Since the big majority lack imagination and artistic skills they end up doing this instead
So we the unimaginative peoples let the professionals do what they can do best and we take the ride. If donne properly it can be a hell of a ride.
I agree. Even though we do see some really amazingly creative stuff, they're no more than diamonds in the rough. One reason is that the average person is really not that creative or focused.
And here's another thing: Most of the really creative people with the imagination and skills to craft that amazing sand castle see it as a monumental waste of time. They can create far more impressive stuff with better "tools" and get paid for it. Among the RL friends I have, I've realized a long time ago that the ones who seek "being creative" in game the least are people who actually do creative work in life. They simply don't play the games for that purpose, they just want to shut down the creative or even the analitical part of their brain and keep killing. So I'd have a hard time getting the actors and even the writers to RP, or getting the artists to do machinima or maps - they'd just want to group up and run dungeons!
I do value having space for creativity in games, but in my opinion you cannot rely *entirely* on your playerbase for what passes for content or else they come up with some really boring stuff.
Originally posted by parrotpholk I cannot stand for the direction to be laid out for me. If I like the setting I can go through with it like in FE. But in games like EVE I can set my own goals both long and short term and the game allows me to do them. I am not a dog and I do not like to be lead around by my nose. Some do and thats all them. EVE has grown every year and has zero signs of stopping that trend anytime soon so those who say we are crazy or this brand of game is dead do not know what they are talking about.
. Odd, I do the same thing in WoW. . Do I want to get a certain piece of gear? . Do I want to help that guildie with his problem? . Do I want to gather stuff for the weekly raid? . Do I want to go fishing? . Do I want to play the auction house and look for bargains to resell at a good price? . Do I want to PvP? . Someone is running a player ran tavern. Sould I go there and roleplay? . and so on . Are you telling me WoW is a sandbox?
I cannot stand for the direction to be laid out for me. If I like the setting I can go through with it like in FE. But in games like EVE I can set my own goals both long and short term and the game allows me to do them. I am not a dog and I do not like to be lead around by my nose. Some do and thats all them. EVE has grown every year and has zero signs of stopping that trend anytime soon so those who say we are crazy or this brand of game is dead do not know what they are talking about.
.
Odd, I do the same thing in WoW.
.
Do I want to get a certain piece of gear?
.
Do I want to help that guildie with his problem?
.
Do I want to gather stuff for the weekly raid?
.
Do I want to go fishing?
.
Do I want to play the auction house and look for bargains to resell at a good price?
.
Do I want to PvP?
.
Someone is running a player ran tavern. Sould I go there and roleplay?
.
and so on
.
Are you telling me WoW is a sandbox?
the game is levelbased, you follow a strict pattern in playing the game, you dont raid from fresh lvl 80 into ICC...you very probably worked your way up as Blizzard wants to.
WOW is the prime example of a themepark arcade mmo.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
So, not only do you dodge the question, but you also childishly insult the person who's asked it?
And on top of that, the logic in that is downright abysmal: You say if he was a real sandbox mmo player, he'd already know, and you'd not have to explain it to him. By that definition, for him to not know and therefore ask, he'd have to not be a real sandbox mmo player - but, ah, in that case you don't waste your time with him, and again don't explain it to him. So in both cases you do not answer the question. How appropriate.
I'd say this is a new low for these boards. You can despise someone's perspective on MMO games, but if you're insulting a person at least show the decency to construct a proper argument.
Originally posted by Edli This is how I see sandbox games. Most peoples want to do something like this
Since the big majority lack imagination and artistic skills they end up doing this instead
So we the unimaginative peoples let the professionals do what they can do best and we take the ride. If donne properly it can be a hell of a ride.
. The only game where you can build that sand castle is Second Life. . In UO, you could build a castle, but it would look nothing like the picture. . In SWG you could buy a house, you didn't create it, but it would look nothing like the sand castle. . Are you saying that Second Life is the only sandbox MMORPG in existence? .
I liked EVE, DF, Ryzom, FE, and also like very themeparky titles like AoC. Mostly, I enjoy playing MMOs to play with other fun folks. Folks that don't resort to dogmatic, ad hominem attacks, and petty insults. ^
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
So, not only do you dodge the question, but you also childishly insult the person who's asked it?
And on top of that, the logic in that is downright abysmal: You say if he was a real sandbox mmo player, he'd already know, and you'd not have to explain it to him. By that definition, for him to not know and therefore ask, he'd have to not be a real sandbox mmo player - but, ah, in that case you don't waste your time with him, and again don't explain it to him. So in both cases you do not answer the question. How appropriate.
I'd say this is a new low for these boards. You can despise someone's perspective on MMO games, but if you're insulting a person at least show the decency to construct a proper argument.
(Mod Edit)
I liked EVE, DF, Ryzom, FE, and also like very themeparky titles like AoC.
(Mod Edit)
A valid question. I have friends from other games and rl that love AoC so we're in a guild. Also, I don't have an xbox. Do you need a tv to hook up an xbox? If so, I don't have a TV.
As to the true game world. I agree with you to a point, I much prefer non-instanced spaces. But if immersion is designs that brign you out of your virtual reality, loading screens are far down on my list after immortality, hit point bars floating over people's head (never ever seen one in RL), not needing to eat or sleep, not aging, not needing to s*&t.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
So, not only do you dodge the question, but you also childishly insult the person who's asked it?
And on top of that, the logic in that is downright abysmal: You say if he was a real sandbox mmo player, he'd already know, and you'd not have to explain it to him. By that definition, for him to not know and therefore ask, he'd have to not be a real sandbox mmo player - but, ah, in that case you don't waste your time with him, and again don't explain it to him. So in both cases you do not answer the question. How appropriate.
I'd say this is a new low for these boards. You can despise someone's perspective on MMO games, but if you're insulting a person at least show the decency to construct a proper argument.
(Mod Edit)
Your ego is so inflated that it's no wonder you don't have any room for empathy for anyone else. If you truely were a REAL MMO player then YOU would know that not everyone comes to the table with the same set of skills, talents or imagination. This is why games like UO did so well in the past.
If you hold such draconian restrictions on potential players for your perfect sandbox MMO if it ever showed it's head, you'd niche your way to a population of: 1. Creativity doesn't just start in the game my friend, first of all, in a true sandbox game you're being creative to spark the creativity of others, this is how a town gets built. You're being creative to keep your community cohesive enough to grow with each new challenge that your town may face. Whether it's an assult from another town, a attack from a army of wondering beast or getting enough supplies to build a wall to protect it.
I personally have played many MMOs from UO and beyond. I have also played many PnP RPGs with friends on a weekly basis and if my GMs were as lacking in ideas, creativity and compromise as you are showing here, we'd never have gotten pass that first night.
The genre is plenty big enough for sandbox and themepark designed MMOs to survive. And I actually enjoy both for various reasons that I won't get into here. But you sir take the cake. It seems like you're not playing any MMO currently and won't be for a mighty long time, but that's cool. I think the genre will just keep on going without your input and do just fine.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
I'm not personally upset, I'm just pointing out how you're not making any sense and acting childishly by trying to insult people. You're not focusing enough to construct a proper argument that I can at least respectfully disagree with (as you do not focus enough to check and see I'm really not new on these boards at all). Instead you're trying to outright attack people's tastes and perspectives without any well-explained grounds.
It's OK that you do not "sugarcoat" anything, I really am OK with that; I'm just pointing out you're not actually discussing the subject itself and keeping it way too "ad hominem" to quote from an above poster.
Besides, I've played online games pretty much since the early 90s, and I've played all of the games you've mentioned, even did enjoy some of them to stay subscribed for a long time. That does not change the fact that I see some flaws with the reigning sandbox MMO designs or my opinion that what you're doing is insulting instead of actually "discussing without sugarcoating".
Problem is that most sandbox games today are PVP oriented ( and hardcore pvp at that)
Almost like its a rule : "You like war ? You like causing grief to other people ? You like profiting on expense of others ?"
Than Sandbox is for you.
So the people that like working towards common PEACEFUL goal. People that want to relax and escape AGGRESION.
They recieve NO ENTRY sign - by all sandbox games today.
Until there is PVE sandbox game (and i am not saying it should have no PVP - but not all about pvp)
There will be no sandbox game that trully can appeal to most of the people.
Actually there is such a game, Ryzom, its just sort of a dead zone atm.
I agree, if a new, fresh, well developed sandbox title was released that wasn't centered around FFA PVP and full looting it probably could draw in 500K interested players.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Problem is that most sandbox games today are PVP oriented ( and hardcore pvp at that)
Almost like its a rule : "You like war ? You like causing grief to other people ? You like profiting on expense of others ?"
Than Sandbox is for you.
So the people that like working towards common PEACEFUL goal. People that want to relax and escape AGGRESION.
They recieve NO ENTRY sign - by all sandbox games today.
Until there is PVE sandbox game (and i am not saying it should have no PVP - but not all about pvp)
There will be no sandbox game that trully can appeal to most of the people.
Actually there is such a game, Ryzom, its just sort of a dead zone atm.
I agree, if a new, fresh, well developed sandbox title was released that wasn't centered around FFA PVP and full looting it probably could draw in 500K interested players.
Check out Perpetuum Online if you haven't already. Robot game. In closed beta, but already has most features in place. A few bugs but really less now than most MMOs on release. *sigh*
PvE inner islands and PvP on outter. You can flag yourself on/off on the PvE islands.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
Problem is that most sandbox games today are PVP oriented ( and hardcore pvp at that)
Almost like its a rule : "You like war ? You like causing grief to other people ? You like profiting on expense of others ?"
Than Sandbox is for you.
So the people that like working towards common PEACEFUL goal. People that want to relax and escape AGGRESION.
They recieve NO ENTRY sign - by all sandbox games today.
Until there is PVE sandbox game (and i am not saying it should have no PVP - but not all about pvp)
There will be no sandbox game that trully can appeal to most of the people.
Give me some examples of how peace would be entertaining in a game. And keep in mind, killing npcs is not peace. Competing to get in raids is not peaceful. Competing economically is not peaceful. If you want to relax and escape agression, then you shouldnt be playing games, period. You should be staring at a sunrise or something. Games are to satisfy our agressive needs.
Originally posted by Kyleran Originally posted by Lobotomist Problem is that most sandbox games today are PVP oriented ( and hardcore pvp at that) Almost like its a rule : "You like war ? You like causing grief to other people ? You like profiting on expense of others ?" Than Sandbox is for you. So the people that like working towards common PEACEFUL goal. People that want to relax and escape AGGRESION. They recieve NO ENTRY sign - by all sandbox games today. Until there is PVE sandbox game (and i am not saying it should have no PVP - but not all about pvp) There will be no sandbox game that trully can appeal to most of the people.
Actually there is such a game, Ryzom, its just sort of a dead zone atm. I agree, if a new, fresh, well developed sandbox title was released that wasn't centered around FFA PVP and full looting it probably could draw in 500K interested players. . Since there is like close to zero difference between a sandbox game and a theme park. I'd say that new sandbox you build would have to have excellent responsive combat mechanics, and barge load of combat features and content. . A brand new sandbox would compete with WoW 1 on 1 just like any new themepark. . All games are sandboxes at the end of the day. . This is why no triple A sandbox will ever be built.
Give me some examples of how peace would be entertaining in a game. And keep in mind, killing npcs is not peace. Competing to get in raids is not peaceful. Competing economically is not peaceful. If you want to relax and escape agression, then you shouldnt be playing games, period. You should be staring at a sunrise or something. Games are to satisfy our agressive needs.
Yes, solitair is extremely aggressive. As is golf online.
There are many games that aren't aggressive, and many that are. It's entirely personal preference. There are games entirely devoted to farming / cooking meals, and those devoted entirely to killing things. Just because western games cater to the later doesn't mean everything does, it's a cultural & preferential thing.
Look at some of the games compared in this thread. The only differences are shown above. A lot of people here call games such as Eve or Darkfall, 'sandboxes', when infact they offer less character development and gameplay than some 'themepark games'.
'Sandbox' is a dumb attempt to classify types of MMO's. The only games that allow creation are ones that allow coding, i.e. second life. Everything else is not 'player freedom' and is just part of the gameplay. I've played everything from UO to EQ to SB to DF etc. While those games have different objectives, they are very much the same at the core minus a few tweaks. I am posting this as this argument always seems to show it's head in the past year or two in the age-old attempt of 'my game is better than your game because..."
AoC is better than any single player RPG I have played in a while. 1-20 is better and the rest is good as well. Would also say FFXI but some see it as a sandbox hybrid. EQ2 is deeper than any single player RPG out there.
I felt the same way. Plus I don't understand how you can compare an MMORPG story to a SPRPG story. Never in a SPRPG have I laughed later with friends on vent about 'Damn, we almost wiped on that boss, but mooky jumped off a bridge into the water, and snuck back and rezzed us.'
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
Your credentials beyond your first MMO experience have nothing to do with it. If you hopped into MMO gaming during the highlight years around UO, you'd be like us.
Nobody can get on your case for being presented structured games from the beginning and desiring more of it, but they will.
Entirely false, I started around UO and I don't particularly like sandboxes either. Oh sure, at one time I said I preferred sandboxes with some themepark elements but I've realized that what I really like are themeparks with some sandbox elements.
Just being dropped into the middle of nothingness and being expected to do something to entertain myself is not something I'd want to do. I'm paying for entertainment. If I wanted to do it all myself, I wouldn't be paying anyone.
Look at some of the games compared in this thread. The only differences are shown above. A lot of people here call games such as Eve or Darkfall, 'sandboxes', when infact they offer less character development and gameplay than some 'themepark games'.
'Sandbox' is a dumb attempt to classify types of MMO's. The only games that allow creation are ones that allow coding, i.e. second life. Everything else is not 'player freedom' and is just part of the gameplay. I've played everything from UO to EQ to SB to DF etc. While those games have different objectives, they are very much the same at the core minus a few tweaks. I am posting this as this argument always seems to show it's head in the past year or two in the age-old attempt of 'my game is better than your game because..."
+1 for some good points.
I think the terms are good for discussion, but they are over simplifications.
I always think about DF v. CoX. (both games I think well of) but CoX being very 'themepark' superficially has vastly more variation in character combat playstyle than DF. Certainly, it lack in other areas (no real crafting, so much character customization that PvP is rock, paper, shotgun).
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
Though by no means do I see myself as a "themeparker", I'm going to answer this one, because I can do that and speak of the main problem I've been having with this genre since the beginning in one fell swoop:
There is none. No such game. Up to now, we have not had a single MMO (themepark or otherwise) with as deep, interesting, engaging storytelling as can be seen in single player RPGs such as Baldur's Gate 2 or Planescape: Torment. I'm thinking (as well as hoping) that the main reason for this is the developers not really trying to find new ways of telling stories in massively multiplayer settings. Admittedly I could turn out to be wrong, and wait forever for that game that does a good job of it... but there has been so little variety in the storytelling designs I've seen up to now that I consider the craft of MMO storytelling in its infancy.
Upcoming games I hope will tackle this problem in a promising way are: Rift: Planes of Telara and Guild Wars 2 - and it's because they seem to be in line with my conviction that you need some sort of dynamic content to make any attempt at storytelling in an MMO environment matter.
Now, as for sandboxes: Maybe you'll be surprised that I actually play the sandbox games more than I play the themepark ones... And they have their glorious aspects, but I always feel I'm pouring time into making some content out of no content and it's not so fun to me in the long run; I already do that in my life much more satisfyingly and I do want to see some brilliant professional content in a universe I like such as EVE.
Although I hugely enjoy playing in gameworlds that have character, I'm also a story person when it comes to RPGs - story is the main reason I got into the genre anyway - and all the sandboxes we have now seem to be ruling out even the possibility of quality directed content, on grounds that it goes against said games' core mechanics. They may be right, but I can't really find myself absolutely fulfilled in that setting, and I still hold out hope for a good mix of the two philosophies.
Ultimately, I'm still not buying that freedom in MMOs come at the cost of professional content.
Comments
.
What the hell is 'The ability to think outside the box'? lol
.
Give me an example of this extremely complex and thought provoking play you're talking about.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
I agree. Even though we do see some really amazingly creative stuff, they're no more than diamonds in the rough. One reason is that the average person is really not that creative or focused.
And here's another thing: Most of the really creative people with the imagination and skills to craft that amazing sand castle see it as a monumental waste of time. They can create far more impressive stuff with better "tools" and get paid for it. Among the RL friends I have, I've realized a long time ago that the ones who seek "being creative" in game the least are people who actually do creative work in life. They simply don't play the games for that purpose, they just want to shut down the creative or even the analitical part of their brain and keep killing. So I'd have a hard time getting the actors and even the writers to RP, or getting the artists to do machinima or maps - they'd just want to group up and run dungeons!
I do value having space for creativity in games, but in my opinion you cannot rely *entirely* on your playerbase for what passes for content or else they come up with some really boring stuff.
Odd, I do the same thing in WoW.
.
Do I want to get a certain piece of gear?
.
Do I want to help that guildie with his problem?
.
Do I want to gather stuff for the weekly raid?
.
Do I want to go fishing?
.
Do I want to play the auction house and look for bargains to resell at a good price?
.
Do I want to PvP?
.
Someone is running a player ran tavern. Sould I go there and roleplay?
.
and so on
.
Are you telling me WoW is a sandbox?
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
the game is levelbased, you follow a strict pattern in playing the game, you dont raid from fresh lvl 80 into ICC...you very probably worked your way up as Blizzard wants to.
WOW is the prime example of a themepark arcade mmo.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
So, not only do you dodge the question, but you also childishly insult the person who's asked it?
And on top of that, the logic in that is downright abysmal: You say if he was a real sandbox mmo player, he'd already know, and you'd not have to explain it to him. By that definition, for him to not know and therefore ask, he'd have to not be a real sandbox mmo player - but, ah, in that case you don't waste your time with him, and again don't explain it to him. So in both cases you do not answer the question. How appropriate.
I'd say this is a new low for these boards. You can despise someone's perspective on MMO games, but if you're insulting a person at least show the decency to construct a proper argument.
The only game where you can build that sand castle is Second Life.
.
In UO, you could build a castle, but it would look nothing like the picture.
.
In SWG you could buy a house, you didn't create it, but it would look nothing like the sand castle.
.
Are you saying that Second Life is the only sandbox MMORPG in existence?
.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
Are you poking these people with sticks on purpose or are you legitimately asking a serious question as to what a sandbox actually is.
I liked EVE, DF, Ryzom, FE, and also like very themeparky titles like AoC. Mostly, I enjoy playing MMOs to play with other fun folks. Folks that don't resort to dogmatic, ad hominem attacks, and petty insults. ^
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
lol z3ro1 likes ryzom, nuff said there.
A valid question. I have friends from other games and rl that love AoC so we're in a guild. Also, I don't have an xbox. Do you need a tv to hook up an xbox? If so, I don't have a TV.
As to the true game world. I agree with you to a point, I much prefer non-instanced spaces. But if immersion is designs that brign you out of your virtual reality, loading screens are far down on my list after immortality, hit point bars floating over people's head (never ever seen one in RL), not needing to eat or sleep, not aging, not needing to s*&t.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
Your ego is so inflated that it's no wonder you don't have any room for empathy for anyone else. If you truely were a REAL MMO player then YOU would know that not everyone comes to the table with the same set of skills, talents or imagination. This is why games like UO did so well in the past.
If you hold such draconian restrictions on potential players for your perfect sandbox MMO if it ever showed it's head, you'd niche your way to a population of: 1. Creativity doesn't just start in the game my friend, first of all, in a true sandbox game you're being creative to spark the creativity of others, this is how a town gets built. You're being creative to keep your community cohesive enough to grow with each new challenge that your town may face. Whether it's an assult from another town, a attack from a army of wondering beast or getting enough supplies to build a wall to protect it.
I personally have played many MMOs from UO and beyond. I have also played many PnP RPGs with friends on a weekly basis and if my GMs were as lacking in ideas, creativity and compromise as you are showing here, we'd never have gotten pass that first night.
The genre is plenty big enough for sandbox and themepark designed MMOs to survive. And I actually enjoy both for various reasons that I won't get into here. But you sir take the cake. It seems like you're not playing any MMO currently and won't be for a mighty long time, but that's cool. I think the genre will just keep on going without your input and do just fine.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
I'm not personally upset, I'm just pointing out how you're not making any sense and acting childishly by trying to insult people. You're not focusing enough to construct a proper argument that I can at least respectfully disagree with (as you do not focus enough to check and see I'm really not new on these boards at all). Instead you're trying to outright attack people's tastes and perspectives without any well-explained grounds.
It's OK that you do not "sugarcoat" anything, I really am OK with that; I'm just pointing out you're not actually discussing the subject itself and keeping it way too "ad hominem" to quote from an above poster.
Besides, I've played online games pretty much since the early 90s, and I've played all of the games you've mentioned, even did enjoy some of them to stay subscribed for a long time. That does not change the fact that I see some flaws with the reigning sandbox MMO designs or my opinion that what you're doing is insulting instead of actually "discussing without sugarcoating".
Problem is that most sandbox games today are PVP oriented ( and hardcore pvp at that)
Almost like its a rule : "You like war ? You like causing grief to other people ? You like profiting on expense of others ?"
Than Sandbox is for you.
So the people that like working towards common PEACEFUL goal. People that want to relax and escape AGGRESION.
They recieve NO ENTRY sign - by all sandbox games today.
Until there is PVE sandbox game (and i am not saying it should have no PVP - but not all about pvp)
There will be no sandbox game that trully can appeal to most of the people.
Actually there is such a game, Ryzom, its just sort of a dead zone atm.
I agree, if a new, fresh, well developed sandbox title was released that wasn't centered around FFA PVP and full looting it probably could draw in 500K interested players.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Check out Perpetuum Online if you haven't already. Robot game. In closed beta, but already has most features in place. A few bugs but really less now than most MMOs on release. *sigh*
PvE inner islands and PvP on outter. You can flag yourself on/off on the PvE islands.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
Give me some examples of how peace would be entertaining in a game. And keep in mind, killing npcs is not peace. Competing to get in raids is not peaceful. Competing economically is not peaceful. If you want to relax and escape agression, then you shouldnt be playing games, period. You should be staring at a sunrise or something. Games are to satisfy our agressive needs.
I agree, if a new, fresh, well developed sandbox title was released that wasn't centered around FFA PVP and full looting it probably could draw in 500K interested players.
.
Since there is like close to zero difference between a sandbox game and a theme park. I'd say that new sandbox you build would have to have excellent responsive combat mechanics, and barge load of combat features and content.
.
A brand new sandbox would compete with WoW 1 on 1 just like any new themepark.
.
All games are sandboxes at the end of the day.
.
This is why no triple A sandbox will ever be built.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
Yes, solitair is extremely aggressive. As is golf online.
There are many games that aren't aggressive, and many that are. It's entirely personal preference. There are games entirely devoted to farming / cooking meals, and those devoted entirely to killing things. Just because western games cater to the later doesn't mean everything does, it's a cultural & preferential thing.
AoC is as good as that gets, if you ask me.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
sandbox per mmorpg.com forum definition:
Open PvP, Guild/Alliance formation, Crafting options, skill advancement
themepark per mmorpg.com forum definition:
no/very limited PvP, Guild formation, Crafting options, level/skill advancement, Quests
Look at some of the games compared in this thread. The only differences are shown above. A lot of people here call games such as Eve or Darkfall, 'sandboxes', when infact they offer less character development and gameplay than some 'themepark games'.
'Sandbox' is a dumb attempt to classify types of MMO's. The only games that allow creation are ones that allow coding, i.e. second life. Everything else is not 'player freedom' and is just part of the gameplay. I've played everything from UO to EQ to SB to DF etc. While those games have different objectives, they are very much the same at the core minus a few tweaks. I am posting this as this argument always seems to show it's head in the past year or two in the age-old attempt of 'my game is better than your game because..."
Sandboxes can have some direction too.
And I have to say that these new "sandboxes", Mortal Online and Darkfall are bad examples.
They are nothing like what Ultima Online use to be.
I felt the same way. Plus I don't understand how you can compare an MMORPG story to a SPRPG story. Never in a SPRPG have I laughed later with friends on vent about 'Damn, we almost wiped on that boss, but mooky jumped off a bridge into the water, and snuck back and rezzed us.'
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
Entirely false, I started around UO and I don't particularly like sandboxes either. Oh sure, at one time I said I preferred sandboxes with some themepark elements but I've realized that what I really like are themeparks with some sandbox elements.
Just being dropped into the middle of nothingness and being expected to do something to entertain myself is not something I'd want to do. I'm paying for entertainment. If I wanted to do it all myself, I wouldn't be paying anyone.
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
+1 for some good points.
I think the terms are good for discussion, but they are over simplifications.
I always think about DF v. CoX. (both games I think well of) but CoX being very 'themepark' superficially has vastly more variation in character combat playstyle than DF. Certainly, it lack in other areas (no real crafting, so much character customization that PvP is rock, paper, shotgun).
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
Though by no means do I see myself as a "themeparker", I'm going to answer this one, because I can do that and speak of the main problem I've been having with this genre since the beginning in one fell swoop:
There is none. No such game. Up to now, we have not had a single MMO (themepark or otherwise) with as deep, interesting, engaging storytelling as can be seen in single player RPGs such as Baldur's Gate 2 or Planescape: Torment. I'm thinking (as well as hoping) that the main reason for this is the developers not really trying to find new ways of telling stories in massively multiplayer settings. Admittedly I could turn out to be wrong, and wait forever for that game that does a good job of it... but there has been so little variety in the storytelling designs I've seen up to now that I consider the craft of MMO storytelling in its infancy.
Upcoming games I hope will tackle this problem in a promising way are: Rift: Planes of Telara and Guild Wars 2 - and it's because they seem to be in line with my conviction that you need some sort of dynamic content to make any attempt at storytelling in an MMO environment matter.
Now, as for sandboxes: Maybe you'll be surprised that I actually play the sandbox games more than I play the themepark ones... And they have their glorious aspects, but I always feel I'm pouring time into making some content out of no content and it's not so fun to me in the long run; I already do that in my life much more satisfyingly and I do want to see some brilliant professional content in a universe I like such as EVE.
Although I hugely enjoy playing in gameworlds that have character, I'm also a story person when it comes to RPGs - story is the main reason I got into the genre anyway - and all the sandboxes we have now seem to be ruling out even the possibility of quality directed content, on grounds that it goes against said games' core mechanics. They may be right, but I can't really find myself absolutely fulfilled in that setting, and I still hold out hope for a good mix of the two philosophies.
Ultimately, I'm still not buying that freedom in MMOs come at the cost of professional content.