Considering that the theme park forces you down a developer designed pathways whereas the sandbox allows you to do what you want. How could anyone possibly hate the idea of doing what they want? The sandbox provides far more alternatives and it also provides a much more meaningful sense of purpose. Consider PvP in a themepark game. You have instanced battlegrounds or you can kill other players. They don't drop anything when they die. The battlegrounds have you fighting for points or kill count. This is not meaningful. Consider a sandbox game. When you PvP in a sandbox game, you're fighting for loot, or maybe for honor. Consider someone killing the wrong person. Clans might go to war. Consider a clan that controls too many resources, again you have a war, you're fighting for something, something that is more meaningful than points, something that affects the game world. It's unfortunate though that sandbox games haven't yet allowed PvE content to change the world (aside from Asheron's Call).
Simple because of fun.
I am not so narrowed minded in accepting anything b/c of a stupid label. Sandbox means nothing. Its the game that matters. IF the game is fun, I play. If the game is crap, I won't even look at it, however the game is advertised. The developer can call it game of the god, sandbox or litterbox, its still the same game.
If you feel the need to buy based on labels, buy a box of labels, write the word SANDBOX on the labels and stick it on your monitor. You got your game.
Because I want to play an RPG, not 3rd person Quake with swords. Even Dungeons and Dragons isn't "sandbox". Maybe from the DM's perspective, but the players are still going to play the story that the DM is writing. Everyone contributes, but even the game that all MMOs are trying to emulate isn't a sandbox. Sandbox is just a pretentious code word for pvp game with a large map. If I wanted to play a game like that, I would be playing Eve, since they do it well. But I don't like that kind of game, so I don't. Don't pretend that your opinions somehow make you superior.
Important facts: 1. Free to Play games are poorly made. 2. Casuals are not all idiots, but idiots call themselves casuals. 3. Great solo and group content are not mutually exclusive, but they suffer when one is shoved into the mold of the other. The same is true of PvP and PvE. 4. Community is more important than you think.
I choose whatever is good but the problem with sandbox games is there aren't any good ones and they always release buggy with no content. Like frigging put quests in them so I have something to do please! Like SWG when that launched I loved it to bits but everyone stood around in cities because there was no content.
LOL? Did you actually try UO at some point? I highly doubt that there ever will be a sandbox as good as UO was in the past (and still is on several freeshards).
UO is a horrible game. I beta-tested it from the start and jumped ship once EQ came out. Mining with 200 other people around you is no fun. Walking 3 steps and got Pk-ed is no fun. Everyone is a tank-mage is no fun.
Hey, if I could play a wizard or scientist and build a secret tower/lab where I researched new spells/devices constantly and secretly helped others but only rarely showed myself....then I'd do that. Two problems. AFAIK, there's no sandbox game MMO that's EVER been made that can do that. Second, it's basically wish fulfillment and so I doubt a game that allowed that would be all that balanced.
Or, I'd play a Superhero game where I stopped evil and helped people out regularly as well as had my secret identity life. That could be pretty fun. Again, problem is, that's never been done. I played CoH for a while and helped random people, but when the people you rescue so obviously don't have a personality or lives (e.g. you quickly get to where they repeat themselves and there's really no feeling of continuity), then I got bored.
Anyhow, I think a big problem is I don't know of any Sandbox game that feels real enough (technology limitation) and let's me do what I'd want. Quests, imho, are a way to simulate that, but admittedly they are a kludge. Ideally I'd probably be pretty happy playing a game where things HAPPENED, such as you are passing by a small town and it is attacked or a fire breaks out and you can go help out (if you want, I guess. I'd want to though). Then you meet people, maybe get to know them, and perhaps one day run into them again (or they send you a present later as more of a continuity nod than anything else) -- or maybe get them to form part of an army if some big evil force develops. Anyhooo, games like this don't exist, but quest-based games do this better than sandbox ones, at the moment. The technology just isn't there to make a sandbox game appealing to me. Eh, when it gets there, the tech available in real life will probably be more interesting anyhow.
Hmm, so, I hypothesize there will never be a really immersive* sandbox game, because by the time we can make one, we'll have far more interesting things to do.
*Based on my previously stated perspective. In short, a realistic world that responds realistically to your actions, yet also enables you to do the sort of things you want (such as be a hero, mad scientist, both, etc).
Edit: Or play a Dr. Soong-type guy and make my highly intelligent androids/golems/life/whatever and see how it progresses on its own, occasionally helping them out, etc. Again, none of the cool things I'd enjoy doing in a Sandbox environment are possible. Part of the problem is none of them have much emergent gameplay, afaik.
As some others have posted, sandbox games really aren't all that free, they just put the requirements to make you fun on you. Take EvE for example. I can do anything I want to do? How about... I WANT TO GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY SHIP!!!!! Nope, can't do that. Try this... I WANT TO EXPLORE ALL THOSE PLANETS!!! Nope. Damn. So much for freedom.
That's a great way to put it.. Even "build a bunch of probes to explore the universe" isn't possible from what I know of EvE (not that I'd be content with just that, but it would be a start).
People act like Sandbox games are these great things where you can do anything you want. That's never been how they've looked to me. The "worlds" are too small and unmodifiable, there are no secrets to discover or create, etc. You can't even be a Caine (from Kung Fu) guy who wanders the Earth making wrongs right and helping people out (and relative character power here doesn't matter much...because even the random wrongs don't exist out there to right). Again, to me Sandbox games are more defined by all the cool things I'd have fun doing that I can't, than by their freedom.
Considering that the theme park forces you down a developer designed pathways whereas the sandbox allows you to do what you want. How could anyone possibly hate the idea of doing what they want? The sandbox provides far more alternatives and it also provides a much more meaningful sense of purpose. Consider PvP in a themepark game. You have instanced battlegrounds or you can kill other players. They don't drop anything when they die. The battlegrounds have you fighting for points or kill count. This is not meaningful. Consider a sandbox game. When you PvP in a sandbox game, you're fighting for loot, or maybe for honor. Consider someone killing the wrong person. Clans might go to war. Consider a clan that controls too many resources, again you have a war, you're fighting for something, something that is more meaningful than points, something that affects the game world. It's unfortunate though that sandbox games haven't yet allowed PvE content to change the world (aside from Asheron's Call).
Some people want to be entertained, some people want to be challenged, and there's nothing wrong with either preference. Sometimes the same person wants different things at different times, come to that.
The only thing wrong is when someone tries a sandbox game and cries for it to be more themeparky, and vice-versa.
As some others have posted, sandbox games really aren't all that free, they just put the requirements to make you fun on you. Take EvE for example. I can do anything I want to do? How about... I WANT TO GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY SHIP!!!!! Nope, can't do that. Try this... I WANT TO EXPLORE ALL THOSE PLANETS!!! Nope. Damn. So much for freedom.
Check back in H1'10 when the Incarna expansion comes out.
In essence you're complaining because the sandbox has boundaries. Well no surprise there mister; CCP don't have infinite resources, so they have to make choices about the boundaries within which they can provide gameplay. I too would love to be able to explore "in person", and not just the planets either. What about those tantalizingly huge ruined starbases and derelict ships one finds in some plexes and missions? But be reasonable: EvE is already vastly complex, CCP is a small company (OK maybe "small-medium" size now with ~300 employees) and they're expanding it as fast as they can. But within the accessible boundaris they do try and follow the principle of player freedom, you must admit.
UO is a horrible game. I beta-tested it from the start and jumped ship once EQ came out. Mining with 200 other people around you is no fun. Walking 3 steps and got Pk-ed is no fun. Everyone is a tank-mage is no fun.
In UO, everyone could be everything they wanted to as long as they developed the skills they wanted. You could too.
You cant complain about what others are or do, when you and everyone can be and do everything.
UO PVP was all about player ability and knowledge. There is one skill you thought it was good, you can learn it if you want, if you think its good, others also might think its good. There is only one Magery skill, that is the generic skill required for all spells, its not Dungeons and Dragons, its a magic world where everyone can be a Magic user.
Classes are in the top stupid design decisions and you are complaining the UO genial classless system? Its not like everyone had maxed out all skills either, the time it took to master one skill is the time you didnt used to master another skill... Your choices still matter and its not like you could master everything, the most usefull skills took a long time to develop.
Too many people on the same mine, go to another mine, mine another time, do something else, buy the cheap minerals. Its a living breathing world, for god's sake. Have you ever seen a real mine? Hundreds of thousands of people mining. I can post some pictures if you like.
Got PKed after 3 steps? There is many possible solutions using the "player brain skills" for any possible situation.
Unless the player likes to hit his head against the wall.
In essence you're complaining because the sandbox has boundaries. Well no surprise there mister; CCP don't have infinite resources, so they have to make choices about the boundaries within which they can provide gameplay. I too would love to be able to explore "in person", and not just the planets either. What about those tantalizingly huge ruined starbases and derelict ships one finds in some plexes and missions? But be reasonable: EvE is already vastly complex, CCP is a small company (OK maybe "small-medium" size now with ~300 employees) and they're expanding it as fast as they can. But within the accessible boundaris they do try and follow the principle of player freedom, you must admit.
The point I was making is that the sandbox-advocates typically claim that sandbox games are so superior because of the freedom you have, you can do anything you want. I just pointed out that you can't. You're still just as restricted in your actions as any other game, you can only do the things the programmers have decided and coded for you to do. The exact same control is there as in a themepark game, it's just not as obvious. It's not a matter of freedom but of transparency.
In essence you're complaining because the sandbox has boundaries. Well no surprise there mister; CCP don't have infinite resources, so they have to make choices about the boundaries within which they can provide gameplay. I too would love to be able to explore "in person", and not just the planets either. What about those tantalizingly huge ruined starbases and derelict ships one finds in some plexes and missions? But be reasonable: EvE is already vastly complex, CCP is a small company (OK maybe "small-medium" size now with ~300 employees) and they're expanding it as fast as they can. But within the accessible boundaris they do try and follow the principle of player freedom, you must admit.
The point I was making is that the sandbox-advocates typically claim that sandbox games are so superior because of the freedom you have, you can do anything you want. I just pointed out that you can't. You're still just as restricted in your actions as any other game, you can only do the things the programmers have decided and coded for you to do. The exact same control is there as in a themepark game, it's just not as obvious. It's not a matter of freedom but of transparency.
That's really not much of a difference at all.
The freedom of sandbox games is "freedom to attempt", no one is saying freedom of satisfactory resolution. In a sandbox game, I can walk my 1st level toon out of the starting area and into a high level zone and get smacked down. In a themepark-ish game, I cannot even do that because I have yet to walk through the endless cutscenes and linear quests that arbitrarily unlock that zone.
Sandbox is all about freedom within an environment. Themepark and linear games are more about a linear storyline, almost a predestined path.
If I could use a non-MMO analogy that might clarify things, a sandbox experience is like playing in a football game, where you can win or lose dependent upon your actions and abilities and those of the other team. Themepark is more like a football movie, where the players are actors following a predetermined script.
Both are fun the first time through, but the sandbox has more lasting appeal with repeated efforts. And for those who have to be led by the hand and told what to do, I wonder if single player RPG's are more down their alley.
If I could use a non-MMO analogy that might clarify things, a sandbox experience is like playing in a football game, where you can win or lose dependent upon your actions and abilities and those of the other team. Themepark is more like a football movie, where the players are actors following a predetermined script. Both are fun the first time through, but the sandbox has more lasting appeal with repeated efforts. And for those who have to be led by the hand and told what to do, I wonder if single player RPG's are more down their alley.
I find I enjoy themepark longer over sandbox because I have goals.
But I do enjoy sandbox, I just do not play it nearly as long.
If you've played Darkfall, that's a sandbox game, and from what I hear, it's just a big, open, gankfest.
Also sandbox players can be douches.
Playing: World Of Warcraft Resting From: Nothing Retired: EQ2, CoH, Tabula Rasa, SWG, Warhammer, AoC Waiting For: SWTOR, APB Love(d): Tabula Rasa, SWG, World Of Warcraft, Age of Conan
Originally posted by Cephus404 The point I was making is that the sandbox-advocates typically claim that sandbox games are so superior because of the freedom you have, you can do anything you want. I just pointed out that you can't. You're still just as restricted in your actions as any other game, you can only do the things the programmers have decided and coded for you to do. The exact same control is there as in a themepark game, it's just not as obvious. It's not a matter of freedom but of transparency. That's really not much of a difference at all.
Players do have more freedom in sandbox MMOs than in themepark MMOs. Yes, there are still restrictions in the sense that game mechanics do exist, and there are still limitations in what is possible for players to do.
There are generally three key difference between a sandbox MMO and a themepark MMO:
1) Character development is more opened up. This is true in both the sense of how the character's skillsets can be composed, and how they can be achieve. For example, rather than characters being defined by what class they pick, they are defined by what skill lines they pick. Furthermore, in a themepark MMO, you can only advance through your class by advancing through a generic pool of experience points. This basically means that say, if you want to craft, you're forced to level your character by doing missions and killing MOBs before you can craft better things. Sandbox MMOs on the other hand, tend to be setup so your specific skill lines are linked to actually using them. Meaning that you can focus more on playing how you want by using the skills you want, rather than having to grind generic xp through grinding mobs or missions to 'level up'.
2) The ingame economies in sandbox MMOs tend to be much stronger, with significantly more depth and player influence than in themepark MMOs. This is usually directly due to more advanced crafting systems which create more reliance on other players. This in turn means there is more reliance and interaction between players. Themepark MMOs tend to be much more simplistic, and players can succeed by being completely independent from the ingame economy.
3) What is maybe one of the most defining points of a sandbox MMO, is that players actually have an impact on the gaming world. Whether it be by building a structure in an open world, to building a city in the gamespace with their friends, or many other lasting changes on the gamespace, Sandbox MMOs facilitate some measure of allowing players to have some form of lasting mark on the game. Themepark MMOs on the other hand, have extremely little to no lasting influence from player, to the point where whether the character did anything, or even existed or not, would make no difference within the virtual world, and it would go on without ever noticing they existed or not.
Saying that sandbox MMOs have no-more freedom than themepark MMOs, is a very narrow sighted thing to say.
In themepark MMOs, the game world exists to influence characters. In sandbox MMOs, the game world exists for characters to influence it.
Considering that the theme park forces you down a developer designed pathways whereas the sandbox allows you to do what you want. How could anyone possibly hate the idea of doing what they want? The sandbox provides far more alternatives and it also provides a much more meaningful sense of purpose. Consider PvP in a themepark game. You have instanced battlegrounds or you can kill other players. They don't drop anything when they die. The battlegrounds have you fighting for points or kill count. This is not meaningful. Consider a sandbox game. When you PvP in a sandbox game, you're fighting for loot, or maybe for honor. Consider someone killing the wrong person. Clans might go to war. Consider a clan that controls too many resources, again you have a war, you're fighting for something, something that is more meaningful than points, something that affects the game world. It's unfortunate though that sandbox games haven't yet allowed PvE content to change the world (aside from Asheron's Call).
I think the answer to this question is simply that sandbox games are not being released with the quality of themepark games right now (atleast that is the biggest reason for me). Some people have no problem giving money to a game company that is technically unsound simply on the reasoning that they are supporting and growing some type of "legacy", and that works until that company once it finds success does things you don't agree with or simply shut down due to lack of support anyway.
At this stage in my life I'm not looking to help usher in some new age of gaming I just want a good, fun product that helps me enjoy the precious few moments I get to spend away from the real world.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
I find I enjoy themepark longer over sandbox because I have goals. But I do enjoy sandbox, I just do not play it nearly as long.
If you've played Darkfall, that's a sandbox game, and from what I hear, it's just a big, open, gankfest. Also sandbox players can be douches.
Humans can be douches.
The sooner you learn that the better. It's not limited to a type of Video Game.
Keep in mind what you've "heard" about Darkfall is merely that.....what you've "heard".
I'm playing DF and EVE atm. But I've been known to have played WOW, COV, WAR, EQ2, and I've even dabbled in LOTRO a few times. It would seem that some like a little variety more so than others.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
In a sandbox game, I can walk my 1st level toon out of the starting area and into a high level zone and get smacked down. In a themepark-ish game, I cannot even do that because I have yet to walk through the endless cutscenes and linear quests that arbitrarily unlock that zone. Sandbox is all about freedom within an environment. Themepark and linear games are more about a linear storyline, almost a predestined path. If I could use a non-MMO analogy that might clarify things, a sandbox experience is like playing in a football game, where you can win or lose dependent upon your actions and abilities and those of the other team. Themepark is more like a football movie, where the players are actors following a predetermined script. Both are fun the first time through, but the sandbox has more lasting appeal with repeated efforts. And for those who have to be led by the hand and told what to do, I wonder if single player RPG's are more down their alley.
You can walk a level 1 into a high level zone in WoW and get instagibbed too. What you are describing, (the necessity of unlocking zones before you can enter them) is not universal to themepark MMOs.
Regarding your analogy; I have a different take on it.
A sandbox experience is like being given a ball and dumped in a field with a few dozen other people. You can kick the ball, you can throw the ball, or you can make up your own game with the ball if you like. If you want to play football then you have to establish and maintain the rules of the game yourself.
A themepark experience is like walking into a football stadium complete with all the rules already in place and playing a game of football.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
The freedom of sandbox games is "freedom to attempt", no one is saying freedom of satisfactory resolution. In a sandbox game, I can walk my 1st level toon out of the starting area and into a high level zone and get smacked down. In a themepark-ish game, I cannot even do that because I have yet to walk through the endless cutscenes and linear quests that arbitrarily unlock that zone. Sandbox is all about freedom within an environment. Themepark and linear games are more about a linear storyline, almost a predestined path.
Which doesn't address what I was saying to begin with. I'm not sure if the freedom to do stupid nonsense is really a good selling point, taking a 1st level toon out to do content which it has absolutely no chance of succeeding at doesn't strike me as a particularly good idea to begin with. And, of course, it ignores the examples I gave of not being free to attempt things simply because the programmers didn't add that content or ability.
Originally posted by Cephus404 Originally posted by pencilrick The freedom of sandbox games is "freedom to attempt", no one is saying freedom of satisfactory resolution. In a sandbox game, I can walk my 1st level toon out of the starting area and into a high level zone and get smacked down. In a themepark-ish game, I cannot even do that because I have yet to walk through the endless cutscenes and linear quests that arbitrarily unlock that zone. Sandbox is all about freedom within an environment. Themepark and linear games are more about a linear storyline, almost a predestined path.
Which doesn't address what I was saying to begin with. I'm not sure if the freedom to do stupid nonsense is really a good selling point, taking a 1st level toon out to do content which it has absolutely no chance of succeeding at doesn't strike me as a particularly good idea to begin with. And, of course, it ignores the examples I gave of not being free to attempt things simply because the programmers didn't add that content or ability.
I guess my last post wasn't noticed...
Here's a really simple, very defining difference between themepark and sandbox MMOS:
The game world of themepark MMOs exists to define what players do.
In sandbox MMOs, what players do defines the game world.
These are achieved in various ways, but the main point is that whether or not a character within a themepark MMO did anything, let alone existed, makes no difference. In a sandbox MMO, what a character does can leave a lasting impression on the game world.
I find I enjoy themepark longer over sandbox because I have goals. But I do enjoy sandbox, I just do not play it nearly as long.
If you've played Darkfall, that's a sandbox game, and from what I hear, it's just a big, open, gankfest. Also sandbox players can be douches.
Humans can be douches.
The sooner you learn that the better. It's not limited to a type of Video Game.
Keep in mind what you've "heard" about Darkfall is merely that.....what you've "heard".
I'm playing DF and EVE atm. But I've been known to have played WOW, COV, WAR, EQ2, and I've even dabbled in LOTRO a few times. It would seem that some like a little variety more so than others.
You are quick to jump to the defense of Darkfall.
Playing: World Of Warcraft Resting From: Nothing Retired: EQ2, CoH, Tabula Rasa, SWG, Warhammer, AoC Waiting For: SWTOR, APB Love(d): Tabula Rasa, SWG, World Of Warcraft, Age of Conan
Originally posted by pencilrick The freedom of sandbox games is "freedom to attempt", no one is saying freedom of satisfactory resolution. In a sandbox game, I can walk my 1st level toon out of the starting area and into a high level zone and get smacked down. In a themepark-ish game, I cannot even do that because I have yet to walk through the endless cutscenes and linear quests that arbitrarily unlock that zone.
Sandbox is all about freedom within an environment. Themepark and linear games are more about a linear storyline, almost a predestined path.
Which doesn't address what I was saying to begin with. I'm not sure if the freedom to do stupid nonsense is really a good selling point, taking a 1st level toon out to do content which it has absolutely no chance of succeeding at doesn't strike me as a particularly good idea to begin with. And, of course, it ignores the examples I gave of not being free to attempt things simply because the programmers didn't add that content or ability.
I guess my last post wasn't noticed...
Here's a really simple, very defining difference between themepark and sandbox MMOS:
The game world of themepark MMOs exists to define what players do.
In sandbox MMOs, what players do defines the game world.
These are achieved in various ways, but the main point is that whether or not a character within a themepark MMO did anything, let alone existed, makes no difference. In a sandbox MMO, what a character does can leave a lasting impression on the game world.
That all sounds great on paper, but like I said in two posts, I STILL CAN'T DO WHAT I WANT in a Sandbox MMO. I can't make a mad scientist type of guy and do research and come up with crazy stuff. I can't make a wizard who lives in a tower in the middle of nowhere and does something similar. Both would probably look and explore the world from a distance most of the time. I can't make a Soong-like guy who makes artificial life and sends it out. I can't make a Caine-like guy (from Kung Fu) who wanders the world and rights wrongs.
Theme Park games don't allow these things either, but at least with the Caine-like guy it is a good bit closer to being doable. Sandbox games just don't do what I want them to do.
Anyhow, the extent of character-created stuff is not as clear-cut as you pretend. When I played WoW for a while (quit about 6 months ago), I made a big difference in Wintegrasp on Farstriders by organizing people and leading them. Similarly, often people can have a big impact on the economy in such games (it isn't like the computer puts things on the AH). Yeah, Sandbox games allow more, but the story-element is really lacking. Want to be an archeologist in a sandbox game? Want to be an explorer and find hidden secrets? I haven't seen one that really allows either to any significant extent. Themepark games generally allow more discovery, even if everyone is doing it. Better than nothing.
Yeah, it is probably a technology limitation, but as random content and emergent gameplay technology improves, we'll probably see the line between Themeparks and Sandboxes blur to the point there is not much of a difference.
Originally posted by Drachasor That all sounds great on paper, but like I said in two posts, I STILL CAN'T DO WHAT I WANT in a Sandbox MMO. I can't make a mad scientist type of guy and do research and come up with crazy stuff. I can't make a wizard who lives in a tower in the middle of nowhere and does something similar. Both would probably look and explore the world from a distance most of the time. I can't make a Soong-like guy who makes artificial life and sends it out. I can't make a Caine-like guy (from Kung Fu) who wanders the world and rights wrongs.
Theme Park games don't allow these things either, but at least with the Caine-like guy it is a good bit closer to being doable. Sandbox games just don't do what I want them to do.
Key phrase if your quote, what you want them to do. Most of the things you listed, you can achieve more closely in a sandbox MMO than you can in a themepark MMO. Yes, it won't be exact, but you won't be confined to the same railed character development/quest treadmill that you would be in a themepark MMO. Living in a tower in the middle of nowhere? UO let you do that. As per researching something new, that's purely a software limitation in that they would have to come up with some new innovative mechanic to allow for players to research/create/develop new items (that are balanced) within the MMO. Much of the other things you stated you can do, but it requires something called roleplaying. Sandbox MMOs facilitate roleplaying, where as most themepark MMO barely even acknowledge it, let alone support it.
Anyhow, the extent of character-created stuff is not as clear-cut as you pretend. When I played WoW for a while (quit about 6 months ago), I made a big difference in Wintegrasp on Farstriders by organizing people and leading them.
And then a few hours later the zone reset and your effort meant absolutely nothing. Which was exactly my point, that themepark MMOs do not give players any measure of longterm influence on the gaming world. A sandbox MMO on the otherhand, would let you say, build a new town/city with other players. Sounds far more lasting than 'winning' control over a zone that resets as if nothing happened after a couple hours.
Similarly, often people can have a big impact on the economy in such games (it isn't like the computer puts things on the AH).
Playing the auctionhouse is not even in the same ballpark as real virtual economy with complex supply and demand models, heavy inter-dependency and reliance on items crafted by other players. In a game like WoW, you can without much more difficulty still get to max level, and get the best gear, without buying a single thing from another player, crafted or otherwise.
Yeah, Sandbox games allow more, but the story-element is really lacking.
Hand-held quest-fed story? Yes of course there's less, because quests are a core mechanic in themepark MMOs, and sparingly used in sandbox MMOs. That by no means makes any story or lore non-existent. And even so, the lore and story can be influenced more by players, rather than being pre-determined, pre-fed quest descriptions.
Want to be an archeologist in a sandbox game? Want to be an explorer and find hidden secrets? I haven't seen one that really allows either to any significant extent. Themepark games generally allow more discovery, even if everyone is doing it. Better than nothing.
You've really not played much of any sandbox MMOs then. Every single one I've played had countless points of interest to explore, waiting to be discovered. The only difference is that you don't have quests holding your hand to lead you to them.
Yeah, it is probably a technology limitation, but as random content and emergent gameplay technology improves, we'll probably see the line between Themeparks and Sandboxes blur to the point there is not much of a difference.
Perhaps, but right now there is a distinction between the two. Certainly enough between the two to make one better than the other depending on each person's preference. If you prefer themepark MMOs, that's fine, but there are countless people who are sick of them, and with good reason.
The original MMOs were about participating and being a part of a virtual world. In themepark MMOs, you're just a tourist.
In essence you're complaining because the sandbox has boundaries. Well no surprise there mister; CCP don't have infinite resources, so they have to make choices about the boundaries within which they can provide gameplay. I too would love to be able to explore "in person", and not just the planets either. What about those tantalizingly huge ruined starbases and derelict ships one finds in some plexes and missions? But be reasonable: EvE is already vastly complex, CCP is a small company (OK maybe "small-medium" size now with ~300 employees) and they're expanding it as fast as they can. But within the accessible boundaris they do try and follow the principle of player freedom, you must admit.
The point I was making is that the sandbox-advocates typically claim that sandbox games are so superior because of the freedom you have, you can do anything you want. I just pointed out that you can't. You're still just as restricted in your actions as any other game, you can only do the things the programmers have decided and coded for you to do. The exact same control is there as in a themepark game, it's just not as obvious. It's not a matter of freedom but of transparency.
That's really not much of a difference at all.
I refer you to the last sentence of my post, which is the important one. in eg: WoW, player interaction and freedom are significantly more circumscribed.
Comments
Simple because of fun.
I am not so narrowed minded in accepting anything b/c of a stupid label. Sandbox means nothing. Its the game that matters. IF the game is fun, I play. If the game is crap, I won't even look at it, however the game is advertised. The developer can call it game of the god, sandbox or litterbox, its still the same game.
If you feel the need to buy based on labels, buy a box of labels, write the word SANDBOX on the labels and stick it on your monitor. You got your game.
Because I want to play an RPG, not 3rd person Quake with swords. Even Dungeons and Dragons isn't "sandbox". Maybe from the DM's perspective, but the players are still going to play the story that the DM is writing. Everyone contributes, but even the game that all MMOs are trying to emulate isn't a sandbox. Sandbox is just a pretentious code word for pvp game with a large map. If I wanted to play a game like that, I would be playing Eve, since they do it well. But I don't like that kind of game, so I don't. Don't pretend that your opinions somehow make you superior.
Important facts:
1. Free to Play games are poorly made.
2. Casuals are not all idiots, but idiots call themselves casuals.
3. Great solo and group content are not mutually exclusive, but they suffer when one is shoved into the mold of the other. The same is true of PvP and PvE.
4. Community is more important than you think.
LOL? Did you actually try UO at some point? I highly doubt that there ever will be a sandbox as good as UO was in the past (and still is on several freeshards).
UO is a horrible game. I beta-tested it from the start and jumped ship once EQ came out. Mining with 200 other people around you is no fun. Walking 3 steps and got Pk-ed is no fun. Everyone is a tank-mage is no fun.
Hey, if I could play a wizard or scientist and build a secret tower/lab where I researched new spells/devices constantly and secretly helped others but only rarely showed myself....then I'd do that. Two problems. AFAIK, there's no sandbox game MMO that's EVER been made that can do that. Second, it's basically wish fulfillment and so I doubt a game that allowed that would be all that balanced.
Or, I'd play a Superhero game where I stopped evil and helped people out regularly as well as had my secret identity life. That could be pretty fun. Again, problem is, that's never been done. I played CoH for a while and helped random people, but when the people you rescue so obviously don't have a personality or lives (e.g. you quickly get to where they repeat themselves and there's really no feeling of continuity), then I got bored.
Anyhow, I think a big problem is I don't know of any Sandbox game that feels real enough (technology limitation) and let's me do what I'd want. Quests, imho, are a way to simulate that, but admittedly they are a kludge. Ideally I'd probably be pretty happy playing a game where things HAPPENED, such as you are passing by a small town and it is attacked or a fire breaks out and you can go help out (if you want, I guess. I'd want to though). Then you meet people, maybe get to know them, and perhaps one day run into them again (or they send you a present later as more of a continuity nod than anything else) -- or maybe get them to form part of an army if some big evil force develops. Anyhooo, games like this don't exist, but quest-based games do this better than sandbox ones, at the moment. The technology just isn't there to make a sandbox game appealing to me. Eh, when it gets there, the tech available in real life will probably be more interesting anyhow.
Hmm, so, I hypothesize there will never be a really immersive* sandbox game, because by the time we can make one, we'll have far more interesting things to do.
*Based on my previously stated perspective. In short, a realistic world that responds realistically to your actions, yet also enables you to do the sort of things you want (such as be a hero, mad scientist, both, etc).
Edit: Or play a Dr. Soong-type guy and make my highly intelligent androids/golems/life/whatever and see how it progresses on its own, occasionally helping them out, etc. Again, none of the cool things I'd enjoy doing in a Sandbox environment are possible. Part of the problem is none of them have much emergent gameplay, afaik.
As some others have posted, sandbox games really aren't all that free, they just put the requirements to make you fun on you.
Take EvE for example. I can do anything I want to do? How about... I WANT TO GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY SHIP!!!!!
Nope, can't do that. Try this... I WANT TO EXPLORE ALL THOSE PLANETS!!!
Nope. Damn. So much for freedom.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
That's a great way to put it.. Even "build a bunch of probes to explore the universe" isn't possible from what I know of EvE (not that I'd be content with just that, but it would be a start).
People act like Sandbox games are these great things where you can do anything you want. That's never been how they've looked to me. The "worlds" are too small and unmodifiable, there are no secrets to discover or create, etc. You can't even be a Caine (from Kung Fu) guy who wanders the Earth making wrongs right and helping people out (and relative character power here doesn't matter much...because even the random wrongs don't exist out there to right). Again, to me Sandbox games are more defined by all the cool things I'd have fun doing that I can't, than by their freedom.
Some people want to be entertained, some people want to be challenged, and there's nothing wrong with either preference. Sometimes the same person wants different things at different times, come to that.
The only thing wrong is when someone tries a sandbox game and cries for it to be more themeparky, and vice-versa.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Check back in H1'10 when the Incarna expansion comes out.
In essence you're complaining because the sandbox has boundaries. Well no surprise there mister; CCP don't have infinite resources, so they have to make choices about the boundaries within which they can provide gameplay. I too would love to be able to explore "in person", and not just the planets either. What about those tantalizingly huge ruined starbases and derelict ships one finds in some plexes and missions? But be reasonable: EvE is already vastly complex, CCP is a small company (OK maybe "small-medium" size now with ~300 employees) and they're expanding it as fast as they can. But within the accessible boundaris they do try and follow the principle of player freedom, you must admit.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
When people go around talking about how sandbox EVE is, I like to throw around a game miles ahead of EVE Online in that department.
Its a single player game though
X3: Terran Conflict.
In UO, everyone could be everything they wanted to as long as they developed the skills they wanted. You could too.
You cant complain about what others are or do, when you and everyone can be and do everything.
UO PVP was all about player ability and knowledge. There is one skill you thought it was good, you can learn it if you want, if you think its good, others also might think its good. There is only one Magery skill, that is the generic skill required for all spells, its not Dungeons and Dragons, its a magic world where everyone can be a Magic user.
Classes are in the top stupid design decisions and you are complaining the UO genial classless system? Its not like everyone had maxed out all skills either, the time it took to master one skill is the time you didnt used to master another skill... Your choices still matter and its not like you could master everything, the most usefull skills took a long time to develop.
Too many people on the same mine, go to another mine, mine another time, do something else, buy the cheap minerals. Its a living breathing world, for god's sake. Have you ever seen a real mine? Hundreds of thousands of people mining. I can post some pictures if you like.
Got PKed after 3 steps? There is many possible solutions using the "player brain skills" for any possible situation.
Unless the player likes to hit his head against the wall.
The point I was making is that the sandbox-advocates typically claim that sandbox games are so superior because of the freedom you have, you can do anything you want. I just pointed out that you can't. You're still just as restricted in your actions as any other game, you can only do the things the programmers have decided and coded for you to do. The exact same control is there as in a themepark game, it's just not as obvious. It's not a matter of freedom but of transparency.
That's really not much of a difference at all.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
The point I was making is that the sandbox-advocates typically claim that sandbox games are so superior because of the freedom you have, you can do anything you want. I just pointed out that you can't. You're still just as restricted in your actions as any other game, you can only do the things the programmers have decided and coded for you to do. The exact same control is there as in a themepark game, it's just not as obvious. It's not a matter of freedom but of transparency.
That's really not much of a difference at all.
The freedom of sandbox games is "freedom to attempt", no one is saying freedom of satisfactory resolution. In a sandbox game, I can walk my 1st level toon out of the starting area and into a high level zone and get smacked down. In a themepark-ish game, I cannot even do that because I have yet to walk through the endless cutscenes and linear quests that arbitrarily unlock that zone.
Sandbox is all about freedom within an environment. Themepark and linear games are more about a linear storyline, almost a predestined path.
If I could use a non-MMO analogy that might clarify things, a sandbox experience is like playing in a football game, where you can win or lose dependent upon your actions and abilities and those of the other team. Themepark is more like a football movie, where the players are actors following a predetermined script.
Both are fun the first time through, but the sandbox has more lasting appeal with repeated efforts. And for those who have to be led by the hand and told what to do, I wonder if single player RPG's are more down their alley.
Spot on
Playing Darkfall EU1 Server
I find I enjoy themepark longer over sandbox because I have goals.
But I do enjoy sandbox, I just do not play it nearly as long.
If you've played Darkfall, that's a sandbox game, and from what I hear, it's just a big, open, gankfest.
Also sandbox players can be douches.
Playing: World Of Warcraft
Resting From: Nothing
Retired: EQ2, CoH, Tabula Rasa, SWG, Warhammer, AoC
Waiting For: SWTOR, APB
Love(d): Tabula Rasa, SWG, World Of Warcraft, Age of Conan
Players do have more freedom in sandbox MMOs than in themepark MMOs. Yes, there are still restrictions in the sense that game mechanics do exist, and there are still limitations in what is possible for players to do.
There are generally three key difference between a sandbox MMO and a themepark MMO:
1) Character development is more opened up. This is true in both the sense of how the character's skillsets can be composed, and how they can be achieve. For example, rather than characters being defined by what class they pick, they are defined by what skill lines they pick. Furthermore, in a themepark MMO, you can only advance through your class by advancing through a generic pool of experience points. This basically means that say, if you want to craft, you're forced to level your character by doing missions and killing MOBs before you can craft better things. Sandbox MMOs on the other hand, tend to be setup so your specific skill lines are linked to actually using them. Meaning that you can focus more on playing how you want by using the skills you want, rather than having to grind generic xp through grinding mobs or missions to 'level up'.
2) The ingame economies in sandbox MMOs tend to be much stronger, with significantly more depth and player influence than in themepark MMOs. This is usually directly due to more advanced crafting systems which create more reliance on other players. This in turn means there is more reliance and interaction between players. Themepark MMOs tend to be much more simplistic, and players can succeed by being completely independent from the ingame economy.
3) What is maybe one of the most defining points of a sandbox MMO, is that players actually have an impact on the gaming world. Whether it be by building a structure in an open world, to building a city in the gamespace with their friends, or many other lasting changes on the gamespace, Sandbox MMOs facilitate some measure of allowing players to have some form of lasting mark on the game. Themepark MMOs on the other hand, have extremely little to no lasting influence from player, to the point where whether the character did anything, or even existed or not, would make no difference within the virtual world, and it would go on without ever noticing they existed or not.
Saying that sandbox MMOs have no-more freedom than themepark MMOs, is a very narrow sighted thing to say.
In themepark MMOs, the game world exists to influence characters. In sandbox MMOs, the game world exists for characters to influence it.
11pages late..but what the heck...
Main reason? There has not been a well done sandbox game released in years. DF is the closest right now and it is a steam pile for many reasons....
A well done themepark (and yes: WoW, LotRO are well done themeparks) beats the pants of a badly done sandbox for enjoyment.
I think the answer to this question is simply that sandbox games are not being released with the quality of themepark games right now (atleast that is the biggest reason for me). Some people have no problem giving money to a game company that is technically unsound simply on the reasoning that they are supporting and growing some type of "legacy", and that works until that company once it finds success does things you don't agree with or simply shut down due to lack of support anyway.
At this stage in my life I'm not looking to help usher in some new age of gaming I just want a good, fun product that helps me enjoy the precious few moments I get to spend away from the real world.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Humans can be douches.
The sooner you learn that the better. It's not limited to a type of Video Game.
Keep in mind what you've "heard" about Darkfall is merely that.....what you've "heard".
I'm playing DF and EVE atm. But I've been known to have played WOW, COV, WAR, EQ2, and I've even dabbled in LOTRO a few times. It would seem that some like a little variety more so than others.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
You can walk a level 1 into a high level zone in WoW and get instagibbed too. What you are describing, (the necessity of unlocking zones before you can enter them) is not universal to themepark MMOs.
Regarding your analogy; I have a different take on it.
A sandbox experience is like being given a ball and dumped in a field with a few dozen other people. You can kick the ball, you can throw the ball, or you can make up your own game with the ball if you like. If you want to play football then you have to establish and maintain the rules of the game yourself.
A themepark experience is like walking into a football stadium complete with all the rules already in place and playing a game of football.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Which doesn't address what I was saying to begin with. I'm not sure if the freedom to do stupid nonsense is really a good selling point, taking a 1st level toon out to do content which it has absolutely no chance of succeeding at doesn't strike me as a particularly good idea to begin with. And, of course, it ignores the examples I gave of not being free to attempt things simply because the programmers didn't add that content or ability.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
I guess my last post wasn't noticed...
Here's a really simple, very defining difference between themepark and sandbox MMOS:
The game world of themepark MMOs exists to define what players do.
In sandbox MMOs, what players do defines the game world.
These are achieved in various ways, but the main point is that whether or not a character within a themepark MMO did anything, let alone existed, makes no difference. In a sandbox MMO, what a character does can leave a lasting impression on the game world.
Humans can be douches.
The sooner you learn that the better. It's not limited to a type of Video Game.
Keep in mind what you've "heard" about Darkfall is merely that.....what you've "heard".
I'm playing DF and EVE atm. But I've been known to have played WOW, COV, WAR, EQ2, and I've even dabbled in LOTRO a few times. It would seem that some like a little variety more so than others.
You are quick to jump to the defense of Darkfall.
Playing: World Of Warcraft
Resting From: Nothing
Retired: EQ2, CoH, Tabula Rasa, SWG, Warhammer, AoC
Waiting For: SWTOR, APB
Love(d): Tabula Rasa, SWG, World Of Warcraft, Age of Conan
I guess my last post wasn't noticed...
Here's a really simple, very defining difference between themepark and sandbox MMOS:
The game world of themepark MMOs exists to define what players do.
In sandbox MMOs, what players do defines the game world.
These are achieved in various ways, but the main point is that whether or not a character within a themepark MMO did anything, let alone existed, makes no difference. In a sandbox MMO, what a character does can leave a lasting impression on the game world.
That all sounds great on paper, but like I said in two posts, I STILL CAN'T DO WHAT I WANT in a Sandbox MMO. I can't make a mad scientist type of guy and do research and come up with crazy stuff. I can't make a wizard who lives in a tower in the middle of nowhere and does something similar. Both would probably look and explore the world from a distance most of the time. I can't make a Soong-like guy who makes artificial life and sends it out. I can't make a Caine-like guy (from Kung Fu) who wanders the world and rights wrongs.
Theme Park games don't allow these things either, but at least with the Caine-like guy it is a good bit closer to being doable. Sandbox games just don't do what I want them to do.
Anyhow, the extent of character-created stuff is not as clear-cut as you pretend. When I played WoW for a while (quit about 6 months ago), I made a big difference in Wintegrasp on Farstriders by organizing people and leading them. Similarly, often people can have a big impact on the economy in such games (it isn't like the computer puts things on the AH). Yeah, Sandbox games allow more, but the story-element is really lacking. Want to be an archeologist in a sandbox game? Want to be an explorer and find hidden secrets? I haven't seen one that really allows either to any significant extent. Themepark games generally allow more discovery, even if everyone is doing it. Better than nothing.
Yeah, it is probably a technology limitation, but as random content and emergent gameplay technology improves, we'll probably see the line between Themeparks and Sandboxes blur to the point there is not much of a difference.
Key phrase if your quote, what you want them to do. Most of the things you listed, you can achieve more closely in a sandbox MMO than you can in a themepark MMO. Yes, it won't be exact, but you won't be confined to the same railed character development/quest treadmill that you would be in a themepark MMO. Living in a tower in the middle of nowhere? UO let you do that. As per researching something new, that's purely a software limitation in that they would have to come up with some new innovative mechanic to allow for players to research/create/develop new items (that are balanced) within the MMO. Much of the other things you stated you can do, but it requires something called roleplaying. Sandbox MMOs facilitate roleplaying, where as most themepark MMO barely even acknowledge it, let alone support it.
And then a few hours later the zone reset and your effort meant absolutely nothing. Which was exactly my point, that themepark MMOs do not give players any measure of longterm influence on the gaming world. A sandbox MMO on the otherhand, would let you say, build a new town/city with other players. Sounds far more lasting than 'winning' control over a zone that resets as if nothing happened after a couple hours.
Playing the auctionhouse is not even in the same ballpark as real virtual economy with complex supply and demand models, heavy inter-dependency and reliance on items crafted by other players. In a game like WoW, you can without much more difficulty still get to max level, and get the best gear, without buying a single thing from another player, crafted or otherwise.
Hand-held quest-fed story? Yes of course there's less, because quests are a core mechanic in themepark MMOs, and sparingly used in sandbox MMOs. That by no means makes any story or lore non-existent. And even so, the lore and story can be influenced more by players, rather than being pre-determined, pre-fed quest descriptions.
You've really not played much of any sandbox MMOs then. Every single one I've played had countless points of interest to explore, waiting to be discovered. The only difference is that you don't have quests holding your hand to lead you to them.
Perhaps, but right now there is a distinction between the two. Certainly enough between the two to make one better than the other depending on each person's preference. If you prefer themepark MMOs, that's fine, but there are countless people who are sick of them, and with good reason.
The original MMOs were about participating and being a part of a virtual world. In themepark MMOs, you're just a tourist.
The point I was making is that the sandbox-advocates typically claim that sandbox games are so superior because of the freedom you have, you can do anything you want. I just pointed out that you can't. You're still just as restricted in your actions as any other game, you can only do the things the programmers have decided and coded for you to do. The exact same control is there as in a themepark game, it's just not as obvious. It's not a matter of freedom but of transparency.
That's really not much of a difference at all.
I refer you to the last sentence of my post, which is the important one. in eg: WoW, player interaction and freedom are significantly more circumscribed.
Give me liberty or give me lasers