would even go so far as to try to implement a system where players can drive some type of story on their own a system for creating events that playout with various outcomes based on conditions.

I am pretty set on the idea of 2d perspective with 3d modeling. I think more detail can be given to the world under those conditions than can be done in a completely 3d environment currently. Think about the diablo 3 graphics and imagine a thousand times for detail given to it. Things are 3d models but the view is still 2d top down. The difference in detail is not in the artwork but in the amount of objects and environments. The artwork in D3 is already very detailed.

I also think that engaging pvp should be a big part of things. The game would not be something for casual players by any means but that is also part of the end goal. You can either dedicate to becoming good at the game which would take time or move on there wouldn't be any room for casual play until very late game and only if you were to become well enough off in the game to kick back a bit.

Competative with high intensity action would be a good way to describe things. But not revolving around that aspect alone.

This is a more detailed explanation of what I am talking about. I know the subject of a game like this is pretty big so forgive me if i over simplify aspects of it. I just want to keep the conversation managable.

I only ask what the demand is for a game like this as a general reference nothing more.

I'm not even sure where to begin given the nature of this style of game. I think I just typed my post around 4 or 5 times and had to begin again. Let's start simple and then if we get rolling we can talk in more detail.

First off how many of you are even familiar with sandbox style mmo/rpgs?

If you are familiar with them what would you say the demand is for that style of game today?

And the last question is what was the last game in this style you remember and what were your thoughts on it?

At the moment I am trying to get some general feedback on this particular style of game. I have ideas sure but for now I need to find out what people think of the style in general and how well it could even do in today's age. Depending on what kind of feedback I can get I will move forward with my concept a bit or maybe change how I decide to progress here.