Let's See What Players Really Want

iamloser

I've been seeing things on the forums about people wanting Sandbox style MMOs only. People who disagree will come back with , "Its all a big money deal, so people copy to play it safe" , "Not everyone does. It may be a better style of gameplay but they won't make enough money". Basicly these people won't be in a "Blizzard" of money. I've been hearing people say there only dealing with a small group of people. Well I thought we'd settle this once and for all. Lets try to get alot of votes here! Please just vote which one you like best, not which one you think would be the most succesful.

Now let me define what I mean by Sandbox and Linear.

Sandbox:

A Sandbox style game is a game where developers give you a world and you live a life in that world. Total control over what you do. Freedom is the key. Total control over class and profession. Want to be a dwarven cook with a little mage thrown in there, fine. Sadly, there isn't many games in this type out there.

Linear:

A Linear style game is a game where you start out by picking a character, usually with strict classes.  Your not going to have complete control over class and profession. While your playing through the game its seems like Quest after Quest. Level after level. You get the feeling of a game rather than a world.

Just a brief description of what I think of Sandbox vs. Linear.

rikilii

You should start by defining what you mean by Sandbox and Linear.

Personally, I think a combination of both concepts would be ideal.

slannmage

I don''t mind both if they are don't to the polish of WOW.....





I loved Oblivion and i loved Gears of War both totally different with high polish.

slannmage

I will add however i'm sick of seeing the same old same old buggy half done released mmorpgs with basic lacking features.

iamloser

Originally posted by rikilii


You should start by defining what you mean by Sandbox and Linear.
Personally, I think a combination of both concepts would be ideal.

True, I guess different people have different opinions about the definition of Sandbox and Linear.

saint4God

The question seems biased.  It appears with the verbage used, you're a supporter of sandbox but aren't happy with what is available.

I think to say linear vs. sandbox is too vague.  Both could be boring.  Both could be splendid.  It really depends on what there is to DO in the game.  Is there an interesting and/or gratifying experience by playing it?  Gamers want fun.  If it's not fun, whether its sandbox or linear makes no difference.

iamloser

Originally posted by saint4God


The question seems biased.  It appears with the verbage used, you're a supporter of sandbox but aren't happy with what is available.
I think to say linear vs. sandbox is too vague.  Both could be boring.  Both could be splendid.  It really depends on what there is to DO in the game.  Is there an interesting and/or gratifying experience by playing it?  Gamers want fun.  If it's not fun, whether its sandbox or linear makes no difference.

True, but the question is: Which do you think is more fun, or which have you had more fun doing?

And about being a supporter and not being happy with what is available, your pretty good at observing. What I want is a game like Renaissance and Darkfall. True Sandboxes. Most say Darkfall is vaporware and I've heard some people saying Renaissance is. I believe niether are, and I'd better hope so. Back to the point, yes, I am not too happy with what is available. I wish delevopers would come to their senses.

ThomasN7

How about a well polished non orcish,elv game that is innovative,fun to play and doesn't charge you an arm and a leg for expansions that are basically the same thing ?

How about a game that is innovative,different and doesn't copy everyone else ?

Linear or sandbox it does not really matter. 2008 will be another year of the hype that disappoints everyone.

iamloser

Originally posted by SaintViktor


How about a well polished non orcish,elv game that is innovative,fun to play and doesn't charge you an arm and a leg for expansions that are basically the same thing ?
How about a game that is innovative,different and doesn't copy everyone else ?
Linear or sandbox it does not really matter. 2008 will be another year of the hype that disappoints everyone.

Linear or sandbox does matter. Two different styles of gameplay do matter. I don't see how it doesn't. Freedom vs. well, non freedom doesn matter.

Kyntor

Originally posted by iamloser


Linear or sandbox does matter. Two different styles of gameplay do matter. I don't see how it doesn't. Freedom vs. well, non freedom doesn matter.

This is how you view it, it doesn't necessarily mean this is how everyone else sees it.  Some of the sandbox games I have played have been very restrictive.

I have always seen sandbox and linear as two extremes.  I would much rather play a game that finds a nice balance between the two.

iamloser

 

Originally posted by Kyntor


 
Originally posted by iamloser


Linear or sandbox does matter. Two different styles of gameplay do matter. I don't see how it doesn't. Freedom vs. well, non freedom doesn matter.

This is how you view it, it doesn't necessarily mean this is how everyone else sees it.  Some of the sandbox games I have played have been very restrictive.

 

I have always seen sandbox and linear as two extremes.  I would much rather play a game that finds a nice balance between the two.

Again, its just different opinions on whats best. To me, I want a total complete true sandbox. I agree with you they are two extremes, but , for me, extreme is fine. And about "This is how you view it, it doesn't necessarily mean this is how everyone else sees it," Well that is the reason I made the poll.

saint4God

I think I know where you're going with this.  I'll share a bit about what interested me about Second Life:

• You could create and exchange objects and costumes
• You could buy, build and customize land or whatever you wanted to build on it
• There was no 'goal' to the game necessarily.  It had great potential to just social roleplay.
• You can fly, teleport and do goofy things not found in real life

Reasons why it fell short of expectations:

- You needed real money to buy in-game land.  A LOT of real money.

- Sin City took over.  It became a host for gambling and other unsavory services.

- The goal for many people became to rook you out of your in-game cash since it could be exchanged for real cash.

- A lot of empty space in some places, barriers from those who owned land and set it private in others.

- Interface was unwieldy, hard to use.  Took a long time to create an object.

- Little to nothing to do most of the time.

Sandbox-style games seem to be for the vagabond artist at heart.  They let the creative mind run or let a person blaze their own trail, but it's certainly not for powergamers.  Lack of goals or definite direction can drive a obsessive-compulsive "gotta beat it!" gamer bonkers.

iamloser

Originally posted by saint4God


I think I know where you're going with this.  I'll share a bit about what interested me about Second Life:

You could create and exchange objects and costumes
You could buy, build and customize land or whatever you wanted to build on it
There was no 'goal' to the game necessarily.  It had great potential to just social roleplay.
You can fly, teleport and do goofy things not found in real life

Reasons why it fell short of expectations:
- You needed real money to buy in-game land.  A LOT of real money.
- Sin City took over.  It became a host for gambling and other unsavory services.
- The goal for many people became to rook you out of your in-game cash since it could be exchanged for real cash.
- A lot of empty space in some places, barriers from those who owned land and set it private in others.
- Interface was unwieldy, hard to use.  Took a long time to create an object.
- Little to nothing to do most of the time.
Sandbox-style games seem to be for the vagabond artist at heart.  They let the creative mind run or let a person blaze their own trail, but it's certainly not for powergamers.  Lack of goals or definite direction can drive a obsessive-compulsive "gotta beat it!" gamer bonkers.

I never played Second Life, or looked into it. Mostly because I heard it was a "crappy game".  A game with a lot of potential, but just a fall.

And yes, I agree with that last paragraph. Alot of your view on MMO's comes from your first MMO. Kind of like your "parent" MMO. Tought you what you know, then you move on. I started with RuneScape, which was a sandbox style game. If someone starts with say WoW, like alot of people, then your view may be different.

DeadJester

Sandbox style but it also needs to be more then the old school style of a sandbox it needs to  become some kinda hybreed sandbox

 

iamloser

Explain your Hybrid Sandbox. I just don't see how you could mix the two entirely different types to make a good game. If someone good do it , and do it extremely well, it would be the most succesful game out there, appealing to both types of gamers in a certain way. If it could make the Sandbox people think of it as a sandbox game and the linear people think of it as a linear game at the same time. That game is one in a million, i swear.

Sunrider

you know, i love the sandbox setup, as well as the linear setup as long as the game play is nice and fluid... yes, like WoW's linear game play. but i think the question shouldnt be so much about which style, but which genre.

we've seen so much of the linear bullshit game play in the fantasy genre that we crave something different and it really gets tiresome.

personally i think that if we have a genre shift we may end up not seeing so many of these threads. at least those are my hopes.

ianubisi

[x] Both

or

[x] Bored with this endless X vs Y nonsense

nomadian

I like a mixture of both. Freedom but if maybe you engage in something you can pursue that in a sort of linear direction.

CaesarsGhost

So in an extreme sandbox you make your character and plop you down in the world and say "have it"... right?  No quests... no tutorial... good cluckin luck.

Not even in a city or anything, just a barren area of landscape that's all yours?

Sounds like Second Life or There.com to me!

What exactly do you do in an extreme sandbox then?  Obviously it's not quests...

darquenblade

The title of this thread really cracks me up. There's no way to find out what the players really want, because this niche little site isn't even remotely representative of any sort of gaming population/playerbase.

OP, if you've paid attention to the topics on this forum *at all* since your time here, you'd know that your poll was going to be rediculously skewed towards "sandbox" than "linear" (also loved your perfectly unbiased description of linear).But *of course* you knew how the poll was going to turn out. People on here are constantly seeking verification of their tastes by other like-minded individuals, hoping it somehow validates the type of game that they like (despite that you and the people that agree with you are each a part of that insignificant hardcore minority that game developers/publishers don't take into consideration anyways).

Carry on. Flame me into the fucking ground. I don't care.

batolemaeus

---

Originally posted by CaesarsGhost
Not even in a city or anything, just a barren area of landscape that's all yours?

---

Exactly. But only initially, on day one, the world would be absolutely empty. After that, it will fill up with player generated content.
This is actually how Wurm Online works: On day one, the world if virtually empty. There are trees, deserts and animals that inhabit that space, but nothing from the players. After that, players spread and settle, create houses, castles, towns, even highways.

In Eve it was similar: The world was virtually Empty in the beginning, and players went out into the wilderness of 0.0 space, and settled. Formed alliances, built up infrastructure, fought over ressources.

In a good sandbox, you give your players some tools and let them build everything. (to the degree of engine and game limitations of course)
A real sandbox would be absolutely empty in the beginning.

Sovrath

Originally posted by iamloser


Explain your Hybrid Sandbox. I just don't see how you could mix the two entirely different types to make a good game. If someone good do it , and do it extremely well, it would be the most succesful game out there, appealing to both types of gamers in a certain way. If it could make the Sandbox people think of it as a sandbox game and the linear people think of it as a linear game at the same time. That game is one in a million, i swear.

I think I'll chime in here.

I would also want some sort of "hybrid" sandbox. A game where there are rails and only rails to follow is a bit constrictive to me. However, those "complete sandbox" games where players just stand around and socialize, make campfires in the wilderness, dance in the streets, role play, etc, would not do it for me either.

My main game is Lineage 2. What many people don't realize is that it is a sandbox game. But it is a pvp sandbox game where the action and game play is generated through player interaction. It is all about politics, controlling castles, fortresses, etc.

Their are raid bosses (which can also be fought over) and quests but the quests are utilitarian at best an mostly never fun.

You also have things like fishing, crafting.

But sometimes I would love to just log in and do quests that are fun an exciting and have some sort of problem solving (even if simple) which of course, L2 quests are not. (boring quests, really).

I did try WoW and what I found was that I actually had fun doing some of their quests. I actually found myself taking any quest I could (as opposed to L2 quests which I never do unless I have to).

It was nice to just log in and be part of the amusement park.

So a hybrid would be nice. Something that allowed for a dynamic world but that there were elements to that world that one could take part in that allowed freedom. Sort of like Morrowind or as someone else said, Oblivion. There is a main quest which is "on rails" but you could do any number of things that weren't related to the main quests. Heck, my roommate played Oblivion quite a bit but never ever touched the main quest. Yet i did both.

That would be a game of interest to me.

GreenHell

Id like to see a skill based system that does have quests if you wish to experience them. Although you would not be forced in to doing them in order to progress.I dont want to have my hand held every step of the way but I would like to have some sort of direction or reason as to why I am there. Quests could be used as a tool to make the world seem more alive and to tell the story of the people living there. Kill 5 wolves isnt my idea of a well thought out quest.

I would also want a player run economy where everything is craftable and the only thing that would drop from any kind of  mobs would be components to upgrade or create items. Housing, Vehicles, Player run cities with  defenses like how SWG used to be except I would want there to be some kind of consequences if your city got taken over by the opposite faction.Im not saying the city should be destroyed but there should be something to lose besides whatever you spent on the defenses.

If there are going to be dungeons I would like to see open dungeons where the only part of it that would be instanced is the boss fight so you would not have spawn camping and make it so you can only kill the boss once. Much like the system in Sword of the New World.

A tutorial noob zone is always good just so new people have some idea wtf is going on.

 

 

rikilii

Originally posted by GreenHell


Id like to see a skill based system that does have quests if you wish to experience them. Although you would not be forced in to doing them in order to progress.I dont want to have my hand held every step of the way but I would like to have some sort of direction or reason as to why I am there. Quests could be used as a tool to make the world seem more alive and to tell the story of the people living there. Kill 5 wolves isnt my idea of a well thought out quest.
I would also want a player run economy where everything is craftable and the only thing that would drop from any kind of  mobs would be components to upgrade or create items. Housing, Vehicles, Player run cities with  defenses like how SWG used to be except I would want there to be some kind of consequences if your city got taken over by the opposite faction.Im not saying the city should be destroyed but there should be something to lose besides whatever you spent on the defenses.
If there are going to be dungeons I would like to see open dungeons where the only part of it that would be instanced is the boss fight so you would not have spawn camping and make it so you can only kill the boss once. Much like the system in Sword of the New World.
A tutorial noob zone is always good just so new people have some idea wtf is going on.
 
 

I'd play that game, especially if it also had bewbies.

 

But seriously...my only qualm is about the instances.  I think instanced dungeons are actually better for suspending your disbelief.  If a deep dark dangerous dungeon is like a shopping mall....it kind of ruins the experience.

Perhaps each dungeon could have a public instance, if you want to go and have a chance to run into others, as well as the option for private instances.

starman999

I have made my position on this clear on these forums for many years.....

 

I would prefer the sandbox style of SWG classic (ie release til about 8 months later) Over the linear style of WOW, EQ, LOTRO etc.. ad nauseum.  Any day of the week.

 

 

 

 

 

 

batolemaeus

---

Originally posted by rikilii
I'd play that game, especially if it also had bewbies.

---

Do that, Eve is waiting.
Sadly, it is currently the only game like that. No competition at all available..so either you like it, or you have to wait for for some devs to make a game that uses that principle..