All I'm saying is having played every major MMO since UO I haven't seen anyone succeed by releasing MMOs that are sandboxes because to date they have been themeparks with no quests and some elaborate write up about social this and that which ammounts to nothing more than PvP without rules. For me, sandbox means lazy incomplete design mechanics.
I'd love to be wrong, but I've asked this from time to time and no one can list an MMO worth playing that is a sandbox. EVE is good for what it is, but its really really boring to me.
One thing that annoys me about sandbox games in the land of the themepark is they all tend to be PVP these days. You do not need to be pvp to be a sandbox.
Asheron's call is still the most likely franchise to revive the sandbox.
For this to happen turbine needs one more outside hit -- so their resources are even more stretched and they find they have no need AT ALL for the AC franchise.
In essence for this to happen it needs to be SOLD.
-----------------
Actually I have a good subtitle for a sandbox game:
Built by Explorers for Explorers.....
----------------
The explorer archetype of player has been ill served ever since the themepark ascended. About the only things that count these days are the explorer/achiever collections in EQ2 and Rift. That is one of the best things of rift -- searching out the most extreme out-of-the-way places to find a shiny.
----------------
At any rate for a good sandbox you first need an absolutely HUGE world. We havent seen any in themeparkland for a reason -- themeparks need every area crammed with content. In a sandbox world content is hidden in many areas but the vast amount of space is space.
Design the ecology from the bottom up -- so it works. The whole "every monster is a huge predator" doesnt work in a huge living world.
--------------
Actually AC had a lot of things that recent games havent. It had SEASONS... Each month something happened...
A sandbox game is NOT a themepark game with no content or progression. It's an entirely different beast. Player-driven content versus developer-coded content. What you want or desire to do versus what the game allows you to do.
How is that different than say WoW with no quests? Or can you list at least one character based MMO that has enjoyed some success with this model?
I like how you intentionally excluded EVE, as if it cannot be used to show the success of player-driven content because it's based in space.
Star Wars Galaxies is probably the most successful game that fits your criteria, but you're right in saying that there are none approaching the success of WoW. Simply put, there hasn't been a sandbox MMO with good production quality that would let us judge what the limits of success may be. There have been a solid handful of sandbox MMOs that have achieved commercial success, but not many. The typical sandbox MMO these days looks like Earthrise or Xsyon, with sub-par graphics and sound, server instability, and bugs galore. It's hard to extrapolate from the failure of our typical sandbox game what market success COULD look like.
A game like World of Warcraft spread through word of mouth, a huge advertising budget, and let's face it- more polish in beta and release than we had ever seen in an MMO before. Drawing comparisons between WoW, Rift, LotRO and games like Darkfall, Earthrise, and Wurm Online is impossible. If we were to compare games of similar quality, let's put SWG up against Matrix Online, Tabula Rasa, or Auto Assault.
All I'm saying is having played every major MMO since UO I haven't seen anyone succeed by releasing MMOs that are sandboxes because to date they have been themeparks with no quests and some elaborate write up about social this and that which ammounts to nothing more than PvP without rules.
Ultima Online, EVE Online, ATITD, Wurm Online and several others offer tools for changing and building within the game world. Those tools are the sandbox content, the absense of quests does not make something a sandbox, the presence of tools does. I'd say even Puzzle Pirates offers significant enough sandbox content to qualify as a sandbox game that has succeeded. Just because you may find them boring or not filling some population criteria or other odd conditional, it does not make them any less successful as sandbox MMOs.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I like how you intentionally excluded EVE, as if it cannot be used to show the success of player-driven content because it's based in space.
EVE is special and yes successful but its boring as hell for me. As an old school sim player I am excited about Black Prophecy and Jumpgate. Comes down to what you like to RP. If I RP a military role, it isn't as a miner
Comments
All I'm saying is having played every major MMO since UO I haven't seen anyone succeed by releasing MMOs that are sandboxes because to date they have been themeparks with no quests and some elaborate write up about social this and that which ammounts to nothing more than PvP without rules. For me, sandbox means lazy incomplete design mechanics.
I'd love to be wrong, but I've asked this from time to time and no one can list an MMO worth playing that is a sandbox. EVE is good for what it is, but its really really boring to me.
One thing that annoys me about sandbox games in the land of the themepark is they all tend to be PVP these days. You do not need to be pvp to be a sandbox.
Asheron's call is still the most likely franchise to revive the sandbox.
For this to happen turbine needs one more outside hit -- so their resources are even more stretched and they find they have no need AT ALL for the AC franchise.
In essence for this to happen it needs to be SOLD.
-----------------
Actually I have a good subtitle for a sandbox game:
Built by Explorers for Explorers.....
----------------
The explorer archetype of player has been ill served ever since the themepark ascended. About the only things that count these days are the explorer/achiever collections in EQ2 and Rift. That is one of the best things of rift -- searching out the most extreme out-of-the-way places to find a shiny.
----------------
At any rate for a good sandbox you first need an absolutely HUGE world. We havent seen any in themeparkland for a reason -- themeparks need every area crammed with content. In a sandbox world content is hidden in many areas but the vast amount of space is space.
Design the ecology from the bottom up -- so it works. The whole "every monster is a huge predator" doesnt work in a huge living world.
--------------
Actually AC had a lot of things that recent games havent. It had SEASONS... Each month something happened...
A sandbox has seasons. A themepark has events.
I like how you intentionally excluded EVE, as if it cannot be used to show the success of player-driven content because it's based in space.
Star Wars Galaxies is probably the most successful game that fits your criteria, but you're right in saying that there are none approaching the success of WoW. Simply put, there hasn't been a sandbox MMO with good production quality that would let us judge what the limits of success may be. There have been a solid handful of sandbox MMOs that have achieved commercial success, but not many. The typical sandbox MMO these days looks like Earthrise or Xsyon, with sub-par graphics and sound, server instability, and bugs galore. It's hard to extrapolate from the failure of our typical sandbox game what market success COULD look like.
A game like World of Warcraft spread through word of mouth, a huge advertising budget, and let's face it- more polish in beta and release than we had ever seen in an MMO before. Drawing comparisons between WoW, Rift, LotRO and games like Darkfall, Earthrise, and Wurm Online is impossible. If we were to compare games of similar quality, let's put SWG up against Matrix Online, Tabula Rasa, or Auto Assault.
If you were me, you'd be arrogant too.
Ultima Online, EVE Online, ATITD, Wurm Online and several others offer tools for changing and building within the game world. Those tools are the sandbox content, the absense of quests does not make something a sandbox, the presence of tools does. I'd say even Puzzle Pirates offers significant enough sandbox content to qualify as a sandbox game that has succeeded. Just because you may find them boring or not filling some population criteria or other odd conditional, it does not make them any less successful as sandbox MMOs.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
UO had me by the balls for a long long time. Sucks that UO:Origins and UO2 got canned =(
EVE is special and yes successful but its boring as hell for me. As an old school sim player I am excited about Black Prophecy and Jumpgate. Comes down to what you like to RP. If I RP a military role, it isn't as a miner