Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
The main reason sandbox mmorpgs don't appeal to the masses.
Rockgod99
Member Posts: 4,640
I know this is obvious to most of us old timers but I figured i'd dash the dreams of the newbies that think a AAA sandbox will ever release.
People want to be a hero in a mmorpg, in a sandbox your this insignificant little nothing skilling up to be a even better nothing. Kind of like real life. Not many will pay for that type of simulation... Now you know.
People want to be a hero in a mmorpg, in a sandbox your this insignificant little nothing skilling up to be a even better nothing. Kind of like real life. Not many will pay for that type of simulation... Now you know.
Comments
I'd say I'm about as old timer as you can get and sandboxes are pretty shit to me.
Not because of the gameplay, but because most of them released nowhere near finished and promise things that never happen.
Only Indy developers make sandbox games and all are underfunded and have idiot PR people over hyping their products.Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
So you don't consider GTA or red dead redemption sandbox games?
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
No, it's a matter of time as well as the genre of mmorpg's going through the stages towards true, great sandbox games being made workable and wanted.
1. The technology, success and investment that is currently refining theme-park games will eventually tend towards sandbox.
2. Think back to the quaint attitudes of the past in eg Western cultures and compare them to the post-modern attitudes in culture today, this will be similar in mmorpg games and there will be a demand, especially when the superhero-theme of combat exhausts itself.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
You are way off OP.the reason Sandbox MMO fail, because in most cases, the game is ether a PvP Focus MMO, or a Pure PvE focus MMO. Never do Sandbox MMO developers try to go for both crowds like WoW has.
Also lets not forget the fact that Sandbox Developer has to add Harsh DP to their game because they lack any way to make gameplay actually be Challenging since the developers dont have much control over the gameplay other than codes.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
You are way off OP.the reason Sandbox MMO fail, because in most cases, the game is ether a PvP Focus MMO, or a Pure PvE focus MMO. Never do Sandbox MMO developers try to go for both crowds like WoW has.
Also lets not forget the fact that Sandbox Developer has to add Harsh DP to their game because they lack any way to make gameplay actually be Challenging since the developers dont have much control over the gameplay other than codes.
Did you just say WoW appeals to pvpers? Anyway... The games are lacking in pve or pvp because their underfunded. Why are they underfunded because these are Indy developers and AAA developers won't bother why? Because people won't pay to be "Uncle Owen"Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
You are way off OP.the reason Sandbox MMO fail, because in most cases, the game is ether a PvP Focus MMO, or a Pure PvE focus MMO. Never do Sandbox MMO developers try to go for both crowds like WoW has.
Also lets not forget the fact that Sandbox Developer has to add Harsh DP to their game because they lack any way to make gameplay actually be Challenging since the developers dont have much control over the gameplay other than codes.
Did you just say WoW appeals to pvpers? Anyway... The games are lacking in pve or pvp because their underfunded. Why are they underfunded because these are Indy developers and AAA developers won't bother why? Because people won't pay to be "Uncle Owen"
you must have missed the epeen arena tournaments.and also if you go back to my statement, I said, both PvE and PvP.
WoW has endgame set ups for both PvPers and PvEers. most Sandbox, do not. They go for one or the other. Usually PvP focused. Do to the lack of PvE development from Developers hands.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
It's the opposite for me. I feel far more accomplished and individual as an expert crafter of some obscure knick knacks than as yet another epic hero with a big sword who has followed an endless chain of being bossed around by NPCs, fetching, carrying, and killing.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
Ok, aside from predictions about sandbox games that will be great in the future (unmade), current sandbox games that are made are evidently not as popular as theme-park games.
OP hypothesis: "Everyone (ie majority of paying players) want to be a superhero, which is what you can do in a theme-park game, but not what you can (easily or as clearly) do in a sandbox game".
In a nut shell, one type of game is more accessible to the wants/satisfactions of most players than the others. This could be described as the difference between:
Casual vs Hardcore: See Gamasutra
The distinction is accessibility. A game that starts easy is accessible, even if it ends hard. But knowing this doesn't exactly give us any revolutionary insight. To truly understand casual, we must first dig deep into specifically what makes a game inaccessible -- what makes it hardcore.
Six things that make a game hardcore:
Difficult controls
Overwhelming options
Prerequisite knowledge
Abstract memorization
Unclear goals
Unclear solutions
Six things that do not make a game hardcore:
Challenge
Trial and Error
Strategy
Theme
Repetition
Depth / Graduated objectives
So do sandbox games fit the criteria?
5., 6. clearly: Lack of predefined goals/progression, learning how many things all work
2. Yes, lots of sub-menus and choice
3. Perhaps these games are designed to appeal to experienced mmo gamers is the assumption made by developers?
1., 4. I am not sure about, maybe some can discuss these?
Seems conclusive that sandbox MMO's are Hardcore eg EVE is the exemplar of this par extraordinaire. Eg a lot of great sandbox games start very hard, but if people make the effort then OUTPUT α INPUT and a very rewarding experience can be had.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Old Timer and Masses is a bit odd to mix into one post.
When Ultima Online and EverQuest launched what we considered "masses" would be considered a flop for opening box sales now.
EverQuest had a higher subscriber base than Ultima Online. Personally I preferred Ultima Online...
So of course many games followed EQ's approach to game design.
In the end you have two factors
1) The most common game design you see is the EQ type of design.
2) Many current designers also played the EQ style of game.
So trying to introduce a non standard game to the market you have to over come player perception. Tie that into product development costs and investors aren't willing to risk it.
*note* I call it the EQ style of game design because its simply easier and many people played or heard of EQ. Beyond MMO's it is the staple of cprg design classes and levels.
The reason sandbox mmo's don't appeal is one thing. A sandbox takes effort to play. People are lazy.
What is the most popular? A theme park where you are held by the hand and leveling is easy.
Look at any complaint thread with a sandbox.(or almost any mmo) Most say, "I don't know what to do." "Nothing is telling me where to go." "I can't figure this out."
And my favorite complaint, "This takes too much effort. Can't the devs make this easier?"
Any of this sound familiar?
No...Usually the complaint I hear is that it is boring....which I typically agree with. Most Sandboxes are about repetative action same as theme parks, but Theme parks just try to use story and different appearances for the grind.
What a foolish statement. It's actually quite the opposite.
In a non-sandbox game, the "hero" concept is merely illusory, you're just another faceless avatar identical to every other faceless avatar in the game with no true ability to impact the game on any tangible level at all. You're just on a rollercoaster ride.
Whereas in a sandbox game, you are free to affect the environment around you, be it through socio-political influence or other means. Take EVE Online for example, there are infamous players who are leaders of alliances or elaborate heist experts because they've earned their notoriety.
Yes. Thank you for explaining this.
I would have to say both are foolish statements. Theme parks give the illusion that you are the hero through a story like a single player RPG. Creating the epic feel by styling the story toward you. Sandboxes create the illusion that you are changing the game by your actions, but really the game does not change you just have the notion that you can.
How can you compair "Hero" with infamous players that are basically assholes to others? There is a hugh difference.
one thing I would add...if infamous player is what you are after then I would think that WoW's Leroy Jenkins is possibly the most famous player in the world and a "hero" by your standards.
No problem.
One of the reasons most people are generally adverse to sandbox MMOs is because they don't like being thrown into a vast open-ended world with no semblance of how to approach the game. Not to sound condescending, but most people just want to be told what to do and how to do it because it requires less evaluation, scheming and cognition, which could be cumbersome to someone who simply wants to relax and feel like they've accomplished something clearcut and displayed as an achievement in bold letters on the screen.
What I read here was:
"I've never played a sandbox MMO."
Yes, you can actually change the game for many different people in a sandbox. It's pretty much the definition of it. No, you're not changing game mechanics, that would be a retarded statement (unless you take Second Life or Blue Mars into consideration, then yes you can change the game mechanics). But, a sandbox is a game where tools are given to you to change things within the game. If you're good enough, your changes could effect hundreds, or thousands, or hundreds of thousands of players.
"Hero" is a relative term btw. What's a "Hero" to one person is the devil to someone else. In themepark game, the lines are clearly drawn between good and evil. In a Sandbox, the lines are created by the players themselves.
Col. Custer was an American Hero at the time, but to Native Americans he was the devil in the flesh.
Like Trading Card Games? Click Here.
Last I checked a true sandbox game like Wurm Online.. If I dig a hole in the ground, then that hole is there until someone comes along and takes the effort to fill it up.
If I take a month and design an amazing fort and provide new people a place to live then I am directly effecting the game and other players around me. If I clear cut a forest then thats one less forest in the game. If I dig a tunnel through a mountain and connect two cities togeather then thats something that is there in the game world forever for anyone to see an be inspired by it.
On the second Wurm Map (before the last server crash / reset) there was a group of people that created a massive road system connecting many popular places togeather and provided a fast means of travel and a safe transport route for goods between groups. They where renowned within the Wurm Community since it took them months to accoumplish something noone else had done.
So a true sandbox game can indeed empower its players and allow them to have a direct effect upon the game world. The problem is that true sandbox games are hard to find and even more few in numbers then games that attempt to be sandbox games.
Another way to look at it is that people want to show up and be entertained. The idea of collecting mats to sell and essentially spend innordinate amount of time forging "something" is not what they want to do.
It's like my friend who played SWG and told me he felt it was like a second job that he wasn't getting paid for.
In the end he was the wrong type of person for a sandbox game. He had limited time and wanted to have fun. Not spend time crafting or wandering around.
People keep forgetting (or are unwilling to admit it) that we are wired differently.
It has nothing to do with being told what to do. It has everything to do with a conscious choice of how one wants to spend their time.
People who are invested in forging a world are the prime audience for a sandbox. These are the people who are very much engaged in the social part of the game and the player interactions. People who want to do quests and engage in pre-made content are there for entertainment.
And they are both very differnet experiences.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
But that is just saying that the sandbox game those players played, were either poor design (repetitive) or more accurately reporting to be subjectively boring because there was unclear goals/satisfactions. Repetitive actions can be ad nausium especially in mmos but when you enjoy something eg juggling it can be amazing fun!! So it's not as clear cut as you indicate?
No, the OP makes a good statement, it's up to you to interprete it in an answerable form, however. Both categories of mmo are VIRTUAL where what you think or feel is simulated abstraction of reality. The difference is in how accessible the satisfactions are to the challenges between the 2 different game designs. Good game design or bad game design enhances or mitigates against this for the player. Seeing as sandbox games are less popular, why? I fully agree with your opinion, that the sense of personal achievement and satisfaction can/should be much higher in sandbox games, but then why are they not as popular?
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
That would be a celebrity, not a hero. He's famous for a video, not something where he took down a big bad group of people with a single blow, he didn't run a large alliance and make safe haven for his people with high efficiency, he didn't do anything but make a scripted video like any other actor, Machinima or not. The game, in this case, is irrelevant. Many of those who made the video famous, had no idea what game it was and probably didn't even know what a MMORPG was.
Like Trading Card Games? Click Here.
Ridiculous. I played a sandbox MMO titled Face Of Mankind awhile back, not sure if you've heard of it or not, but it was the textbook version of sandbox. Unlike WoW and it's ilk, it had no grinding, no leveling, the only difference between you and the other player was individual skill level (at all aspects of combat) and gear. Combat was based purely off skill, and nothing else, which is the only type of game I want to play, but moving on...
In Face of Mankind the government was run by the players, it was all politics. Anybody could work their way up the ranks by simply contributing to one's faction, fighting in the wars, manufacturing items and gear, as well as acting courteous to everyone you encounter. The group of high ranks made up the government of the faction, which decided on manufacturing policies on each colony, war stance, allies and enemies, war strategy, troop placement. This would alter the course of any war, which in turn, makes the players running the faction very important and powerful, they were the proverbial "hero's" we've been speaking of. However, government was not the only way to become the "hero" and change the game. I was highly skilled in combat due to my 5+ years of playing this game, as your skill becomes more noticeable and you kill popularly skilled players your reputation increases and people recognize who you are and sometimes even tend to avoid you. Now if a player such as myself were to leave my faction and join an enemy faction, the war might shift signifigantly and the new faction I've joined might end up winning due to my contribution of skill, this also made me the "hero" and made me alter the course of the game.
Not to mention, there were many clans or "groups" that joined certain factions that altered the course of a war or battle.
So as you can see, it is no illusion, I've seen for myself and expierenced it over the course of many years, sandbox games allow you to alter the course of a game and become respected, a rewarding expierence unlike the endless leveling and gear gathering games that provide mundane and repetative gameplay, WoW is so huge and based off level and gear it is near impossible to gain political (not that the game has politics) or reputational status.
Our explanations are similar in nature - mine just had a bitter tone; probably because I've been irked by the fact that adequately funded MMOs tend to cater more towards the aformentioned demographic.