Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Explanation of why I enjoy sandbox compared to Themepark.

2»

Comments

  • MetsisMetsis Member Posts: 66

    I don't really get this whole separation of the two... Wouldn't sandbox elements be a good end game for a themepark game? Why not try a little double dipping. We have games coming that have big "story elements" in them that have voice overs etc. SWTOR, GW2 and there were some others.

    The end game in Themepark style game is just plain awful and repetative... You grind the same instances, battlegrounds for some loot to drop, wouldn't this be a good time to make your "mark on the world" as you do in a Sandbox game...

    The themepark would act as your "introduction" to the game... With a drop into the sandbox at the end of the ride. That would be a very nice end game instead of just camping in Orgrimmar and waiting for the instance to pop or the battleground to start... You could actually do something to make your mark. I know Themepark games are known to be "static", but it could easily have zones that are not "static". For example in SWTOR you could have entire planets as sandboxes for the end game to take place in. It would leave the "newbie" areas free of idiot gankers since they would have something worth while to do by protecting their investments and cities and going on the offensive to take down the other faction...

    I know it is a big hassle to do and to get even some resemblance of balance into it, but a roller coaster ride into a sandbox would most likely be something that would attract people to it. You get to know and learn your character role and abilities during the themepark ride and would be already somewhat invested in the character you have. The story based stuff would certainly help you set your "character" in the sandbox as well... And as you are familiar with the game concepts and abilities and gameplay when you end up in that sandbox, you would probably already have an idea of what you could do when you get to the box. And probably there would be something you'd LIKE to do by then.

    Why can't we have both??? Rollercoaster ride into the sandbox??? What do you think? Wouldn't this be a nice fantasy to play around with? I would certainly play that game...

    And I'm not talking about full loot free for all PVP combat as the sandbox, but rather something with focus on powerful world PVE opponents that require groups to deal with and places you could setup your cities for your guild or your faction. Some sort of gathering and crafting systems etc.

    Anyhow, I'm feeling a bit tired, just been thinking about this sort of a game for a while and merging the good partsof the themepark and sandbox into one and seeing if it would work. I'm saying it would!

  • QuirhidQuirhid Member UncommonPosts: 6,230

    Originally posted by Enerzeal

    Originally posted by Quirhid

    There is no sandbox with good quality or production values. That is the main reason why people don't like them.

    That is a reason to not like the games that are made following a sandbox theme, not the idea of the sandbox its self.

    True, but since sandbox has been near synonymous to bad quality so far, it hardly matters.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • drake_hounddrake_hound Member Posts: 773

    Originally posted by Metsis

    I don't really get this whole separation of the two... Wouldn't sandbox elements be a good end game for a themepark game? Why not try a little double dipping. We have games coming that have big "story elements" in them that have voice overs etc. SWTOR, GW2 and there were some others.

    The end game in Themepark style game is just plain awful and repetative... You grind the same instances, battlegrounds for some loot to drop, wouldn't this be a good time to make your "mark on the world" as you do in a Sandbox game...

    The themepark would act as your "introduction" to the game... With a drop into the sandbox at the end of the ride. That would be a very nice end game instead of just camping in Orgrimmar and waiting for the instance to pop or the battleground to start... You could actually do something to make your mark. I know Themepark games are known to be "static", but it could easily have zones that are not "static". For example in SWTOR you could have entire planets as sandboxes for the end game to take place in. It would leave the "newbie" areas free of idiot gankers since they would have something worth while to do by protecting their investments and cities and going on the offensive to take down the other faction...

    I know it is a big hassle to do and to get even some resemblance of balance into it, but a roller coaster ride into a sandbox would most likely be something that would attract people to it. You get to know and learn your character role and abilities during the themepark ride and would be already somewhat invested in the character you have. The story based stuff would certainly help you set your "character" in the sandbox as well... And as you are familiar with the game concepts and abilities and gameplay when you end up in that sandbox, you would probably already have an idea of what you could do when you get to the box. And probably there would be something you'd LIKE to do by then.

    Why can't we have both??? Rollercoaster ride into the sandbox??? What do you think? Wouldn't this be a nice fantasy to play around with? I would certainly play that game...

    And I'm not talking about full loot free for all PVP combat as the sandbox, but rather something with focus on powerful world PVE opponents that require groups to deal with and places you could setup your cities for your guild or your faction. Some sort of gathering and crafting systems etc.

    Anyhow, I'm feeling a bit tired, just been thinking about this sort of a game for a while and merging the good partsof the themepark and sandbox into one and seeing if it would work. I'm saying it would!

    That is what WoW did and gotten such huge success , just they have been moving away from complex talent tree .

    and other feature like guildhall , more diversity into streamlining everything into a total grind .

    That it became unbearable , You asking for a WoW 2 but instead of catering to dummies and money .

    Cater to the smart people , yes we all have been asking that , but they rather have dummies and trolls .

    Instead of veteran gamers , see there solution to tank and healer shortage .

    Throw around some pets >.< you will get greedy rubbishe dps that suddenly tank .

    And make life more miserable for pugs ..

    Congrats on trusting your community to ruin the game more .

  • reggi-shcreggi-shc Member Posts: 11

    Originally posted by drake_hound

    1 is already the reason why sandbox FAILS

    nobody want to play the victim , if sandbox has a beter community of carebears it last longer.

    Sorry put a bunch of leet and elitist and griefers into the same zone .

    And in the end only the leet left the rest quit .

    Cause they were the victim of superior skills .

    Sorry you explanation of why sandbox is failing is so obvious ... it pains me .

    Star Wars Galaxies pre-NGE solved this by have neutral faction & covert / overt status as well as TEF. 

    **DISCLAIMER**

    If you have read any of my post responses you know that I am totaly biased for pre-NGE SWG.

  • EnerzealEnerzeal Member Posts: 326

    To be completely honest I would play a pve sandbox right now, I am that in need of one. Why is it so difficult for developers to see the massive hole thats sitting in the genre..

    Even those raised on themeparks are slowly coming to the conclusion that something is missing in their games now, they don't all know what that something is, but alot are coming round to the sandbox.

  • drake_hounddrake_hound Member Posts: 773

    Originally posted by reggi-shc

    Originally posted by drake_hound

    1 is already the reason why sandbox FAILS

    nobody want to play the victim , if sandbox has a beter community of carebears it last longer.

    Sorry put a bunch of leet and elitist and griefers into the same zone .

    And in the end only the leet left the rest quit .

    Cause they were the victim of superior skills .

    Sorry you explanation of why sandbox is failing is so obvious ... it pains me .

    Star Wars Galaxies pre-NGE solved this by have neutral faction & covert / overt status as well as TEF. 

    **DISCLAIMER**

    If you have read any of my post responses you know that I am totaly biased for pre-NGE SWG.

    Listen I know you hold onto your dreams of SWG with 100 million people community .

    But it isn´t going to happen , why SWG was flawed to the bone , it was the community that held SWG together .

    SOE dumped on the community , instead of trying to communicate with the community .

    Failure to convince community in meaningfull , explainable ways , always lead to lash back .

    Nowadays the best example you can give what went wrong with NGE , is this , community manage tries to explain vision of SOE ,fails , cause a bunch of trolls keep on bashing DON´T WANT THAT .

    Cause Cause Cause , what community manage should have done , sorry people the change is going trough .

    What would we do to make it bearable , what can we do to make you understand it is for the future of this game !

    See a totally different explanation . this is why backbone is so important in MMO .

    And so many companies are failing at the backbone , cause of communication .

  • drake_hounddrake_hound Member Posts: 773

    Originally posted by Enerzeal

    To be completely honest I would play a pve sandbox right now, I am that in need of one. Why is it so difficult for developers to see the massive hole thats sitting in the genre..

    Even those raised on themeparks are slowly coming to the conclusion that something is missing in their games now, they don't all know what that something is, but alot are coming round to the sandbox.

    This is what EVE and other sandbox are working on slowly in secret , but it takes time a lot of time.

    Problem is that in the end people cannot wait , and engine or graphics get outdated .

    Look for PVP to work you need people , a bucket load of people , that is the only problem PvP fullloot has .

    The system is not flawed but you need new  victims every once in a while , you need victims to have cooldown period.

    Where they suddenly realise , that it is not fun !!! .

    Before they try again , and have fun .

    PVE don´t care about what happens they create there drama different means , but keep paying .

    While PvPer quit when there fun isn´t there .

     

    In the end we all seek a THEMEBOX (cause sandpark sound stupid) , but a company still has to release that .

  • ZoulzZoulz Member Posts: 477

    Sandbox MMORPGs will never be anything more than a niche market imo. Gamers in general just want to havie fun as soon as they login. They want to choose their fun, not be forced to anything. Wandering around looking for fun or creating your own fun just won't cut it. Getting ganked while your trying to do something is frustrating. But there is of course a niche for it within the MMORPG sphere, as is evident by the fact that so many on this forum yearn for a good sandbox MMORPG. Maybe a themepark/sandbox hybrid would have better luck than pure sandbox game, but I doubt it. I think your best bet if you want a truly immersive experience is a single-player RPG like dragon age or neverwinter nights.

    The era of the hardcore gamer is coming to a close. Soon the largest game developers will focus even more on the casual market. The industry has grown up and is becoming mainstream. Maybe the indie scene is a good place to hope for a sandbox MMORPG. Although indie developers probably have to few resources in general to make a proper MMORPG.

  • SinellaSinella Member UncommonPosts: 343

    Seems a lot of players think that sandbox=FFA PvP. Sandbox definition has nothing to do with PvP....Atitd is a sandbox and it has no combat at all.

    A pure PvE sandbox or a sandbox with separeted PvP zone would be a big success imo. Well a good sandbox of course, with a lot of tools and sand in it.

  • RollerratRollerrat Member UncommonPosts: 200

    Originally posted by Enerzeal

    To be completely honest I would play a pve sandbox right now, I am that in need of one. Why is it so difficult for developers to see the massive hole thats sitting in the genre..

    Even those raised on themeparks are slowly coming to the conclusion that something is missing in their games now, they don't all know what that something is, but alot are coming round to the sandbox.

     

    Last time I checked Ryzom was still mainly a PvE sandbox. There are some areas where you are flagged for PvP but it still is mostly a PvE game IMO. Population is scarce though.

  • EnerzealEnerzeal Member Posts: 326

    Originally posted by drake_hound

    Originally posted by Enerzeal

    To be completely honest I would play a pve sandbox right now, I am that in need of one. Why is it so difficult for developers to see the massive hole thats sitting in the genre..

    Even those raised on themeparks are slowly coming to the conclusion that something is missing in their games now, they don't all know what that something is, but alot are coming round to the sandbox.

    This is what EVE and other sandbox are working on slowly in secret , but it takes time a lot of time.

    Problem is that in the end people cannot wait , and engine or graphics get outdated .

    Look for PVP to work you need people , a bucket load of people , that is the only problem PvP fullloot has .

    The system is not flawed but you need new  victims every once in a while , you need victims to have cooldown period.

    Where they suddenly realise , that it is not fun !!! .

    Before they try again , and have fun .

    PVE don´t care about what happens they create there drama different means , but keep paying .

    While PvPer quit when there fun isn´t there .

     

    In the end we all seek a THEMEBOX (cause sandpark sound stupid) , but a company still has to release that .

    Eve isn't sercretly trying to make their game pve, that just foolishness, Dust 514 is adding MORE pvp to the game.

  • goblagobla Member UncommonPosts: 1,412

    Originally posted by adeptuz

    Last time I checked Ryzom was still mainly a PvE sandbox. There are some areas where you are flagged for PvP but it still is mostly a PvE game IMO. Population is scarce though.

    A PvE sandbox would need more agressive NPCs.

    Like how in most zombie games shooting loud weapons attracts only more zombies.

    In a sandbox you need conflict. A reason why you're making and building all the stuff you are. In PvP sandboxes there are other players whom will automatically seek conflict. In a PvE sandbox you need NPCs who seek you out to kill you and destroy what you're making. If the NPCs just stand there waiting for you like in your standard MMO then there's no conflict. And after the initial interest in building things the game will die as there's no reason to keep on building them.

    Be it a zombie apocalypse, demon invasion or the awakening of some draconic race you need some event of an apocalyptic scale against which the players are fighting. A reason why the players would want to build stuff in the world ( so the zombies won't eat me there. ) and why they'll maintain it ( so the zombies won't ever start eating me there. )

    The PvE would need to ebb and flow. Periods that are more dangerous in which player-build stuff is suddenly destroyed under a tidal wave of rotten zombie flesh, demonic minions or dragon fire. And periods that are more peacefull so players can suddenly build a lot more and access rarer materials and areas, only to find it all destroyed in the next flood of zombies, demons or dragons.

    This would create a common objective of survival for all players and I think it will bring out the best that a sandbox has to offer.

    We are the bunny.
    Resistance is futile.
    ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
    ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
    (")("),,(")("),(")(")

  • JB47394JB47394 Member Posts: 409

    Originally posted by gobla

    The PvE would need to ebb and flow. Periods that are more dangerous in which player-build stuff is suddenly destroyed under a tidal wave of rotten zombie flesh, demonic minions or dragon fire. And periods that are more peacefull so players can suddenly build a lot more and access rarer materials and areas, only to find it all destroyed in the next flood of zombies, demons or dragons.

    Agreed.  This is straight out of traditional PnP gaming where the players play against the gamemaster.  Depending on how nasty the gamemaster is, the players could have some serious setbacks.  I don't know about wanton and wholesale destruction, but certainly making the world fluid is important.  And if the game is going to have an economy, it needs to consume manufactured goods.

    If anyone wants to see what happens when there is no ebb and flow in a PvE sandbox, look at A Tale in the Desert.

  • TruthXHurtsTruthXHurts Member UncommonPosts: 1,555

    I think I'm just going to have to go back to PnP.

    "I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"

  • MeowheadMeowhead Member UncommonPosts: 3,716

    Once I mentioned how Rifts in reverse could make an interesting sandbox game.

    Where there are basically small staging areas, cities you start off in, and you go through rifts to try and invade and take over a massive NPC continent.  If you take over enemy towns, you could rebuild them how you wish, then try to hold them against the increasingly powerful reprisals. :D

    ... so rather than having very aggressive NPCs, you could just have very uh... defensive NPCs?

    It's not being aggressive if you're trying to kick invaders out of your land, right?

  • elockeelocke Member UncommonPosts: 4,335

    One game to rule them all--not LOTRO lol, but

    ARCHEAGE

    Even if it doesn't succeed or do what we want, for now it represents what we want as gamers.  A pure sandbox/themepark hybrid. 

  • onehunerdperonehunerdper Member Posts: 837

    Originally posted by Meowhead

    Once I mentioned how Rifts in reverse could make an interesting sandbox game.

    Where there are basically small staging areas, cities you start off in, and you go through rifts to try and invade and take over a massive NPC continent.  If you take over enemy towns, you could rebuild them how you wish, then try to hold them against the increasingly powerful reprisals. :D

    ... so rather than having very aggressive NPCs, you could just have very uh... defensive NPCs?

    It's not being aggressive if you're trying to kick invaders out of your land, right?

     

    That's kinda what EVE did a few years back with there portals, or whatever they called them, isn't it?

     

    I was talking to my brother before Rift even released and said how cool it would be to either be able to invade another server randomly or something, or be able to open a rift into other servers in order to allow other server allies to jump in and help you on your server.  I think that would be interesting for a while, extended if you come up with clever ways of doing it. 

    image
    image

  • TorikTorik Member UncommonPosts: 2,342

    Originally posted by Enerzeal

    Thanks for the mostly constructive replies folks, will try and answer some of the statements raised.

    The best sandbox at the moment is Eve Online, it simply has a very unique method for advancing and a spreadsheet approach to.. well everything. It does however support the BEST online community out there. You ask a question in help or in rookie help, and about 5 people clamor to answer it for you, ive seen people group up with strangers to help them through some missions 30 jumps away. I have also seen scammers and pks, can flippers and complete bastards, but only if you choose that side of the game.

    Eve Online also answers the desire for pvers to enjoy their world aswell.

    1.0 -0.5 is safe space, if someone attacks you they are reduced to a pile of mush in moments. I spent months and months in that game sitting in highsec trading, manufacturing and mining. Safe as can be, yes someone in a battleship could of warped in and attempt to gank me but its a complete waste of a ship and no one does it really.

     

    The simple way to marry together pve and pvp in a sandbox is to have the rarest stuff and the building land in pvp areas, and have the limited building land and lesser resources in the safe zones.

     

    It is a shame though that pvpers and pvers can't co-exist anymore. PvErs make a pvp game, they are the life blood.

    Actually the best sandbox game out right now is A Tale in the Desert.  However, not many people can handle a non-combat, cooperative MMORPG (ie a pure sandbox).

  • onehunerdperonehunerdper Member Posts: 837

    Originally posted by Torik

    Originally posted by Enerzeal

    Thanks for the mostly constructive replies folks, will try and answer some of the statements raised.

    The best sandbox at the moment is Eve Online, it simply has a very unique method for advancing and a spreadsheet approach to.. well everything. It does however support the BEST online community out there. You ask a question in help or in rookie help, and about 5 people clamor to answer it for you, ive seen people group up with strangers to help them through some missions 30 jumps away. I have also seen scammers and pks, can flippers and complete bastards, but only if you choose that side of the game.

    Eve Online also answers the desire for pvers to enjoy their world aswell.

    1.0 -0.5 is safe space, if someone attacks you they are reduced to a pile of mush in moments. I spent months and months in that game sitting in highsec trading, manufacturing and mining. Safe as can be, yes someone in a battleship could of warped in and attempt to gank me but its a complete waste of a ship and no one does it really.

     

    The simple way to marry together pve and pvp in a sandbox is to have the rarest stuff and the building land in pvp areas, and have the limited building land and lesser resources in the safe zones.

     

    It is a shame though that pvpers and pvers can't co-exist anymore. PvErs make a pvp game, they are the life blood.

    Actually the best sandbox game out right now is A Tale in the Desert.  However, not many people can handle a non-combat, cooperative MMORPG (ie a pure sandbox).

     

    I think that's subjective, IMO a good majority of people want combat in a game, but to each his own.

    edit: *Yawn* wow that made me tired just reading about ATitD.  Calling it a pure sandbox game is a little...eh, I mean you can do a lot, but honestly ancient egypt was probably a slightly dangerous place. I'm sure some people like no combat, but if you're going to claim sandbox, you should be able to choose PVP as well IMO.

    image
    image

  • goblagobla Member UncommonPosts: 1,412

    Originally posted by JB47394

    Agreed.  This is straight out of traditional PnP gaming where the players play against the gamemaster.  Depending on how nasty the gamemaster is, the players could have some serious setbacks.  I don't know about wanton and wholesale destruction, but certainly making the world fluid is important.  And if the game is going to have an economy, it needs to consume manufactured goods.

    If anyone wants to see what happens when there is no ebb and flow in a PvE sandbox, look at A Tale in the Desert.

    It doesn't have to be total destruction but say the world is ebbing and a player builds a far-out outpost with a small group. The next flood would mean that outpost got destroyed totally.

    But if a large guild build a large city that had lots of visitors daily then such a flood would only mean some damage to the buildings and possibly some of the outlying walls/defensive structures destroyed.

    Such ebbs and floods shouldn't even be in the entire game-world but zone-specific. One zone could be under heavy attack while another could be having an easier day. If there's something worth defending in the trouble zone then players would do so. If not then it would burn. There would be cases when only a single zone is under heavy attack and would be easily defended. There'd also be cases when multiple zones would be under attack and some zones would have to be sacrificed to ensure major construction in other zones remained safe.

    All of this constantly managed by a single halfway decent AI that would serve as overlord for hordes of mindless creatures: Select a random number of hours H and a random severity S then for the next H hours the world would be under an attack with severity S. Then select a random number of minutes M, a random zone Z and an attacking strength A ( where A < S. ) For the next M minutes zone Z would be under attack with severity A. Now decrease S by A. If S isn't 0 yet then select another zone like this. After M minutes expire A would be added to S again and zone Z would no longer be under attack. Now a new zone would be randomly determined and attacked again. After H hours all attacks would cease and the AI would reset, starting a new attack on the world.

    If a zone isn't under attack then there remain some creatures there however. No zone is ever truly safe. But the amount of creatures there wouldn't be enough to overcome standard defensive structures made by the players. So player constructions would be safe ( provided they built some defense ).

    Creatures would be simple homing beacons. If there's anything in their direct vicinity then they attack that. If there's not then they start wandering towards player constructions and large gatherings of players.

    We are the bunny.
    Resistance is futile.
    ''/\/\'''''/\/\''''''/\/\
    ( o.o) ( o.o) ( o.o)
    (")("),,(")("),(")(")

  • ThorqemadaThorqemada Member UncommonPosts: 1,282

    A Tale in the Desert is like a game becoming business tycoon in ancient egypt.
    They sell it as whole game but to me it is only one of the many aspects a mmorpg should cover.
    Fighting is absolutley a neccessarity, how will you overcome dangerous adventures without fighting?
    Maybe with seduction but then you have a porn game - which maybe could be very interesting too ;)

    "Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"

    MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
    Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM

  • onehunerdperonehunerdper Member Posts: 837

    Originally posted by elocke

    One game to rule them all--not LOTRO lol, but

    ARCHEAGE

    Even if it doesn't succeed or do what we want, for now it represents what we want as gamers.  A pure sandbox/themepark hybrid. 

     

    LOL, I went to their site to check it out, looked interesting.  Then I saw "Korean" and my interest flat lined completely...

    image
    image

  • EnerzealEnerzeal Member Posts: 326

    Originally posted by onehunerdper

    Originally posted by elocke

    One game to rule them all--not LOTRO lol, but

    ARCHEAGE

    Even if it doesn't succeed or do what we want, for now it represents what we want as gamers.  A pure sandbox/themepark hybrid. 

     

    LOL, I went to their site to check it out, looked interesting.  Then I saw "Korean" and my interest flat lined completely...

    I asume you declined to investigate further based upon the normal korean grinder games out there. Unfortunately its what its come down to, the market is happier to release the same garbage rehash of yesteryears MMOs forcing us wanting something unique to head where we normally wouldn't dare go.

    I have to atleast try Archeage regardless of its Korean roots, even if it does throw on an F2P tag I will STILL try it, as I am jonsing for a quality sandbox.

  • Cik_AsalinCik_Asalin Member Posts: 3,033

    Originally posted by Enerzeal

    2.) Content is created by the player.

    Decent read.  @ #2, true, and through the features provided to players to push content that is community engaging. 

     

    This is a good read on the matter, that I think you'd appreciate.  http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4489/the_icelandic_model_of_mmo_.php?page=1

  • onehunerdperonehunerdper Member Posts: 837

    Originally posted by Enerzeal

    Originally posted by onehunerdper


    Originally posted by elocke

    One game to rule them all--not LOTRO lol, but

    ARCHEAGE

    Even if it doesn't succeed or do what we want, for now it represents what we want as gamers.  A pure sandbox/themepark hybrid. 

     

    LOL, I went to their site to check it out, looked interesting.  Then I saw "Korean" and my interest flat lined completely...

    I asume you declined to investigate further based upon the normal korean grinder games out there. Unfortunately its what its come down to, the market is happier to release the same garbage rehash of yesteryears MMOs forcing us wanting something unique to head where we normally wouldn't dare go.

    I have to atleast try Archeage regardless of its Korean roots, even if it does throw on an F2P tag I will STILL try it, as I am jonsing for a quality sandbox.

     

    Me and my Bro played RF Online for a good while, at level 47 or something it just became unbearable LOL.  We switched to a private server with 100x the XP and it still takes months to go up a level, it's nuts. 

    I wouldn't say I wouldn't play this game.  I played AION and it had a strong Korean feel to it.  The game looks pretty good, and amazingly customizable, but I'll probably wait for it to release and see reviews or try the beta before I would buy it

    image
    image

Sign In or Register to comment.