I never played SWG, so I'm not going to make any attempt to talk about it's particular implimentation. However, I do take issue with the idea that sandbox style games HAVE to leave the players directionless or that they must lack content.
A good sand-box style game will have a TON of story-arcs and events going on in the World...including those created by Developers not just players. It will also have organizations, power groups and individuals (NPC) who have thier own motivations and agendas that they want to push to influence the course of events in the world. Those organizations/individuals will most certainly afford players the opportunity to share in those goals and agendas.
The difference between sandbox and themepark is that the sandbox allows the player the freedom to choose how they interact with those agendas and why and it allows them the opportunity to create thier own. In other words, the sandbox game influences/suggests where the themepark forces.
Themepark - You're mother was slaughtered by Sand-People. Your character hates Sand-People. Goto the village of Ploon and kill 10 Sand-People and recieve an award, then proceed to the next phase of the story.
Sandbox - You're standing in the town of Plox. A ragged looking man is standing in the town square begging for aid as his village of Ploon is being raided by Sand-People. He is even offering a cash bounty from what little he was able to salvage from his home before leaving.
- You could goto Ploon and kill Sand-People and accept the bounty.
- You could goto Ploon and kill Sand-People and accept no bounty...because that's the kind of character you are.
- You could pick-pocket the refuge and steal the cash ge is using for the reward.
- You could take advantage of the chaos in Ploon, ignore/avoid the Sand-People and loot the abandoned homes there for treasure.
- You could ignore the whole situation and do something else entirely.
Point is, a good sandox style game can provide hooks/direction for players IF they want to follow them.
The reason why you see so many AAA titles being written as themepark games is not because they are more popular (IMO).... It's because they are MUCH easier to write. If you only allow players one or two ways to interact with the content, then you only have to account for supporting those one or two options in your game logic. If you leave it open as to how the player interacts with the content.... then you've got to account for all the different ways that a player can interact with it in your game logic. It's alot more effort and work and it requires alot more sophistication is design.
Note that this isn't simply a matter of budget either. Spending $150 million dollars on voice-acting or artwork is relatively straight forward. You can see and judge exactly what you are getting from that money very quickly on with a very small sample and it's just a matter of scale and repetition. For example, if an actor does well on voicing a 10 second clip.... chances are pretty good that they'll do equaly as well on the next 500 10 second clips. On the design side of things, programming one small function or sub-sytem well doesn't tell you all that much about how well the entire system will do with all the little bits and pieces of it working together
I never played SWG, so I'm not going to make any attempt to talk about it's particular implimentation. However, I do take issue with the idea that sandbox style games HAVE to leave the players directionless or that they must lack content.
A good sand-box style game will have a TON of story-arcs and events going on in the World...including those created by Developers not just players. It will also have organizations, power groups and individuals (NPC) who have thier own motivations and agendas that they want to push to influence the course of events in the world. Those organizations/individuals will most certainly afford players the opportunity to share in those goals and agendas.
The difference between sandbox and themepark is that the sandbox allows the player the freedom to choose how they interact with those agendas and why and it allows them the opportunity to create thier own. In other words, the sandbox game influences/suggests where the themepark forces.
Themepark - You're mother was slaughtered by Sand-People. Your character hates Sand-People. Goto the village of Ploon and kill 10 Sand-People and recieve an award, then proceed to the next phase of the story.
Sandbox - You're standing in the town of Plox. A ragged looking man is standing in the town square begging for aid as his village of Ploon is being raided by Sand-People. He is even offering a cash bounty from what little he was able to salvage from his home before leaving.
- You could goto Ploon and kill Sand-People and accept the bounty.
- You could goto Ploon and kill Sand-People and accept no bounty...because that's the kind of character you are.
- You could pick-pocket the refuge and steal the cash ge is using for the reward.
- You could take advantage of the chaos in Ploon, ignore/avoid the Sand-People and loot the abandoned homes there for treasure.
- You could ignore the whole situation and do something else entirely.
Point is, a good sandox style game can provide hooks/direction for players IF they want to follow them.
The reason why you see so many AAA titles being written as themepark games is not because they are more popular (IMO).... It's because they are MUCH easier to write. If you only allow players one or two ways to interact with the content, then you only have to account for supporting those one or two options in your game logic. If you leave it open as to how the player interacts with the content.... then you've got to account for all the different ways that a player can interact with it in your game logic. It's alot more effort and work and it requires alot more sophistication is design.
Note that this isn't simply a matter of budget either. Spending $150 million dollars on voice-acting or artwork is relatively straight forward. You can see and judge exactly what you are getting from that money very quickly on with a very small sample and it's just a matter of scale and repetition. For example, if an actor does well on voicing a 10 second clip.... chances are pretty good that they'll do equaly as well on the next 500 10 second clips. On the design side of things, programming one small function or sub-sytem well doesn't tell you all that much about how well the entire system will do with all the little bits and pieces of it working together
That is a good post BM, but I would counter the multiple path thing can work in a themepark setting. BW themselves are known for allowing multiple paths on storylines.
My definition of sandbox is that folks are allowed to create their own content, and affect the world around them. It may also include open world PVP.
When you allow folks to create their own content, then they need to tools to do so. If they are writing quest scripts, the devs either need to allow players basically the same game editors they use....or else the modder is starting at a handi-cap vs what the proffesional Dev can produce. Granted some amatuer modders can make some fine content....but how much piss-poor attempts are dumped into the game world as well?
What about allowing folks to place permenant objects in the landscape? SWG was a mess. Even if communities come together, and create something very nice....the instant they leave game you are left with a ghost town. This doesnt even take into account all the area being reserved instead of having content areas placed there. Even worse if there is a content area, and the tools allow someone to place something over it. As we all know, it only takes one tool to screw things up for others.
IMO sandbox MMOs are ripe for players ruining others fun. Be it either ignorant quests, permenant objects, or simple PVP griefing. I am also of the opinion that other than time/person requirements, EQ pretty much nailed what a MMO should be. It gave a great PVE game, a huge wide open world, deep tradeskills that enhanced play, extended lore, and PVP optional servers.
I hope BW is really looking hard at EQ for ideas about making game worlds.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Comments
I never played SWG, so I'm not going to make any attempt to talk about it's particular implimentation. However, I do take issue with the idea that sandbox style games HAVE to leave the players directionless or that they must lack content.
A good sand-box style game will have a TON of story-arcs and events going on in the World...including those created by Developers not just players. It will also have organizations, power groups and individuals (NPC) who have thier own motivations and agendas that they want to push to influence the course of events in the world. Those organizations/individuals will most certainly afford players the opportunity to share in those goals and agendas.
The difference between sandbox and themepark is that the sandbox allows the player the freedom to choose how they interact with those agendas and why and it allows them the opportunity to create thier own. In other words, the sandbox game influences/suggests where the themepark forces.
Themepark - You're mother was slaughtered by Sand-People. Your character hates Sand-People. Goto the village of Ploon and kill 10 Sand-People and recieve an award, then proceed to the next phase of the story.
Sandbox - You're standing in the town of Plox. A ragged looking man is standing in the town square begging for aid as his village of Ploon is being raided by Sand-People. He is even offering a cash bounty from what little he was able to salvage from his home before leaving.
- You could goto Ploon and kill Sand-People and accept the bounty.
- You could goto Ploon and kill Sand-People and accept no bounty...because that's the kind of character you are.
- You could pick-pocket the refuge and steal the cash ge is using for the reward.
- You could take advantage of the chaos in Ploon, ignore/avoid the Sand-People and loot the abandoned homes there for treasure.
- You could ignore the whole situation and do something else entirely.
Point is, a good sandox style game can provide hooks/direction for players IF they want to follow them.
The reason why you see so many AAA titles being written as themepark games is not because they are more popular (IMO).... It's because they are MUCH easier to write. If you only allow players one or two ways to interact with the content, then you only have to account for supporting those one or two options in your game logic. If you leave it open as to how the player interacts with the content.... then you've got to account for all the different ways that a player can interact with it in your game logic. It's alot more effort and work and it requires alot more sophistication is design.
Note that this isn't simply a matter of budget either. Spending $150 million dollars on voice-acting or artwork is relatively straight forward. You can see and judge exactly what you are getting from that money very quickly on with a very small sample and it's just a matter of scale and repetition. For example, if an actor does well on voicing a 10 second clip.... chances are pretty good that they'll do equaly as well on the next 500 10 second clips. On the design side of things, programming one small function or sub-sytem well doesn't tell you all that much about how well the entire system will do with all the little bits and pieces of it working together
That is a good post BM, but I would counter the multiple path thing can work in a themepark setting. BW themselves are known for allowing multiple paths on storylines.
My definition of sandbox is that folks are allowed to create their own content, and affect the world around them. It may also include open world PVP.
When you allow folks to create their own content, then they need to tools to do so. If they are writing quest scripts, the devs either need to allow players basically the same game editors they use....or else the modder is starting at a handi-cap vs what the proffesional Dev can produce. Granted some amatuer modders can make some fine content....but how much piss-poor attempts are dumped into the game world as well?
What about allowing folks to place permenant objects in the landscape? SWG was a mess. Even if communities come together, and create something very nice....the instant they leave game you are left with a ghost town. This doesnt even take into account all the area being reserved instead of having content areas placed there. Even worse if there is a content area, and the tools allow someone to place something over it. As we all know, it only takes one tool to screw things up for others.
IMO sandbox MMOs are ripe for players ruining others fun. Be it either ignorant quests, permenant objects, or simple PVP griefing. I am also of the opinion that other than time/person requirements, EQ pretty much nailed what a MMO should be. It gave a great PVE game, a huge wide open world, deep tradeskills that enhanced play, extended lore, and PVP optional servers.
I hope BW is really looking hard at EQ for ideas about making game worlds.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.