Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    proving xyson was made for full sandbox

    i will prove some reasons why this game should be full player made and no default safezones:

    1st of all the most obvious: this is a sandbox game, yes actually, we would like another MO or Darkfall, you know why? this theme is diffrent, graphic type, system of sandbox, etc, alot of people dont play MO or DF becouse the game's system and graphics ( DF is too cartoony i way better like this gams graphics, but MO beats all the three, tho this games graphcis are rly good. besides, we need more sandbox games, there are WAY lot of themepark games already, a couple more sandboxes would be better, more options for sandbox players.

    2nd reason: this game is made in the post apocalyptic age were most of the world are savages, and chaos, their will be alot of greifers, but if this would happen in RL, whic his what this game is good in, Realism, their will be alot of greifers ( bandits, savages, etc) who would kill for sport or few dollars or etc, fallout for example, its awsome becouse you can kill anybody and you walk around the map with the feeling of risk that someone can kill you or that a mutant can come and kill you. that feeling is good

    killing/ assassinating inside tribe cities is awsome becouse guards would chase you and you would haev the option to cause chaos or not, to be a notorius barbarian or not. that is awsome, now putting safezones would suck couse your targets that know their being hunted would just stay around there and it would become a problem.

    people who want safezones should not play sandbox games, becouse sandbox games are = a map ( sandbox) which you can build cities ( castles), when you leave other people can demolish it and cause chaos to it ( raid or destroy the totems) so the sandbox looks clear, or they could keep building where you left off ( destroy totem + put totem same place and keep building in the place.)

    this is a sandbox game, so lets keep doing sandbox features

    3rd reason:Always keep with your first thought of your actions. dont get mind changed easily.

    there will be a strong nation that will rise that will provide good protection amongs its land that will grow to be a good empire, inside that empire will be safe zones.
    [img size=300][/img]

  2. #2
    I completely agree and disagree with you.

    I love the idea of a full sandbox. I enjoyed UO very much and Meridian during beta. I have been a PK (Meridian), anti PK (UO) and a crafter. The idea of a sandbox is great but even these games (including UO and DF had some protection in towns. Each "tribal" area is a town. I wouldn't mind if it wasn't a safe zone but instead worked more like a bank. I think there should be some "griefing" to encourage people to join up and form lynch mobs etc.

    The only problem is the grief-logout-grief-log out problem. If you completely got rid of safe zones then a person should have to have some way of getting retribution for things done to them. A griefer will simply not have anything worth destroying.

    Also gates FTW

  3. #3
    its the post apocalyptic area, its realistic lots of bandits and barbarians, grefiers will get recognized and not get helped soon, or xsyon can make a consequence system like MO
    [img size=300][/img]

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by joakin View Post
    its the post apocalyptic area, its realistic lots of bandits and barbarians, grefiers will get recognized and not get helped soon, or xsyon can make a consequence system like MO
    In fact it is a prejudice, that after a kind of apocalypse there would be anarchy and chaos. I recently saw a documentation, in which scientists said, that in such a case, people would probably cooperate wth each other in order to survive, because helping each other gives you the best chances to stay alive. They compared it with the ice age in the middle age, in which people, especially in the hard beginning of this time, cooperated and sent for example gifts to each other in order to show their will for cooperation and peace.
    "To generalize is to be an idiot." (William Blake)

    Tribe: Hopi Tribe

  5. #5
    Xsyon Citizen VeryWiiTee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Somewhere in nowhere
    Small groups of survivors sharing the same common traits might be able to coorperate, but I doubt people from different nations/monetary unions will be able to coorperate together.
    The chance of you actually having people that knows how to craft weapons for hunting, people that can hunt effeciently as well as farmers to tend the fields meanwhile teaching others their craft, I think you'll be trying to survive the best you can.
    Countries like Denmark, without the advanced technology within agriculture wouldn't be able to sustain more than 1k people. Honestly. I'd fight for the food.
    It all depends on the scenario I suppose..

    And oh.. Neither of your suggestions have any real value. This is a mix between PvP and PvE sandbox. There will be restrictions on PvP and safe zones will go away when prelude ends.

  6. #6
    I'm still going to stick with the idea that letting players create safe/pvp zones that require upkeep is the best solution so if the pve players want the entire game pve only they can do it with player resources that require upkeep, which would then give them a reason to do other things like trade and craft.
    TokTok - Axe Welding Basket Weaver

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts