UO is a sandbox game (was?), EVE is a sandbox game. SWG WAS a sandbox game.
Yep. but EQ and Vanguard? They're just not. EQ was the original anti-sandbox MMO, and Vanguard follows in its footsteps. It's no more a sandbox game than WoW or LOTRO is, they just have different styles of linear. Vanguard is less about hand-holding, but being able to wander around a big world grinding spawns doesn't make a game more "sandboxy."
I don't know why anyone would want to say otherwise. Maybe some just like playing with the word, twisting it around, because it doesn't have a strict definition.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Anarchyart, I know that you like Vanguard and you like to defend it. However, I wasn't singling Vanguard out. I was saying that any game primarily focused on level progression is not, and cannot be, a sandbox game. Level progression as the underlying foundation of a games' design dictates that the game world must be broken up into level appropriate areas. So a level based game can't have that "go anywhere, do anything" feel to it. At any particular point in your progression there will be some places you can go to continue progressing and some places you have outleveled and to which there is no point in going and some places that are too high level for you which would simply be suicide to go to.
Add to that a class based system and it's even less of a sandbox game. You have little choice in the design of your character because all of the choices have already been made for you. Even if you have a little leeway to play around with things it won't be much in a fixed class system.
Anyway, there isn't anything inherantly bad about a non-sandbox game. Different people like different things. But defending a non-sandbox game by saying that it is a sandbox type of game doesn't even make sense. If you want to defend it at least defend it for what it actually is. Sandbox games can be crap too you know. Just calling a game sandbox or linear doesn't mean that it's good or bad.
Anarchyart, I know that you like Vanguard and you like to defend it. However, I wasn't singling Vanguard out. I was saying that any game primarily focused on level progression is not, and cannot be, a sandbox game. Level progression as the underlying foundation of a games' design dictates that the game world must be broken up into level appropriate areas. So a level based game can't have that "go anywhere, do anything" feel to it. At any particular point in your progression there will be some places you can go to continue progressing and some places you have outleveled and to which there is no point in going and some places that are too high level for you which would simply be suicide to go to. Add to that a class based system and it's even less of a sandbox game. You have little choice in the design of your character because all of the choices have already been made for you. Even if you have a little leeway to play around with things it won't be much in a fixed class system. Anyway, there isn't anything inherantly bad about a non-sandbox game. Different people like different things. But defending a non-sandbox game by saying that it is a sandbox type of game doesn't even make sense. If you want to defend it at least defend it for what it actually is. Sandbox games can be crap too you know. Just calling a game sandbox or linear doesn't mean that it's good or bad.
That's just it. The feeling I get from Vanguard is that which I got from UO also: of being in a world where I can truly pick my own path. You don't have to even do a single quest, or you can go to an entirely different continent and do quest lines there or not. It's just a great big world with lots of content and you can go about playing it in whatever way you wish.
It might not fit the definition of what some people call a sandbox game, but that is how it feels to me. Level based or skill based doesn't matter. A skill based game can be seperated into different skill level areas too. Just because it is class specific also doesn't negate it's sandboxiness. Granted you can't use archery if you're a mage, but the sandbox, which is the play area, is still as wide open as if it were a skill based game.
If it feels sandboxy, it is sandboxy to the person who feels it.
I realized that Vangaurd has less hairstyles then LoTRO ! woah, mind blowing
Barbie Fashion Show has even more, might wanna check it out. What did that do to your mind?
So now barbie fashion show mmo is better then vangaurd ,woah , that blows my mind
If any game is better than another because of the number hairstyles, that is a genre I do not wish to participate in.
BTW, Barbie Fashion Show has less hand-holding than LotRO.
I'm kidding obviously, take it easy on your mind.
So now "customization" isn't a big deal. but before people started analyzing, LotrO Sucked because their was not enough "customization" and vanguard was the who de doo of non character clones , Woah, this really blows my mind, that in fact thier are more option in LotrO to make a unique character , without it looking like an alein with a pookamacky
You might want to gather your community up and get your stories straight cause you are just getting shot to shit roght now.... and that is a fact.
So now "customization" isn't a big deal. but before people started analyzing, LotrO Sucked because their was not enough "customization" and vanguard was the who de doo of non character clones , Woah, this really blows my mind, that in fact thier are more option in LotrO to make a unique character , without it looking like an alein with a pookamacky
Aw come on now, Vanguard has a big art patch coming, where we'll get a fifth hair style.
So now "customization" isn't a big deal. but before people started analyzing, LotrO Sucked because their was not enough "customization" and vanguard was the who de doo of non character clones , Woah, this really blows my mind, that in fact thier are more option in LotrO to make a unique character , without it looking like an alein with a pookamacky
Aw come on now, Vanguard has a big art patch coming, where we'll get a fifth hair style.
I hear it's going to be a goblin pompadour.
How much do you wanna bet , that sigil didn't compress the textures, I bet that Sigil in all the haste of getting this bahemoth out the door forgot to optimize all the files.....What are some of the texture pack file sizes ?
May seam like I hate vangaurd, but im still beta testing it in my mind trying to figure out why it ran like it did.
Also think they should of got with John Carmack and looked at his mega texture idea, that would of totally free'd up massive ammounts of memory.
i gotta draw the line on players who call their mmo a sandbox when it features a linear 1-50 levelling system and little else. sure you can go anywhere in vanguard, but you wont find anything. That would go against the very non sandbox idea of risk vs reward which is game design on training wheels. you wont be finding any sword of death locked up inside a tree, you wont be getting lucky to find a treasure chest with something awesome out in the middle of nowhere.. however.. you can find an epic item anywhere in wow at random, if your lucky, even from treasure chests. in lotr all your character differentiation traits are NOT linked to the levelling system. all these games are linear levelling treadmills, they are not sandboxes. some are better treadmills than others.
Yeah, I have to chime in and agree with this because lately I've been seeing a lot of confusion about what 'sandbox' means. Either confusion or people deliberately mis-using the term.
No game in which you have to follow a predetermined progression path through successively higher level areas can be called a sandbox game. Those are linear and very un-sandbox games. Even if the progression path has some forks that let you choose between a few different areas at each stage of progression it's still a linear game and a non-consistant game world broken up into discrete level appropriate areas. Not sandbox at all...not even remotely sandbox by my thinking.
That's your opinion Neanderthal, one which you are certainly entitled to. Thing is, there is no pre-determined progression path in Vanguard as such. You are free to go down any path, enter any area or dwelling you wish. There are no zones. There are high level mobs mixed in with low level ones, quest chains end and you are left to find the next quests on your own. You can go any direction you want, it is the most un-linear level based game I have ever come across.
I think you are saying that apples and oranges are the same just because they are both fruit...
So now "customization" isn't a big deal. but before people started analyzing, LotrO Sucked because their was not enough "customization" and vanguard was the who de doo of non character clones , Woah, this really blows my mind, that in fact thier are more option in LotrO to make a unique character , without it looking like an alein with a pookamacky
You might want to gather your community up and get your stories straight cause you are just getting shot to shit roght now.... and that is a fact.
So, what you're saying basically, is LotRO is better than Vanguard because it has more hairstyles?? I think you are on crack, and that is a fact.
How much do you wanna bet , that sigil didn't compress the textures, I bet that Sigil in all the haste of getting this bahemoth out the door forgot to optimize all the files.....What are some of the texture pack file sizes ?
May seam like I hate vangaurd, but im still beta testing it in my mind trying to figure out why it ran like it did.
Also think they should of got with John Carmack and looked at his mega texture idea, that would of totally free'd up massive ammounts of memory.
I don't know about that, I mean, how could they forget something like that? I do wonder how much time they spent implementing workarounds for slower systems, though. Aside from texture detail, there doesn't seem to be much by way of LOD adjustment and the like. Seems as if the graphics are all-or-nothing, and you can't do anything untill all of it finishes loading.
I was thinking about DAOC, how when you first approach other characters, they use a blank placeholder texture. The game client can still function, while that placeholder gets filled in with the right textures and items. In Vanguard, there's nothing like that. The client seems to come to a full stop, every time it has to load any data. There are no placeholders, and loading every bit of data has priority over client functionality.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
That's just it. The feeling I get from Vanguard is that which I got from UO also: of being in a world where I can truly pick my own path. You don't have to even do a single quest, or you can go to an entirely different continent and do quest lines there or not. It's just a great big world with lots of content and you can go about playing it in whatever way you wish. It might not fit the definition of what some people call a sandbox game, but that is how it feels to me. Level based or skill based doesn't matter. A skill based game can be seperated into different skill level areas too. Just because it is class specific also doesn't negate it's sandboxiness. Granted you can't use archery if you're a mage, but the sandbox, which is the play area, is still as wide open as if it were a skill based game. If it feels sandboxy, it is sandboxy to the person who feels it.
Originally posted by anarchyart
Originally posted by Ohaan
I think you are saying that apples and oranges are the same just because they are both fruit...
Rather than wasting a post with some bad cliche, why not tell me why I'm wrong in what I said?
The degree of 'freedom' or sandbox you are describing in Vanguard is no different than what is found in most MMOs, including WoW. You can grind mobs and/or do quests, you can stick to one continent or another, you can enter buildings, etc. You can turn left or you can turn right. In ALL MMOs you will have some degree of choice or freedom. The existence of that choice, regardless of the quantity, does not in itself qualify the game as a sandbox-type MMO. The 'play-area' of the game is not the same as its sandbox. It is also what you are able to in that area.
Vanguard may have some features, such as non-instanced housing, that have more typically been found in sandbox games. The game may also provide an experience that feels sandboxy to some but that does not mean it would be on a more 'universal' scale. A Ford Thunderbird could be considered a fast car if the driver was used to a Toyota Tercel but not if one considered the existence of high-end models from Ferrari and Porsche.
For the record I never said you were wrong. We are arguing opinions here and opinions are not right or wrong. Like Neanderthal, Volkmar, and Vhain, I'm just not buying your rationale for getting there hence my apples and oranges comment.
Sigil officially sucks. Now they might have some "potential", but in the here and now they... suck. The only way they cannot suck is by being good, and they definetly haven't achieved this yet. What makes them suck? The only game they have on thier roster is incomplete and totally unpolished. The game in its current state is unplayable. It doesn't even look that good and its boring to play due to the gameplay. However, sigil has to keep this game going cause thier game designers aren't going to get jobs anywhere else.
I will use what Brad McQuaid said to show that this game is not 3rd gen in the least. Now when defining generations, it is about being able to take the previous generation and applying lessons from it to produce a better product. EQ1 is 1st gen that takes lessons from MUDs to create a graphical game thus the MMO. 2nd gen games are like WoW and EQ2 that took games like EQ1 and made a game based after it. I would say UO, but they didn't try to learn from UO sadly. Then a 3rd gen game takes what is learned from 2nd gen and applies it to thier game. This is were Vanguard shows it isn't a 3rd gen game. It completely disregarded what 2nd gen games offered. Heck Brad even said he disregarded what 1st gen offered and looked at MUDs. So according to Brad. Vanguard is a 1st gen game. Its actually pretty accurate because its just as boring and unrefined as EQ is only with higher system specs, a bigger world, and less content.
There is only 1 3rd gen game out right now and that is Granado Espada because you can accuretly see the division from it and 2nd gen Korean Titles like Lineage 2. Its also obvious that the game took into mind what worked in 2nd gen titles.
Sigil officially sucks. Now they might have some "potential", but in the here and now they... suck. The only way they cannot suck is by being good, and they definetly haven't achieved this yet. What makes them suck? The only game they have on thier roster is incomplete and totally unpolished. The game in its current state is unplayable. It doesn't even look that good and its boring to play due to the gameplay. However, sigil has to keep this game going cause thier game designers aren't going to get jobs anywhere else. I will use what Brad McQuaid said to show that this game is not 3rd gen in the least. Now when defining generations, it is about being able to take the previous generation and applying lessons from it to produce a better product. EQ1 is 1st gen that takes lessons from MUDs to create a graphical game thus the MMO. 2nd gen games are like WoW and EQ2 that took games like EQ1 and made a game based after it. I would say UO, but they didn't try to learn from UO sadly. Then a 3rd gen game takes what is learned from 2nd gen and applies it to thier game. This is were Vanguard shows it isn't a 3rd gen game. It completely disregarded what 2nd gen games offered. Heck Brad even said he disregarded what 1st gen offered and looked at MUDs. So according to Brad. Vanguard is a 1st gen game. Its actually pretty accurate because its just as boring and unrefined as EQ is only with higher system specs, a bigger world, and less content. There is only 1 3rd gen game out right now and that is Granado Espada because you can accuretly see the division from it and 2nd gen Korean Titles like Lineage 2. Its also obvious that the game took into mind what worked in 2nd gen titles.
That's just it. The feeling I get from Vanguard is that which I got from UO also: of being in a world where I can truly pick my own path. You don't have to even do a single quest, or you can go to an entirely different continent and do quest lines there or not. It's just a great big world with lots of content and you can go about playing it in whatever way you wish. It might not fit the definition of what some people call a sandbox game, but that is how it feels to me. Level based or skill based doesn't matter. A skill based game can be seperated into different skill level areas too. Just because it is class specific also doesn't negate it's sandboxiness. Granted you can't use archery if you're a mage, but the sandbox, which is the play area, is still as wide open as if it were a skill based game. If it feels sandboxy, it is sandboxy to the person who feels it.
Originally posted by anarchyart
Originally posted by Ohaan
I think you are saying that apples and oranges are the same just because they are both fruit...
Rather than wasting a post with some bad cliche, why not tell me why I'm wrong in what I said?
The degree of 'freedom' or sandbox you are describing in Vanguard is no different than what is found in most MMOs, including WoW. You can grind mobs and/or do quests, you can stick to one continent or another, you can enter buildings, etc. You can turn left or you can turn right. In ALL MMOs you will have some degree of choice or freedom. The existence of that choice, regardless of the quantity, does not in itself qualify the game as a sandbox-type MMO. The 'play-area' of the game is not the same as its sandbox. It is also what you are able to in that area.
Vanguard may have some features, such as non-instanced housing, that have more typically been found in sandbox games. The game may also provide an experience that feels sandboxy to some but that does not mean it would be on a more 'universal' scale. A Ford Thunderbird could be considered a fast car if the driver was used to a Toyota Tercel but not if one considered the existence of high-end models from Ferrari and Porsche.
For the record I never said you were wrong. We are arguing opinions here and opinions are not right or wrong. Like Neanderthal, Volkmar, and Vhain, I'm just not buying your rationale for getting there hence my apples and oranges comment.
Yes all MMO's have certain levels of freedom, I just feel that it is more visceral in Vanguard than most other level based games. It really feels like it is up to you to go where you want, at least for me. I'm as hooked on it as I was UO and EQ and having just as much fun. I've said this many times before, but I never thought I'd like a game as much as I liked those two. I'm very happy to say I was wrong.
Pre-CU SWG is gone, UO is still there but I can't go back at least until this upcoming graphics upgrade. Vanguard is huge, ruthlessly difficult and very much open ended. That, I suppose, is sandbox enough for me.
Comments
Yep. but EQ and Vanguard? They're just not. EQ was the original anti-sandbox MMO, and Vanguard follows in its footsteps. It's no more a sandbox game than WoW or LOTRO is, they just have different styles of linear. Vanguard is less about hand-holding, but being able to wander around a big world grinding spawns doesn't make a game more "sandboxy."
I don't know why anyone would want to say otherwise. Maybe some just like playing with the word, twisting it around, because it doesn't have a strict definition.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
who me ?
Barbie Fashion Show has even more, might wanna check it out. What did that do to your mind?
Barbie Fashion Show has even more, might wanna check it out. What did that do to your mind?
So now barbie fashion show mmo is better then vangaurd ,woah , that blows my mindwho me ?
Anarchyart, I know that you like Vanguard and you like to defend it. However, I wasn't singling Vanguard out. I was saying that any game primarily focused on level progression is not, and cannot be, a sandbox game. Level progression as the underlying foundation of a games' design dictates that the game world must be broken up into level appropriate areas. So a level based game can't have that "go anywhere, do anything" feel to it. At any particular point in your progression there will be some places you can go to continue progressing and some places you have outleveled and to which there is no point in going and some places that are too high level for you which would simply be suicide to go to.
Add to that a class based system and it's even less of a sandbox game. You have little choice in the design of your character because all of the choices have already been made for you. Even if you have a little leeway to play around with things it won't be much in a fixed class system.
Anyway, there isn't anything inherantly bad about a non-sandbox game. Different people like different things. But defending a non-sandbox game by saying that it is a sandbox type of game doesn't even make sense. If you want to defend it at least defend it for what it actually is. Sandbox games can be crap too you know. Just calling a game sandbox or linear doesn't mean that it's good or bad.
Barbie Fashion Show has even more, might wanna check it out. What did that do to your mind?
So now barbie fashion show mmo is better then vangaurd ,woah , that blows my mindIf any game is better than another because of the number hairstyles, that is a genre I do not wish to participate in.
BTW, Barbie Fashion Show has less hand-holding than LotRO.
I'm kidding obviously, take it easy on your mind.
That's just it. The feeling I get from Vanguard is that which I got from UO also: of being in a world where I can truly pick my own path. You don't have to even do a single quest, or you can go to an entirely different continent and do quest lines there or not. It's just a great big world with lots of content and you can go about playing it in whatever way you wish.
It might not fit the definition of what some people call a sandbox game, but that is how it feels to me. Level based or skill based doesn't matter. A skill based game can be seperated into different skill level areas too. Just because it is class specific also doesn't negate it's sandboxiness. Granted you can't use archery if you're a mage, but the sandbox, which is the play area, is still as wide open as if it were a skill based game.
If it feels sandboxy, it is sandboxy to the person who feels it.
Barbie Fashion Show has even more, might wanna check it out. What did that do to your mind?
So now barbie fashion show mmo is better then vangaurd ,woah , that blows my mindIf any game is better than another because of the number hairstyles, that is a genre I do not wish to participate in.
BTW, Barbie Fashion Show has less hand-holding than LotRO.
I'm kidding obviously, take it easy on your mind.
So now "customization" isn't a big deal. but before people started analyzing, LotrO Sucked because their was not enough "customization" and vanguard was the who de doo of non character clones , Woah, this really blows my mind, that in fact thier are more option in LotrO to make a unique character , without it looking like an alein with a pookamackyYou might want to gather your community up and get your stories straight cause you are just getting shot to shit roght now.... and that is a fact.
who me ?
Aw come on now, Vanguard has a big art patch coming, where we'll get a fifth hair style.
I hear it's going to be a goblin pompadour.
Aw come on now, Vanguard has a big art patch coming, where we'll get a fifth hair style.
I hear it's going to be a goblin pompadour.
How much do you wanna bet , that sigil didn't compress the textures, I bet that Sigil in all the haste of getting this bahemoth out the door forgot to optimize all the files.....What are some of the texture pack file sizes ?May seam like I hate vangaurd, but im still beta testing it in my mind trying to figure out why it ran like it did.
Also think they should of got with John Carmack and looked at his mega texture idea, that would of totally free'd up massive ammounts of memory.
who me ?
Yeah, I have to chime in and agree with this because lately I've been seeing a lot of confusion about what 'sandbox' means. Either confusion or people deliberately mis-using the term.
No game in which you have to follow a predetermined progression path through successively higher level areas can be called a sandbox game. Those are linear and very un-sandbox games. Even if the progression path has some forks that let you choose between a few different areas at each stage of progression it's still a linear game and a non-consistant game world broken up into discrete level appropriate areas. Not sandbox at all...not even remotely sandbox by my thinking.
That's your opinion Neanderthal, one which you are certainly entitled to. Thing is, there is no pre-determined progression path in Vanguard as such. You are free to go down any path, enter any area or dwelling you wish. There are no zones. There are high level mobs mixed in with low level ones, quest chains end and you are left to find the next quests on your own. You can go any direction you want, it is the most un-linear level based game I have ever come across.
I think you are saying that apples and oranges are the same just because they are both fruit...
So, what you're saying basically, is LotRO is better than Vanguard because it has more hairstyles?? I think you are on crack, and that is a fact.
Rather than wasting a post with some bad cliche, why not tell me why I'm wrong in what I said?
I don't know about that, I mean, how could they forget something like that? I do wonder how much time they spent implementing workarounds for slower systems, though. Aside from texture detail, there doesn't seem to be much by way of LOD adjustment and the like. Seems as if the graphics are all-or-nothing, and you can't do anything untill all of it finishes loading.
I was thinking about DAOC, how when you first approach other characters, they use a blank placeholder texture. The game client can still function, while that placeholder gets filled in with the right textures and items. In Vanguard, there's nothing like that. The client seems to come to a full stop, every time it has to load any data. There are no placeholders, and loading every bit of data has priority over client functionality.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Vanguard may have some features, such as non-instanced housing, that have more typically been found in sandbox games. The game may also provide an experience that feels sandboxy to some but that does not mean it would be on a more 'universal' scale. A Ford Thunderbird could be considered a fast car if the driver was used to a Toyota Tercel but not if one considered the existence of high-end models from Ferrari and Porsche.
For the record I never said you were wrong. We are arguing opinions here and opinions are not right or wrong. Like Neanderthal, Volkmar, and Vhain, I'm just not buying your rationale for getting there hence my apples and oranges comment.
who me ?
Sigil officially sucks. Now they might have some "potential", but in the here and now they... suck. The only way they cannot suck is by being good, and they definetly haven't achieved this yet. What makes them suck? The only game they have on thier roster is incomplete and totally unpolished. The game in its current state is unplayable. It doesn't even look that good and its boring to play due to the gameplay. However, sigil has to keep this game going cause thier game designers aren't going to get jobs anywhere else.
I will use what Brad McQuaid said to show that this game is not 3rd gen in the least. Now when defining generations, it is about being able to take the previous generation and applying lessons from it to produce a better product. EQ1 is 1st gen that takes lessons from MUDs to create a graphical game thus the MMO. 2nd gen games are like WoW and EQ2 that took games like EQ1 and made a game based after it. I would say UO, but they didn't try to learn from UO sadly. Then a 3rd gen game takes what is learned from 2nd gen and applies it to thier game. This is were Vanguard shows it isn't a 3rd gen game. It completely disregarded what 2nd gen games offered. Heck Brad even said he disregarded what 1st gen offered and looked at MUDs. So according to Brad. Vanguard is a 1st gen game. Its actually pretty accurate because its just as boring and unrefined as EQ is only with higher system specs, a bigger world, and less content.
There is only 1 3rd gen game out right now and that is Granado Espada because you can accuretly see the division from it and 2nd gen Korean Titles like Lineage 2. Its also obvious that the game took into mind what worked in 2nd gen titles.
Excellent post
Vanguard may have some features, such as non-instanced housing, that have more typically been found in sandbox games. The game may also provide an experience that feels sandboxy to some but that does not mean it would be on a more 'universal' scale. A Ford Thunderbird could be considered a fast car if the driver was used to a Toyota Tercel but not if one considered the existence of high-end models from Ferrari and Porsche.
For the record I never said you were wrong. We are arguing opinions here and opinions are not right or wrong. Like Neanderthal, Volkmar, and Vhain, I'm just not buying your rationale for getting there hence my apples and oranges comment.
Yes all MMO's have certain levels of freedom, I just feel that it is more visceral in Vanguard than most other level based games. It really feels like it is up to you to go where you want, at least for me. I'm as hooked on it as I was UO and EQ and having just as much fun. I've said this many times before, but I never thought I'd like a game as much as I liked those two. I'm very happy to say I was wrong.
Pre-CU SWG is gone, UO is still there but I can't go back at least until this upcoming graphics upgrade. Vanguard is huge, ruthlessly difficult and very much open ended. That, I suppose, is sandbox enough for me.
Thanks for replying intelligently. Cheers.