Zorn, what is your second best sandbox game right after WoW?
Napoleon's Battles (with sadles).
I don't know why I should respond to someone who called me an idiot 3 pages ago?
Hope at least you read my stuff above.
No I didnt call you idiot. I said the guy on the picture is nuts. Nothing to do with you. And no I'm not reading your posts if they have more than 3 sentences.
Having played about all MMORPG I could lay my hands on. I can't count the avatars any more, just like there are about 500 wargames in my attic and 12 armies of Warhammer in my REAL sandbox. Not counting the historical ones.
And you know what: the best game I played after Wow is Star Raiders on the 800 system.
You were.. I see ... 3 years then.
But as a MMO I would say World War 2 because of the theme.
Worst? Vanguard on release and EQ2 (flying as a little bee - speaking of childish things).
But since LOTRO the trend is really DOWNWARDS.
Just installing Pirates (do you believe it just got released here in Belgium). I bet it is more polished than the hyped Conan (but let me try first).
But back on topic/ Wow anno 2008 and 2009 certainly has some great elements of sandboxes in it. )).
Not quite the scenery of my Warhammer armies but it beats the time to set up by thousands of hours.
OK....I can't take it anymore. I have to try and do -my- part of making you see.
WoW has no -true- Sanbox element to it. It has elements that might be found as such in Sandbox-like games (notice Mahni, I say sandbox-like and not Sandbox to avoid you jumping down my throat P). But the elements are not Sanbox-elements for a very simple reason.
They do not affect the gameworld with player actions, or at all. If they do affect the gameworld, it is in a pre-defined manner (see opening of the Sunwell or heck, opening of the Ahn'Qiraj gates). The sieges do not change the world. When one faction wins, they do not get more territory. A victory does not hold significant alterations to the way the world is set up. A "loss" in the Sunwell thing does not change anything, in fact, you can't lose. You can only take longer than others.
Crafting in WoW is limited to a SUB-profession. You cannot craft for the crafting and only do that.
Those are simple facts. That is why people do not consider WoW a Sandbox game, because the world, as it is, IS LINEAR. You, as a player, have no effect on how it is shaped or how it progresses. The Developers think up paths and you go along them. You might alter the world in the process, but only if the Dev's -want- you to do that, and in the WAY they want you to do that.
But...since I am basically only repeating what others have said, I guess I am wasting my time typing this.
Having played about all MMORPG I could lay my hands on. I can't count the avatars any more, just like there are about 500 wargames in my attic and 12 armies of Warhammer in my REAL sandbox. Not counting the historical ones. And you know what: the best game I played after Wow is Star Raiders on the 800 system. You were.. I see ... 3 years then. But as a MMO I would say World War 2 because of the theme. Worst? Vanguard on release and EQ2 (flying as a little bee - speaking of childish things). But since LOTRO the trend is really DOWNWARDS. Just installing Pirates (do you believe it just got released here in Belgium). I bet it is more polished than the hyped Conan (but let me try first). But back on topic/ Wow anno 2008 and 2009 certainly has some great elements of sandboxes in it. )). Not quite the scenery of my Warhammer armies but it beats the time to set up by thousands of hours.
OK....I can't take it anymore. I have to try and do -my- part of making you see.
WoW has no -true- Sanbox element to it. It has elements that might be found as such in Sandbox-like games (notice Mahni, I say sandbox-like and not Sandbox to avoid you jumping down my throat P). But the elements are not Sanbox-elements for a very simple reason.
They do not affect the gameworld with player actions, or at all. If they do affect the gameworld, it is in a pre-defined manner (see opening of the Sunwell or heck, opening of the Ahn'Qiraj gates). The sieges do not change the world. When one faction wins, they do not get more territory. A victory does not hold significant alterations to the way the world is set up. A "loss" in the Sunwell thing does not change anything, in fact, you can't lose. You can only take longer than others.
Crafting in WoW is limited to a SUB-profession. You cannot craft for the crafting and only do that.
Those are simple facts. That is why people do not consider WoW a Sandbox game, because the world, as it is, IS LINEAR. You, as a player, have no effect on how it is shaped or how it progresses. The Developers think up paths and you go along them. You might alter the world in the process, but only if the Dev's -want- you to do that, and in the WAY they want you to do that.
But...since I am basically only repeating what others have said, I guess I am wasting my time typing this.
Do I influence MY world when I craft me a helicopter or scope or a long ranged weapon?
If I craft me a scope and I sell it on the auction house for a hunter or a warrior :
I change that mans game expeirence with his character through the auction house.
Do I change a BUILDING with it ? No, but I change his perception.
I change that man's character through economics and with combat experiences.
On a bigger picture: WotLK has craftable buildings (keeps and fortressess) and siege combat system.
If it counts for one game (as having "elements of sandboxes"), why do you always make exceptions to WOW?
----
hard disk reset is the only solution and of course knowing what's going on in Wow anno 2008.
Dude, are you jus that dense and hard headed, or is it that you just love to argue with others. WOW, as we all know it and even things that will eventually come out for it, is and will never be a sandbox game, period. Does that make it bad, nope. It just makes it what it is.
Anytime you have to lvl a toon from 1 to whatever, for anything in a mmo, it is considered a class/linear/quest based progression type game. A mmo that has no lvls and you can do whatever you want, such as, mix match differant proffessions with a skill system, craft and never have to kill anything, be a politician of your own city, entertain customers in a bar/cantina and have player made content, set in an open world, you have a sandbox mmo.
You keep going on and on about these things in WOW and you keep not listening to what others are saying. I myself told you that if you never played games such as UO, SWG pre-cu or Eve you have no clue what a true sandbox game is like.
I even gave you some examples of new games that are coming out in the future that are sandbox. Learn to educate yourself and go to these game's homepages. Darkfall, Earthrise, Mortal Online, Crusades and Fallen Earth. Read and see the differances of what you can and will be able to do vs what you can do in games like WOW, AOC, LOTR, SWG NGE, And a whole bucket more.
Knowledge is power, but if you have no clue what your talking about, i have always believed that it would be best to listen and learn than talk and show ignorance.
I guess that's what it was all about, not WoW, not sandbox, linear, PES, helicopters or everything else you pulled out of your ass. It was all about your need to win, right?
Is a "sandbox" mmorpg clearly defined in your opinion? Do "sandbox" mmorpgs have a list of necessary and / or sufficient features? Is a "sandbox" mmorpg a concrete concept or an aspirational concept? Is a "sandbox" mmorpg a matter of type/kind or a matter of degree? Is EVE a true "sandbox" mmorpg?
I ask because some people in the thread treat these matters as if they are black and white, where I think of them as open for a worthwhile debate between gamers who may or may not like sandbox mmorpgs
1.) Yes, the "sandbox" design is clearly defined (although implemented differently) in different genre of video game.
2.) As I've stated before, there are core elements of sandbox design, and elements associated and/or derived from these core elements. The core are as follow:
I.) Dynamic World (this is the "open-ended" definition given to sandbox world - a dynamic world where there is limited or almost no restriction to interact and/or affect the game world from a physical or the abstract [such as economy]...)
II.) Freedom in Character Design (this is one of the major elements which many used to judge if a game is "sandbox" or not - how much freedom is given in Character Design (not just at one stage of the game, but at all stage...), and how much choice are given in Character Progression System.)
III.) Community-based Gameplay [MMORPG only] (this is the part where can have a lot of ways to implement into the game, and it can all be debated in detail if needed. The biggest reason for this is because of the inter-dependency in the Character Design.)
And the rest are derived from and/or associate to one or more core elements.
3.) Yes, it is a concrete concept with many examples existing already. When you compare games to see if they are sandbox or not, you do not just look at what the system offers, but rather if the system stays true to the core elements of sandbox. Some may want to re-invent the whole idea of sandbox, or different ways of implementation, but most would keep the core elements as the basis of their sandbox design.
4.) Yes, you could say it is a type of MMORPG, just like you can say there are linear MMORPG. And based on the how the core systems are designed, you can clearly categorize if a game is sandbox or not.
5.) EVE is a sandbox, if using the core elements listed as above:
I.) Dynamic World : I shouldn't have to explain this for EVE, but yes, the game world in EVE is dynamic in the sense that players are taking control of the game world, not developers' pre-scripted system.
II.) Freedom in Character Design : This can be argued, but the present system give the players the freedom to change their avatar in the form of the ships. The ships can be modified with different parts to fit the play-style of the players.
III.) Community-based Gameplay [MMORPG only] : This is seen in how guilds and craft are designed in the game, and these focus on the inter-dependency of the systems (how the combat characters and crafter affect the outcome of the dynamic world.
No more replies... I guess I won ) You won at nothing. You dodged my hard questions and don't even answer them, I wonder why? Is it because those questions will paint a different picture of WoW than the one you believed to be? You won at nothing really. All you show here is by applying fuzzy logic your biased opinion seem like facts to you. --
Next step: and not even joking ! World of Warcraft is the ONLY MMORPG with influences OUTSIDE Azaroth so making it even a step further than an ingame sandbox. I would say World of Warcraft is about the only MMORPG with an OUTSIDE sandbox. Just look at how many people play it you know in Real Life And have discussions with for hours on end HOW you do what in which part. That's a sandbox in your RL ! Something other than Second lIfe )) With this logic all MMORPG that has players playing have an outside sandbox... since I CAN and will find players playing different MMO at any given time, and that including WoW, so that kinda burst your bubble right there huh?
Dude, are you jus that dense and hard headed, or is it that you just love to argue with others. WOW, as we all know it and even things that will eventually come out for it, is and will never be a sandbox game, period. Does that make it bad, nope. It just makes it what it is. Anytime you have to lvl a toon from 1 to whatever, for anything in a mmo, it is considered a class/linear/quest based progression type game. A mmo that has no lvls and you can do whatever you want, such as, mix match differant proffessions with a skill system, craft and never have to kill anything, be a politician of your own city, entertain customers in a bar/cantina and have player made content, set in an open world, you have a sandbox mmo. You keep going on and on about these things in WOW and you keep not listening to what others are saying. I myself told you that if you never played games such as UO, SWG pre-cu or Eve you have no clue what a true sandbox game is like. I even gave you some examples of new games that are coming out in the future that are sandbox. Learn to educate yourself and go to these game's homepages. Darkfall, Earthrise, Mortal Online, Crusades and Fallen Earth. Read and see the differances of what you can and will be able to do vs what you can do in games like WOW, AOC, LOTR, SWG NGE, And a whole bucket more. Knowledge is power, but if you have no clue what your talking about, i have always believed that it would be best to listen and learn than talk and show ignorance.
If it counts for ONE game than it counts for all others.
WOW and all the others you mention are ALL MMORPG's with some elements of sandboxes in them.
Again, it is NOT sandbox at the core design, merely having the allusion of some associated elements doesn't make it a sandbox.
The fact that you don't want to see this is just prejudgement of an image you have from these games.
The moment I can craft and economically interact with other avatars, I influence and change my world.
Not in the physical sense. In general sense, maybe. You cannot build a house, you cannot take over a specific land for your personal use, and you cannot wipe out anything without it being reset (just like the name bosses, you can't kill them off at all... They exist whether you killed them or not.)
No doubt about that.
So Where do YOU pull the line? because I have seen about 120 different lines each defending their own views of their preferred games.
And you use personal experience and biased opinion means something? Nope. The proof you given isn't objective enough, and is full of personal bias within, hence making it a questionable reasoning.
Come to think of it WoW breaks another basic tenant most sandboxes share. There is teaming restrictions in WoW Battlegrounds the limit is what - 48 vs 48? Raids is what 10 now? I forgot, the number isn;t important. The important fact is there is a 'limit'. A barrier
In a sandbox there is no grouping restrictions. Freedom. In EVE Online we can bring a fleet into a mission. No grouping limits anywhere. Ever....
Sandbox basic criteria is Freedom. WoW is no where close to this.
Ok.
One question: where is YOUR character in EVE ???
Freedom? You can't even come out of your spaceship !
While I MAKE helicopters in Wow, EvE doesn't even allow me to exit my spaceship.
Yep FREEDOM. )
Oh BTW Open >World PvP have NO limits on the number of players.
PvP server fights on haala prove it every day ! (newest daily open world pvp). Patch 2.4
EVE Online will be getting the 'Ambulation' patch shortly. In any case we can indeed get out of our ships. How do you think we get out of our ships and enter new ones in space?
Also, this isn't an EQ clone. EVE is very different from what you are used to
Play a real sandbox and that will clear up your misconceptions
Is a "sandbox" mmorpg clearly defined in your opinion? Do "sandbox" mmorpgs have a list of necessary and / or sufficient features? Is a "sandbox" mmorpg a concrete concept or an aspirational concept? Is a "sandbox" mmorpg a matter of type/kind or a matter of degree? Is EVE a true "sandbox" mmorpg?
I ask because some people in the thread treat these matters as if they are black and white, where I think of them as open for a worthwhile debate between gamers who may or may not like sandbox mmorpgs
1.) Yes, the "sandbox" design is clearly defined (although implemented differently) in different genre of video game.
2.) As I've stated before, there are core elements of sandbox design, and elements associated and/or derived from these core elements. The core are as follow:
I.) Dynamic World (this is the "open-ended" definition given to sandbox world - a dynamic world where there is limited or almost no restriction to interact and/or affect the game world from a physical or the abstract [such as economy]...)
II.) Freedom in Character Design (this is one of the major elements which many used to judge if a game is "sandbox" or not - how much freedom is given in Character Design (not just at one stage of the game, but at all stage...), and how much choice are given in Character Progression System.)
III.) Community-based Gameplay [MMORPG only] (this is the part where can have a lot of ways to implement into the game, and it can all be debated in detail if needed. The biggest reason for this is because of the inter-dependency in the Character Design.)
And the rest are derived from and/or associate to one or more core elements.
3.) Yes, it is a concrete concept with many examples existing already. When you compare games to see if they are sandbox or not, you do not just look at what the system offers, but rather if the system stays true to the core elements of sandbox. Some may want to re-invent the whole idea of sandbox, or different ways of implementation, but most would keep the core elements as the basis of their sandbox design.
4.) Yes, you could say it is a type of MMORPG, just like you can say there are linear MMORPG. And based on the how the core systems are designed, you can clearly categorize if a game is sandbox or not.
5.) EVE is a sandbox, if using the core elements listed as above:
I.) Dynamic World : I shouldn't have to explain this for EVE, but yes, the game world in EVE is dynamic in the sense that players are taking control of the game world, not developers' pre-scripted system.
II.) Freedom in Character Design : This can be argued, but the present system give the players the freedom to change their avatar in the form of the ships. The ships can be modified with different parts to fit the play-style of the players.
III.) Community-based Gameplay [MMORPG only] : This is seen in how guilds and craft are designed in the game, and these focus on the inter-dependency of the systems (how the combat characters and crafter affect the outcome of the dynamic world.
If I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that the following are jointly sufficient and necessary to classify something as a sandbox (mmorpg):
Dynamic world
Freedom in character design
Community-based gameplay (guilds, crafting)
Saying that the "rest" are derived from and / or associate with these "core" elements just keeps the feature list abstract enough that additional necessary and / or sufficient features can be added.
You are making the strong claim that sandboxes are clearly defined, but your feature set uses words like "limited" restriction on how dynamic the world is, "how much" freedom there is in character design, and a "lot of [different] ways to implement" community-based gameplay.
These qualifiers make the classification subjective, not objective at all. I could see where someone might think that a game like WoW features a dynamic world (with limited restrictions), freedom in character design through choice of classes, tradeskills, and talents, and has implemented community-based gameplay through guilds and an economic system. Probably a bit too much wiggle room in those definitions.
If the qualifiers make the categorization subjective, isn't is difficult to claim that the definition is concrete?
Moreover, don't the qualifiers demonstrate a continuum - a world can have more or less restrictions placed on it (from limited to unlimited), more or less freedom in character design (how much), and more or less community-based gameplay (since there are a lot of different ways to implement it)? And if the "rest" of sandbox related features derive from these three core features, couldn't a game have more or less of these derived features (even if they are neither necessary or sufficient)? Wouldn't that affect *how* sandboxy a game is - meaning a matter of degree and not one of type or kind?
Lastly, you've pointed out in other posts that others aren't being objective enough, but you present subjective definitions. You've pointed out that in WoW you "cannot wipe anything out without it being reset" - isn't that ALSO true for NPCs in EVE, which you claim is a sandbox mmorpg? You've scolded others for not answering your questions, but you've ignored my reasons why I believe that EVE violates the same core features that you've listed. I'll repeat them below, classifed by your core features:
Freedom in character design - Character advancement - in my opinion, a "true" sandbox game would not have classes, levels, skills or skill points, character statistics, crafting proficiency or the like. Everyone could do anything - and a "newbie" could do the same things as a "veteran", dependent on player (not character) skill
Dynamic world - Restrictions on open-world exploration - there are more areas in which to explore, but the security ratings of areas are a type of linearity just as much as difficulty of zones in other mmorpgs
Dynamic world - Restrictions on open-world exploration - there are different agents in the game (quest givers with a different abstract form of ? over their heads), but your "faction" with their corporation impose a type of linearity just as much as different level quest givers in other mmorpgs (you cannot go to *any* quest giver and ask what's up - you must work through prerequisites to be able to interact with them)
Freedom in character design - Restrictions on character design - race is a factor that cannot be overcome
Freedom in character design - Restrictions on character design / advancement - there are (arbitrary) prerequisites for skills
Freedom in character design - Restrictions on character advancement - there a time-based restriction on skills (which in my opinion is a different type of linear character advancement)
Freedom in character design - Restrictions on character design / advancement - it replaces character level with a group of skill levels
Freedom in character design - Restrictions on character design / advancement - it replaces "classes" with an associated set of skills needed to adequately perform a role in group play
Non-core - Restrictions on what different players are able to do based on loot
Dynamic world - Restrictions on available character actions - every action that is possible to do given the setting / genre / environment is not allowed - you cannot walk in a starbase, you cannot land on a planet, you cannot start a colony, etc.
Dynamic world - The world is not truly dynamic - if you kill an NPC, it will respawn some time later. You cannot wipe out all pirates from the game forever, they are infinately spawning and any change that you make regarding NPCs will become undone over time if no further action is taken
Dynamic world - The world is not truly dynamic - what are the ways in which you can truly "affect" the world (besides building an outpost - what is the "affect" of that)? Can you take over a starbase? Can you create a new portal between zones? Can you create a new asteroid field? Can you create a new blueprint?
Dynamic world - The world is not truly dynamic - there is no in-game system to engage in politics and "change" the rules - can citizens get together in-game and lobby for changes in the security rating of a zone or how security forces operate?
Community-based gameplay - The economy is not completely character driven - NPCs offer manufactured goods and harvestable materials at prices which compete with player character created or harvested goods and materials
Community-based gameplay - The economy is not completely character driven - prices for goods get "reset" as there are arbitrary market controls
Dynamic world - The pvp is not truly "open" - there are systems (security rating / security forces) that attempt to regulate aggressive actions against new players who may choose to use them (stay in high security space) to avoid player aggression
Freedom in character design - You cannot be a "pure" crafter without *leveling up* (where level up = time instead of some other level)
Dynamic world - There not a "large" selection of things to do - this is solely an opinion, but the rather cookie cutter options of quest (ratting) / pvp / resource gathering / crafting / fed-exing goods from point a to point b does not seem quantitatively or qualitatively different from other "linear" mmorpgs
Dynamic world - There a "large" selection of player-generated goals that are possible - there are other goals than those listed in the actions above (such as those involving corporations), but these do not seem qualitatively different from guilds in other "linear" mmorpgs
Do these violate your core features of a "sandbox" mmorpg? Are you making a completely objective decision? "Sandbox" categorization is really a yes / no decision, and not a matter of degree?
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it.
It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact.
Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
The wikipedia definition is solely about non-linear level design in video, but you assert that you are discussing the widely accepted definition of what a sandbox mmorpg is?
If some people aren't even willing to enter in to an in-depth discussion of what a sandbox "is" around here, do they deserve to get anything but EQ clones left and right?
Can we really not have a civil discussion about what "sandbox" means in relation to mmorpgs?
One of the things I'm interested in is if there is a tension between "sandbox" (open-ended, freedom) and the RPG part of mmorpg (traditional rpgs with classes, levels)? Is there an inherent tension between sandbox freedom and RPG character progression?
Freedom in character design - Character advancement - in my opinion, a "true" sandbox game would not have classes, levels, skills or skill points, character statistics, crafting proficiency or the like. Everyone could do anything - and a "newbie" could do the same things as a "veteran", dependent on player (not character) skill
I don't agree with this assesment at all. Without any form of character progression the game would just be an FPS or something of that ilk. RPGs have always been about developing your character over time and having them become stronger as you learn new things.
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Freedom in character design - Character advancement - in my opinion, a "true" sandbox game would not have classes, levels, skills or skill points, character statistics, crafting proficiency or the like. Everyone could do anything - and a "newbie" could do the same things as a "veteran", dependent on player (not character) skill I don't agree with this assesment at all. Without any form of character progression the game would just be an FPS or something of that ilk. RPGs have always been about developing your character over time and having them become stronger as you learn new things.
I agree, which is why I feel like there is some tension between a prototypical "sandbox" game (non-linear level design) and the "rpg" in mmorpgs. I agree that RPGs have always had some form of character advancement (either with classes/levels or other schemes in games such as GURPS or the like). Which is why I feel like "sandboxiness" is a continuum with its most extreme point not obtainable in a mmorpg without bending or breaking a core aspect of RPGs (character advancement / progression).
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
The are too linear for you. Can't you be a little for frank and speak from your perspective on this. You come off sounding like your ideas are the ideas of everyone else.
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
Also, you may want to re-read the wikipedia article you quoted. It's about level design (where levels = traditional game levels like World 1 in Mario) not character levels. It's about linear progression through game levels (areas), not at all about powerleveling to reach a higher character level.
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
The wikipedia definition is solely about non-linear level design in video, but you assert that you are discussing the widely accepted definition of what a sandbox mmorpg is?
If some people aren't even willing to enter in to an in-depth discussion of what a sandbox "is" around here, do they deserve to get anything but EQ clones left and right?
Can we really not have a civil discussion about what "sandbox" means in relation to mmorpgs?
One of the things I'm interested in is if there is a tension between "sandbox" (open-ended, freedom) and the RPG part of mmorpg (traditional rpgs with classes, levels)? Is there an inherent tension between sandbox freedom and RPG character progression?
I make no distinction between RPG and MMORPG. I believe the same criteria should be applied to single player RPG and MMORPG.
Interesting, you assert that "RPG" gets in the way of a sandbox. I haven't reached that same conclusion quite yet but maybe one day I will. RPG does inherently rely on "gates".
You are correct a new player in EVE cannot produce equipment as well as a veteran. However, the equipment a newbie produces is still useful to a vet. To produce Tech II level equipment you must first produce/acquire it's Tech I version
In a Traditional RPG- the gates are so extreme, items produced by newbies are often worthless to vets in most titles
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
Does anything prevent a noob in EVE from talking to the highest level agents / contacts?
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
Also, you may want to re-read the wikipedia article you quoted. It's about level design (where levels = traditional game levels like World 1 in Mario) not character levels. It's about linear progression through game levels (areas), not at all about powerleveling to reach a higher character level.
you might want to give that point more thought. Traditional Levels and Level based titles like mario have a lot of similarities.
Tradtional levels escourt players though the game content. That is why developers employ them. It helps guarantee you cannot bypass a gate without the required time invested
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
Does anything prevent a noob in EVE from talking to the highest level agents / contacts?
Yes the progression through the Agent missions is heavily gated: Levels 1 to 4. However, the game does not force you to engage in the PVE content
The Time Based XP system allows players to roleplay as they please, anyway they please. We are not forced into PVE to advance our avatar.
Interesting, you assert that "RPG" gets in the way of a sandbox. I haven't reached that same conclusion quite yet but maybe one day I will. RPG does inherently rely on "gates".
It's just a theory, more of a thought experiment. I personally like my games as sandboxy as I can get them. And even though I'm suggesting the definition of "sandbox" is not concrete, not universally accepted when it comes to mmorpgs, etc., I also think that EVE has more sandbox features than any most other mmorpg I can think of (Ryzom also is way up there - and I thought what they did with the Ring of Ryzom player-created content was a novel and brilliant idea).
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
The are too linear for you. Can't you be a little for frank and speak from your perspective on this. You come off sounding like your ideas are the ideas of everyone else.
I dont mean to sound elite I often play traditional Level based titles alongside sandbox ones. City of Heroes, Guild Wars, WoW, etc I've hit max cap in many of them on multiple avatars and try to appreciate the minor sandbox elements evident in the gameplay
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it. It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact. Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
Also, you may want to re-read the wikipedia article you quoted. It's about level design (where levels = traditional game levels like World 1 in Mario) not character levels. It's about linear progression through game levels (areas), not at all about powerleveling to reach a higher character level.
The problem when using that logic applied to the MMO genre is that it practically ensures we can ONLY define the standard crop AS purely linear...even more so than Mario. I realize that statement might be hard to swallow at first, so let me explain.
In WoW (example used for most widespread understanding) you can easily view each zone AS a stage. The problem here is that, in level based MMO's, you are practically punished for going back to stages you have already completed (outleveled, in this sense). You get worthless money, items which you cannot use, and no XP. In traditional linear games (such AS mario) you are REWARDED for going back these days. In all Mario games since Super Mario World, going back meant unlocking new areas or gaining more coins for extra men. You were rewarded for going back, and even then there was always the joy of completing the challenge of the level again. In MMO's, there is no challenge in returning...and there is no reward.
Strictly speaking, MMO's today are twice as linear as even the most linear single player games being made now. This plays into why burnout happens, and why that, when it does, the player often can never go back to the game again. The "wide worlds" of this genre are nothing more than stages through which you are ushered. In the end, you are confined to a single stage most times....repeating it ad nauseam so that you might EVENTUALLY be rewarded. Once that part of the game sets in, the wide world is gone...and so is the magic that accompanies it. Of all gaming genres, MMO's truly take the cake in creating disposable content....or, content which can only generally be absorbed once or twice. I think most of us can still go back and play, from start to finish, most platformers and still obtain some joy from it.
Yes the progression through the Agent missions is heavily gated: Levels 1 to 4. However, the game does not force you to engage in the PVE content The Time Based XP system allows players to roleplay as they please, anyway they please. We are not forced into PVE to advance our avatar.
I hear you re: PVE content being optional - my argument is mostly a semantic one about what the definition of "sandbox" means in mmorpgs and whether its concrete, universally accepted, whether it is a rule based categorization or whether "sandboxihood" is a continuum, etc.
I agree that EVE has a lot of sandbox features in it.
Comments
Napoleon's Battles (with sadles).
I don't know why I should respond to someone who called me an idiot 3 pages ago?
Hope at least you read my stuff above.
No I didnt call you idiot. I said the guy on the picture is nuts. Nothing to do with you. And no I'm not reading your posts if they have more than 3 sentences.
Having played about all MMORPG I could lay my hands on. I can't count the avatars any more, just like there are about 500 wargames in my attic and 12 armies of Warhammer in my REAL sandbox. Not counting the historical ones.
And you know what: the best game I played after Wow is Star Raiders on the 800 system.
You were.. I see ... 3 years then.
But as a MMO I would say World War 2 because of the theme.
Worst? Vanguard on release and EQ2 (flying as a little bee - speaking of childish things).
But since LOTRO the trend is really DOWNWARDS.
Just installing Pirates (do you believe it just got released here in Belgium). I bet it is more polished than the hyped Conan (but let me try first).
But back on topic/ Wow anno 2008 and 2009 certainly has some great elements of sandboxes in it.
)).
Not quite the scenery of my Warhammer armies but it beats the time to set up by thousands of hours.
OK....I can't take it anymore. I have to try and do -my- part of making you see.
WoW has no -true- Sanbox element to it. It has elements that might be found as such in Sandbox-like games (notice Mahni, I say sandbox-like and not Sandbox to avoid you jumping down my throat P). But the elements are not Sanbox-elements for a very simple reason.
They do not affect the gameworld with player actions, or at all. If they do affect the gameworld, it is in a pre-defined manner (see opening of the Sunwell or heck, opening of the Ahn'Qiraj gates). The sieges do not change the world. When one faction wins, they do not get more territory. A victory does not hold significant alterations to the way the world is set up. A "loss" in the Sunwell thing does not change anything, in fact, you can't lose. You can only take longer than others.
Crafting in WoW is limited to a SUB-profession. You cannot craft for the crafting and only do that.
Those are simple facts. That is why people do not consider WoW a Sandbox game, because the world, as it is, IS LINEAR. You, as a player, have no effect on how it is shaped or how it progresses. The Developers think up paths and you go along them. You might alter the world in the process, but only if the Dev's -want- you to do that, and in the WAY they want you to do that.
But...since I am basically only repeating what others have said, I guess I am wasting my time typing this.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
I agree completely that PES 5 is more sandbox than WoW. Eventually, we will see PES 6 added to this site sooner or later.
REALITY CHECK
OK....I can't take it anymore. I have to try and do -my- part of making you see.
WoW has no -true- Sanbox element to it. It has elements that might be found as such in Sandbox-like games (notice Mahni, I say sandbox-like and not Sandbox to avoid you jumping down my throat P). But the elements are not Sanbox-elements for a very simple reason.
They do not affect the gameworld with player actions, or at all. If they do affect the gameworld, it is in a pre-defined manner (see opening of the Sunwell or heck, opening of the Ahn'Qiraj gates). The sieges do not change the world. When one faction wins, they do not get more territory. A victory does not hold significant alterations to the way the world is set up. A "loss" in the Sunwell thing does not change anything, in fact, you can't lose. You can only take longer than others.
Crafting in WoW is limited to a SUB-profession. You cannot craft for the crafting and only do that.
Those are simple facts. That is why people do not consider WoW a Sandbox game, because the world, as it is, IS LINEAR. You, as a player, have no effect on how it is shaped or how it progresses. The Developers think up paths and you go along them. You might alter the world in the process, but only if the Dev's -want- you to do that, and in the WAY they want you to do that.
But...since I am basically only repeating what others have said, I guess I am wasting my time typing this.
Do I influence MY world when I craft me a helicopter or scope or a long ranged weapon?
If I craft me a scope and I sell it on the auction house for a hunter or a warrior :
I change that mans game expeirence with his character through the auction house.
Do I change a BUILDING with it ? No, but I change his perception.
I change that man's character through economics and with combat experiences.
On a bigger picture: WotLK has craftable buildings (keeps and fortressess) and siege combat system.
If it counts for one game (as having "elements of sandboxes"), why do you always make exceptions to WOW?
----
hard disk reset is the only solution and of course knowing what's going on in Wow anno 2008.
Dude, are you jus that dense and hard headed, or is it that you just love to argue with others. WOW, as we all know it and even things that will eventually come out for it, is and will never be a sandbox game, period. Does that make it bad, nope. It just makes it what it is.
Anytime you have to lvl a toon from 1 to whatever, for anything in a mmo, it is considered a class/linear/quest based progression type game. A mmo that has no lvls and you can do whatever you want, such as, mix match differant proffessions with a skill system, craft and never have to kill anything, be a politician of your own city, entertain customers in a bar/cantina and have player made content, set in an open world, you have a sandbox mmo.
You keep going on and on about these things in WOW and you keep not listening to what others are saying. I myself told you that if you never played games such as UO, SWG pre-cu or Eve you have no clue what a true sandbox game is like.
I even gave you some examples of new games that are coming out in the future that are sandbox. Learn to educate yourself and go to these game's homepages. Darkfall, Earthrise, Mortal Online, Crusades and Fallen Earth. Read and see the differances of what you can and will be able to do vs what you can do in games like WOW, AOC, LOTR, SWG NGE, And a whole bucket more.
Knowledge is power, but if you have no clue what your talking about, i have always believed that it would be best to listen and learn than talk and show ignorance.
I guess that's what it was all about, not WoW, not sandbox, linear, PES, helicopters or everything else you pulled out of your ass. It was all about your need to win, right?
Congratulations.
1.) Yes, the "sandbox" design is clearly defined (although implemented differently) in different genre of video game.
2.) As I've stated before, there are core elements of sandbox design, and elements associated and/or derived from these core elements. The core are as follow:
And the rest are derived from and/or associate to one or more core elements.
3.) Yes, it is a concrete concept with many examples existing already. When you compare games to see if they are sandbox or not, you do not just look at what the system offers, but rather if the system stays true to the core elements of sandbox. Some may want to re-invent the whole idea of sandbox, or different ways of implementation, but most would keep the core elements as the basis of their sandbox design.
4.) Yes, you could say it is a type of MMORPG, just like you can say there are linear MMORPG. And based on the how the core systems are designed, you can clearly categorize if a game is sandbox or not.
5.) EVE is a sandbox, if using the core elements listed as above:
Current MMO: FFXIV:ARR
Past MMO: Way too many (P2P and F2P)
Current MMO: FFXIV:ARR
Past MMO: Way too many (P2P and F2P)
If it counts for ONE game than it counts for all others.
WOW and all the others you mention are ALL MMORPG's with some elements of sandboxes in them.
Again, it is NOT sandbox at the core design, merely having the allusion of some associated elements doesn't make it a sandbox.
The fact that you don't want to see this is just prejudgement of an image you have from these games.
The moment I can craft and economically interact with other avatars, I influence and change my world.
Not in the physical sense. In general sense, maybe. You cannot build a house, you cannot take over a specific land for your personal use, and you cannot wipe out anything without it being reset (just like the name bosses, you can't kill them off at all... They exist whether you killed them or not.)
No doubt about that.
So Where do YOU pull the line? because I have seen about 120 different lines each defending their own views of their preferred games.
And you use personal experience and biased opinion means something? Nope. The proof you given isn't objective enough, and is full of personal bias within, hence making it a questionable reasoning.
Current MMO: FFXIV:ARR
Past MMO: Way too many (P2P and F2P)
Ok.
One question: where is YOUR character in EVE ???
Freedom? You can't even come out of your spaceship !
While I MAKE helicopters in Wow, EvE doesn't even allow me to exit my spaceship.
Yep FREEDOM.
)
Oh BTW Open >World PvP have NO limits on the number of players.
PvP server fights on haala prove it every day ! (newest daily open world pvp). Patch 2.4
EVE Online will be getting the 'Ambulation' patch shortly. In any case we can indeed get out of our ships. How do you think we get out of our ships and enter new ones in space?
Also, this isn't an EQ clone. EVE is very different from what you are used to
Play a real sandbox and that will clear up your misconceptions
1.) Yes, the "sandbox" design is clearly defined (although implemented differently) in different genre of video game.
2.) As I've stated before, there are core elements of sandbox design, and elements associated and/or derived from these core elements. The core are as follow:
And the rest are derived from and/or associate to one or more core elements.
3.) Yes, it is a concrete concept with many examples existing already. When you compare games to see if they are sandbox or not, you do not just look at what the system offers, but rather if the system stays true to the core elements of sandbox. Some may want to re-invent the whole idea of sandbox, or different ways of implementation, but most would keep the core elements as the basis of their sandbox design.
4.) Yes, you could say it is a type of MMORPG, just like you can say there are linear MMORPG. And based on the how the core systems are designed, you can clearly categorize if a game is sandbox or not.
5.) EVE is a sandbox, if using the core elements listed as above:
If I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that the following are jointly sufficient and necessary to classify something as a sandbox (mmorpg):
Saying that the "rest" are derived from and / or associate with these "core" elements just keeps the feature list abstract enough that additional necessary and / or sufficient features can be added.
You are making the strong claim that sandboxes are clearly defined, but your feature set uses words like "limited" restriction on how dynamic the world is, "how much" freedom there is in character design, and a "lot of [different] ways to implement" community-based gameplay.
These qualifiers make the classification subjective, not objective at all. I could see where someone might think that a game like WoW features a dynamic world (with limited restrictions), freedom in character design through choice of classes, tradeskills, and talents, and has implemented community-based gameplay through guilds and an economic system. Probably a bit too much wiggle room in those definitions.
If the qualifiers make the categorization subjective, isn't is difficult to claim that the definition is concrete?
Moreover, don't the qualifiers demonstrate a continuum - a world can have more or less restrictions placed on it (from limited to unlimited), more or less freedom in character design (how much), and more or less community-based gameplay (since there are a lot of different ways to implement it)? And if the "rest" of sandbox related features derive from these three core features, couldn't a game have more or less of these derived features (even if they are neither necessary or sufficient)? Wouldn't that affect *how* sandboxy a game is - meaning a matter of degree and not one of type or kind?
Lastly, you've pointed out in other posts that others aren't being objective enough, but you present subjective definitions. You've pointed out that in WoW you "cannot wipe anything out without it being reset" - isn't that ALSO true for NPCs in EVE, which you claim is a sandbox mmorpg? You've scolded others for not answering your questions, but you've ignored my reasons why I believe that EVE violates the same core features that you've listed. I'll repeat them below, classifed by your core features:
Do these violate your core features of a "sandbox" mmorpg? Are you making a completely objective decision? "Sandbox" categorization is really a yes / no decision, and not a matter of degree?
Interesting, people cannot even decide what the definition of a sandbox "is" around here it's no small wonder we keep getting EQ clones left & right
I've personally always liked wikipedia definition. It's straight forward and simple. Obviously, World of Warcraft does not meet this criteria. The presence of "Traditional Levels" simply disqualify it.
It all boils down to the linear progression. Just becase you can get powerleveled, buy a character at ebay, or what have you doesn't change this fact.
Each to his own though. I merely discuss the widely accepted definition of Sandbox
The wikipedia definition is solely about non-linear level design in video, but you assert that you are discussing the widely accepted definition of what a sandbox mmorpg is?
If some people aren't even willing to enter in to an in-depth discussion of what a sandbox "is" around here, do they deserve to get anything but EQ clones left and right?
Can we really not have a civil discussion about what "sandbox" means in relation to mmorpgs?
One of the things I'm interested in is if there is a tension between "sandbox" (open-ended, freedom) and the RPG part of mmorpg (traditional rpgs with classes, levels)? Is there an inherent tension between sandbox freedom and RPG character progression?
Freedom in character design - Character advancement - in my opinion, a "true" sandbox game would not have classes, levels, skills or skill points, character statistics, crafting proficiency or the like. Everyone could do anything - and a "newbie" could do the same things as a "veteran", dependent on player (not character) skill
I don't agree with this assesment at all. Without any form of character progression the game would just be an FPS or something of that ilk. RPGs have always been about developing your character over time and having them become stronger as you learn new things.
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
I agree, which is why I feel like there is some tension between a prototypical "sandbox" game (non-linear level design) and the "rpg" in mmorpgs. I agree that RPGs have always had some form of character advancement (either with classes/levels or other schemes in games such as GURPS or the like). Which is why I feel like "sandboxiness" is a continuum with its most extreme point not obtainable in a mmorpg without bending or breaking a core aspect of RPGs (character advancement / progression).
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
The are too linear for you. Can't you be a little for frank and speak from your perspective on this. You come off sounding like your ideas are the ideas of everyone else.
Also, you may want to re-read the wikipedia article you quoted. It's about level design (where levels = traditional game levels like World 1 in Mario) not character levels. It's about linear progression through game levels (areas), not at all about powerleveling to reach a higher character level.
The wikipedia definition is solely about non-linear level design in video, but you assert that you are discussing the widely accepted definition of what a sandbox mmorpg is?
If some people aren't even willing to enter in to an in-depth discussion of what a sandbox "is" around here, do they deserve to get anything but EQ clones left and right?
Can we really not have a civil discussion about what "sandbox" means in relation to mmorpgs?
One of the things I'm interested in is if there is a tension between "sandbox" (open-ended, freedom) and the RPG part of mmorpg (traditional rpgs with classes, levels)? Is there an inherent tension between sandbox freedom and RPG character progression?
I make no distinction between RPG and MMORPG. I believe the same criteria should be applied to single player RPG and MMORPG.
Interesting, you assert that "RPG" gets in the way of a sandbox. I haven't reached that same conclusion quite yet but maybe one day I will. RPG does inherently rely on "gates".
You are correct a new player in EVE cannot produce equipment as well as a veteran. However, the equipment a newbie produces is still useful to a vet. To produce Tech II level equipment you must first produce/acquire it's Tech I version
In a Traditional RPG- the gates are so extreme, items produced by newbies are often worthless to vets in most titles
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
Does anything prevent a noob in EVE from talking to the highest level agents / contacts?
Also, you may want to re-read the wikipedia article you quoted. It's about level design (where levels = traditional game levels like World 1 in Mario) not character levels. It's about linear progression through game levels (areas), not at all about powerleveling to reach a higher character level.
you might want to give that point more thought. Traditional Levels and Level based titles like mario have a lot of similarities.
Tradtional levels escourt players though the game content. That is why developers employ them. It helps guarantee you cannot bypass a gate without the required time invested
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
Does anything prevent a noob in EVE from talking to the highest level agents / contacts?
Yes the progression through the Agent missions is heavily gated: Levels 1 to 4. However, the game does not force you to engage in the PVE content
The Time Based XP system allows players to roleplay as they please, anyway they please. We are not forced into PVE to advance our avatar.
It's just a theory, more of a thought experiment. I personally like my games as sandboxy as I can get them. And even though I'm suggesting the definition of "sandbox" is not concrete, not universally accepted when it comes to mmorpgs, etc., I also think that EVE has more sandbox features than any most other mmorpg I can think of (Ryzom also is way up there - and I thought what they did with the Ring of Ryzom player-created content was a novel and brilliant idea).
I don't see what you are claiming in there. You do seem to make that claim about levels disqualifying what a sandbox is in many other threads about it. So was that a slip on your part? Anyhow, it's mearly a wiki and we know how bad those are.
IMO, if you can't get beyond the limited belief that a level game could be sandbox, then perhaps you don't have a sandbox mind?...lol.
Traditional Level based games are too linear. Levels presents extremely gated content making games progress like a Linear Level based game whereas gamer goes from Level 1 to the End.
Take WoW. Character development is a huge part of that game. Players are firmly directed from area to area. If a vet tries to stay in say- the newbie area he will get no XP. He is virtually pushed out
Open ended games allow you yto choose any area you enjoy and stay there
Nothing prevents a vet in EVE from doing a Level 1 mission. I do it all the time with friends and I can dynamicall adjust my power scale to make myself completely even with my newbie pals. That way we all enjoy the challenge.
The are too linear for you. Can't you be a little for frank and speak from your perspective on this. You come off sounding like your ideas are the ideas of everyone else.
I dont mean to sound elite I often play traditional Level based titles alongside sandbox ones. City of Heroes, Guild Wars, WoW, etc I've hit max cap in many of them on multiple avatars and try to appreciate the minor sandbox elements evident in the gameplay
Also, you may want to re-read the wikipedia article you quoted. It's about level design (where levels = traditional game levels like World 1 in Mario) not character levels. It's about linear progression through game levels (areas), not at all about powerleveling to reach a higher character level.
The problem when using that logic applied to the MMO genre is that it practically ensures we can ONLY define the standard crop AS purely linear...even more so than Mario. I realize that statement might be hard to swallow at first, so let me explain.
In WoW (example used for most widespread understanding) you can easily view each zone AS a stage. The problem here is that, in level based MMO's, you are practically punished for going back to stages you have already completed (outleveled, in this sense). You get worthless money, items which you cannot use, and no XP. In traditional linear games (such AS mario) you are REWARDED for going back these days. In all Mario games since Super Mario World, going back meant unlocking new areas or gaining more coins for extra men. You were rewarded for going back, and even then there was always the joy of completing the challenge of the level again. In MMO's, there is no challenge in returning...and there is no reward.
Strictly speaking, MMO's today are twice as linear as even the most linear single player games being made now. This plays into why burnout happens, and why that, when it does, the player often can never go back to the game again. The "wide worlds" of this genre are nothing more than stages through which you are ushered. In the end, you are confined to a single stage most times....repeating it ad nauseam so that you might EVENTUALLY be rewarded. Once that part of the game sets in, the wide world is gone...and so is the magic that accompanies it. Of all gaming genres, MMO's truly take the cake in creating disposable content....or, content which can only generally be absorbed once or twice. I think most of us can still go back and play, from start to finish, most platformers and still obtain some joy from it.
What joy is there in going back to the barrens?
I hear you re: PVE content being optional - my argument is mostly a semantic one about what the definition of "sandbox" means in mmorpgs and whether its concrete, universally accepted, whether it is a rule based categorization or whether "sandboxihood" is a continuum, etc.
I agree that EVE has a lot of sandbox features in it.