I like EVE because it takes me back to the early days of EQ where communtiy > the product, where the game is good because of what the players do with the toys the devs give them. I play an MMO to interact with players in a virtual world, griefing, wars, alliances, politics and so on, I don't want to play a mediocre RPG online. Yes I do like a few of these games that are "themeparked" MMO's but only for a short while before I drop it for something else. It is my opinion though, some players like WoW a lot more than I ever will, whatever. I have a feeling I'll be sitting on EVE for a long time.
Thats a good point. However, I can ALWAYS find a good community in a themepark. Its quite easy to find likeminded people. But a sandbox is what it is. The gameplay is always less polished and buggy. Theres a lot of guesswork involved. I can't find the fun in a game that isn't necessarily designed to be fun. Sandboxes are designed to just let you do "stuff". That stuff doesn't exactly mean FUN stuff. Thats the problem with sandboxes. The game, like you said caters to the greifers, waring and poilitcal nerd rage that for the most part, doesn't foster a freindly environment. When the main goal of every sandbox is destroying everyone around you, is it any surprise those communities attract the lowest form of scum you can find? YES, nice, good people play them also, but lets get real. A specific personality is drawn to games that promote greif play. And ALL sandboxes promote grief play. Every single one of them.
But a sandbox is what it is. The gameplay is always less polished and buggy. That is not necessarily the fault of it being a Sandbox. That is the fault of a poor development cycle. Its generally held true, but I don't know if I would say there needs to be a relationship between bugs and sandbox games.
And ALL sandboxes promote grief play. Every single one of them. Asheron's Call was just as much of a Sandbox as UO, Darkfall, and Eve, but it didn't have any griefing on the non-PvP servers. Open PvP doesn't necessarily mean Sandbox and vice versa. It just works out that way more often than not.
I also agree 100% about the FUN STUFF to do. The old space game X2 was an awesome sandbox of a game, but it wasn't nearly as fun as the linear Tie Fighter space game.
The true Theme Park will be Free Realms. In fact, I hope we seen more Theme Park like features in the more Sandbox style games. I kinda like the idea of having minigames like a collectible card game or features like the ski slopes in City of Heroes. Those were FUN! Now ideally I would be able to whip out my skiis anytime I am on the top of a snowy mountain, but I can live with a few restrictions.
There's been a lot of debate between these two groups, and they can never seem to see eye to eye. It's baffling to one side why anyone would want the other type of game. People often say that one side is hardcore the other casual, or that one side consists of gamers the other of normal people, or that one side is more mature than the other. I think, however, that you will find all these types of people in both games. I suspect that this is the difference: Sandbox fans expect to stick to one game for the long term. As such, depth and complexity are important to keep the game entertaining, while pre-made content runs out. They plan to stick with the same community of players, so social based features are considered beneficial. They form an identity within the context of the game, and desire tools to help them express it such as character customization. They seek to distinguish themselves within the game, wanting their achievements to mean something. To them, even features they don't plan to explore are important because they provide for a richer community. Linear fans, on the other hand, only plan to play a certain game for the short term. They expect to play through the game until they reach a certain point then look for something else to do. Therefore, the pre made content is what provides most of their entertainment, They don't have time or desire to get involved in the community in any meaningful way, so features oriented towards that are unnecessary. They want games that are easy to get into, because they change games and don't want to have to relearn everything each time. In each group, there may be people who play many hours a week or few, who take risks or play it safe, who are old or young, but I suspect the difference is in how long they plan to play the game. Sandbox people want a game they can play forever, linear people just want a game. Thoughts?
My thoughts are that people who want linear games are more about showing up to a movie or amusment park and enjoying experiencing what has been created.
People who want sandbox games are more about arriving at a National Park Park or a Gym and amusing themselves/utilizing whatever is around to amuse themselves.
And I don't think it has to be mutually exclusive.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
i dont think you really did anything in your post but describe the diffrence between linear/sandbox games and not players.
you used generalization and nothing else.
on the other hand.
is there even a good sandbox MMO for actuall fantasy? (i also dont care about out-dated, sketchy games that have been around b4 graphics even looked good. so dont suggest all those dinosaurs that have alrady been replaced by NEW games which is what i am interested in)
ps - i said all that cuz curmudgeons on this site just say to try UO and DAoC. yea lets go play horrible looking games that should of died years back and will never go in a new direction ever again. that sounds lovely.
Linear fans, on the other hand, only plan to play a certain game for the short term. They expect to play through the game until they reach a certain point then look for something else to do. Thoughts?
WoW. Very linear, fans still playing it for the long term.
Disagree with the OP's statements; feel it's an oversimplification and not particularly accurate to boot. I've played both types of game and haven't seen any marked difference in the retention periods of players. I know WoW players who've been there since the servers opened .. I know EVE players who get bored after a couple of months, quit and spend their days on MMO forums complaining about the lack of sandbox games. We choose the games that offer us the things we want; be that a vast open world or a theme-park ride around an instanced dungeon; and when we're sucked into the hype and excitement of a promising new MMO, the last thing on our minds is how long we'll be playing it for.
^---What he said.
The terms sandbox and theme park pretty much explain the difference. Sandboxes are for people looking to build. Theme parks are for people looking to be entertained. Even if a person's play style is weighed in one direction, it doesn't seem uncommon for them to enjoy the other side of gaming, but it seems it is usually in another genre or platform. I don't see the two preferences as mutually exclusive.
This is entirely anecdotal and not grounded in any type of concrete research, but....
From what I've seen of player patterns among friends and co-workers, as well as on GamerDNA and on XFire, it seems that people who prefer sandbox MMOs also seem to be big fans of multiplayer FPS games while people who are theme park fans seem to enjoy single-player games, including 'sandboxy' RTS stuff. The only factor I can really find that seem distinctly different is the level of direct competition with other players, but even then that's sketchy.
This is an experiment you can also try for yourself if you use XFire. Join things like 'the offiicial XFire EVE guild' and 'the official XFire WOW guild' watch what people play in addition to the MMO they usually play.
EDIT:
"My thoughts are that people who want linear games are more about showing up to a movie or amusment park and enjoying experiencing what has been created.
People who want sandbox games are more about arriving at a National Park Park or a Gym and amusing themselves/utilizing whatever is around to amuse themselves.
And I don't think it has to be mutually exclusive." -Sovrath
^--What he said, too.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
And anyways once you played a lot of similar games you often want something different.
I can play either kind as long as the game is good and fun to play.
But I just don't want to play copies of the same stuff over and over all the time.
It doesn't matter that much if a game is a sandbox, themepark or something else as long as it is new, fresh and fun to play. Many of the people longing for a sandbox is tired of Everquest copies.
Of course everyone would prefer a game to be in a certain way but no game will be exactly as you want anyways.
Comments
Thats a good point. However, I can ALWAYS find a good community in a themepark. Its quite easy to find likeminded people. But a sandbox is what it is. The gameplay is always less polished and buggy. Theres a lot of guesswork involved. I can't find the fun in a game that isn't necessarily designed to be fun. Sandboxes are designed to just let you do "stuff". That stuff doesn't exactly mean FUN stuff. Thats the problem with sandboxes. The game, like you said caters to the greifers, waring and poilitcal nerd rage that for the most part, doesn't foster a freindly environment. When the main goal of every sandbox is destroying everyone around you, is it any surprise those communities attract the lowest form of scum you can find? YES, nice, good people play them also, but lets get real. A specific personality is drawn to games that promote greif play. And ALL sandboxes promote grief play. Every single one of them.
The theory holds no water.
I also agree 100% about the FUN STUFF to do. The old space game X2 was an awesome sandbox of a game, but it wasn't nearly as fun as the linear Tie Fighter space game.
The true Theme Park will be Free Realms. In fact, I hope we seen more Theme Park like features in the more Sandbox style games. I kinda like the idea of having minigames like a collectible card game or features like the ski slopes in City of Heroes. Those were FUN! Now ideally I would be able to whip out my skiis anytime I am on the top of a snowy mountain, but I can live with a few restrictions.
My thoughts are that people who want linear games are more about showing up to a movie or amusment park and enjoying experiencing what has been created.
People who want sandbox games are more about arriving at a National Park Park or a Gym and amusing themselves/utilizing whatever is around to amuse themselves.
And I don't think it has to be mutually exclusive.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
to the op
i dont think you really did anything in your post but describe the diffrence between linear/sandbox games and not players.
you used generalization and nothing else.
on the other hand.
is there even a good sandbox MMO for actuall fantasy? (i also dont care about out-dated, sketchy games that have been around b4 graphics even looked good. so dont suggest all those dinosaurs that have alrady been replaced by NEW games which is what i am interested in)
ps - i said all that cuz curmudgeons on this site just say to try UO and DAoC. yea lets go play horrible looking games that should of died years back and will never go in a new direction ever again. that sounds lovely.
and lol to anyone who mentions DF
For me sandbox players are looking for a world to feel inmerse in. Linear players are looking for a game to have fun with.
Thats the diference I see.
WoW. Very linear, fans still playing it for the long term.
^---What he said.
The terms sandbox and theme park pretty much explain the difference. Sandboxes are for people looking to build. Theme parks are for people looking to be entertained. Even if a person's play style is weighed in one direction, it doesn't seem uncommon for them to enjoy the other side of gaming, but it seems it is usually in another genre or platform. I don't see the two preferences as mutually exclusive.
This is entirely anecdotal and not grounded in any type of concrete research, but....
From what I've seen of player patterns among friends and co-workers, as well as on GamerDNA and on XFire, it seems that people who prefer sandbox MMOs also seem to be big fans of multiplayer FPS games while people who are theme park fans seem to enjoy single-player games, including 'sandboxy' RTS stuff. The only factor I can really find that seem distinctly different is the level of direct competition with other players, but even then that's sketchy.
This is an experiment you can also try for yourself if you use XFire. Join things like 'the offiicial XFire EVE guild' and 'the official XFire WOW guild' watch what people play in addition to the MMO they usually play.
EDIT:
"My thoughts are that people who want linear games are more about showing up to a movie or amusment park and enjoying experiencing what has been created.
People who want sandbox games are more about arriving at a National Park Park or a Gym and amusing themselves/utilizing whatever is around to amuse themselves.
And I don't think it has to be mutually exclusive." -Sovrath
^--What he said, too.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Another theory: Taste just differs.
And anyways once you played a lot of similar games you often want something different.
I can play either kind as long as the game is good and fun to play.
But I just don't want to play copies of the same stuff over and over all the time.
It doesn't matter that much if a game is a sandbox, themepark or something else as long as it is new, fresh and fun to play. Many of the people longing for a sandbox is tired of Everquest copies.
Of course everyone would prefer a game to be in a certain way but no game will be exactly as you want anyways.