I dont really think you could call this one a sandbox... Sandbox in its purest form implies a game that you can just go and dick around doing whatever tickles your fancy within the realm of what the game offers. There is so little structure that it can seem a little daunting. After watching vids browsing through many posts EVE seems like about as close to sandbox as you can get. Something for you to do no matter where you go with so much content and explorable space you simply cannot have it all. So no WAR just doesnt quite cut it as a "Sandbox".
From what I've seen of the videos on YouTube, WAR fits the "Sandbox" description-do anything you want. This applies to joining any group, any time for a public quest! What a great idea!!
yes its a great game but get real dude. trying to win over a few more subs by lying to them is just a dumb thing to do. no it does not fill the sandbox criteria (of which there is more than 1 requirement)
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds -Solid non level based game -Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
From what I've seen of the videos on YouTube, WAR fits the "Sandbox" description-do anything you want. This applies to joining any group, any time for a public quest! What a great idea!!
yes its a great game but get real dude. trying to win over a few more subs by lying to them is just a dumb thing to do. no it does not fill the sandbox criteria (of which there is more than 1 requirement)
I agree..dunno what Sarile is talking about, anyone looking for a sandbox in WAR will be hugely disappointed. I mean there is freedom of choice on how you want to progress and more choices of activities to do than some currently popular games have but WAR's far from sandbox.
The closest games that were sandbox but still had game content are Vanguard (failure) , Horizons (ultimate failure), UO (not a failure but its game portion was destroyed over the years), SWG (pre NGE), & Shadowbane. (these are just the ones im familiar with enough to comment on).
If developers would think big but design smaller, games like the above would probably do really well. The problem is most developers that have tried to do sandbox hybrid MMOS think really big and try to do way to much for release. THey should think big and then decide on a couple of the most important features to have for launch and use the rest as free content or expansions.
The purest sandbox in existance is Techincally Second Life. There's absolutely no game mechanics at all and all the 'content' from vehicles to houses to business's are built directly by the users. Of course its all wacked out hideious and runs like crap too lol.
Yep about hte lore and sandboxes, you can have a lore as a background. But the lore cant restrict you in you ations, there cant be a king npc because it would get killed by the first leet group of hardcore gamers that feels confident enough to kill him. And he wouldnt respaw, So there would be a need for elections, and the king would need to have real powers.
I'm not a no life that sits in front of his computer all day long, I'm an intern that sits in front of his computer all day long.
Comments
I dont really think you could call this one a sandbox... Sandbox in its purest form implies a game that you can just go and dick around doing whatever tickles your fancy within the realm of what the game offers. There is so little structure that it can seem a little daunting. After watching vids browsing through many posts EVE seems like about as close to sandbox as you can get. Something for you to do no matter where you go with so much content and explorable space you simply cannot have it all. So no WAR just doesnt quite cut it as a "Sandbox".
yes its a great game but get real dude. trying to win over a few more subs by lying to them is just a dumb thing to do. no it does not fill the sandbox criteria (of which there is more than 1 requirement)
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds
-Solid non level based game
-Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
yes its a great game but get real dude. trying to win over a few more subs by lying to them is just a dumb thing to do. no it does not fill the sandbox criteria (of which there is more than 1 requirement)
I agree..dunno what Sarile is talking about, anyone looking for a sandbox in WAR will be hugely disappointed. I mean there is freedom of choice on how you want to progress and more choices of activities to do than some currently popular games have but WAR's far from sandbox.
The closest games that were sandbox but still had game content are Vanguard (failure) , Horizons (ultimate failure), UO (not a failure but its game portion was destroyed over the years), SWG (pre NGE), & Shadowbane. (these are just the ones im familiar with enough to comment on).
If developers would think big but design smaller, games like the above would probably do really well. The problem is most developers that have tried to do sandbox hybrid MMOS think really big and try to do way to much for release. THey should think big and then decide on a couple of the most important features to have for launch and use the rest as free content or expansions.
The purest sandbox in existance is Techincally Second Life. There's absolutely no game mechanics at all and all the 'content' from vehicles to houses to business's are built directly by the users. Of course its all wacked out hideious and runs like crap too lol.
Yep about hte lore and sandboxes, you can have a lore as a background. But the lore cant restrict you in you ations, there cant be a king npc because it would get killed by the first leet group of hardcore gamers that feels confident enough to kill him. And he wouldnt respaw, So there would be a need for elections, and the king would need to have real powers.
I'm not a no life that sits in front of his computer all day long, I'm an intern that sits in front of his computer all day long.