a theme park RPG you go from zone to zone on a levelling ride doing quests and eventually after doing all the rides you reach end game in which they add in gear grind time sinks via raids which have time locks on the raid dungeons .
in sandbox you are free to do whatever you want , build / craft / fight monsters / explore .. they give you the world , the tools and off you go .
So why is it that some games that have:
Housing system
Crafting classes
Gathering classes
Multiple PvE options
Multiple PvP options
Large Scenic world
...are still labeled as theme park?
Because if you take out any single or all of those systems listed and you can still solo level your way to end game with little or no impact in game play it isn't a sandbox.
Sandbox games are about each system being so important to each other that if any single one of them is missing the game collapses.
Take housing out of Lotro and the core game remains the same.
Take crafting out of Wow and the core game remains the same.
Take instanced pvp out of nearly any mmo and the core game remains the same.
Take out the entire known world in Wow and many end game players wouldn't even notice it gone and can still queue up for every dungeon and pvp instance.
A themepark is a collection of systems that have very little to do with each other and the player using them has little impact on the global game. A Sandbox is about each player controlled system being entirely dependent upon each other.
Wait, why is a sandbox so desperately dependent on each pillar existing?
That seems to be a critically unstable platform for any game. One subpar element and the mmorpg fails.
A themeparks die if developers don't provide a stream of developer made content to keep their players around. It is a constant race to keep the players interested and subpar or late content patches could kill the game at any time.
Sandbox developers only have to ensure their systems work in a sandbox game and only attract enough players interested in keeping the game alive.
Which game sounds more fragile? Which game has more problems than the other? Which game attracts the same type of player? Why even bring up which is superior? They are different. They both exist for a reason: to attract different audiences.
a theme park RPG you go from zone to zone on a levelling ride doing quests and eventually after doing all the rides you reach end game in which they add in gear grind time sinks via raids which have time locks on the raid dungeons .
in sandbox you are free to do whatever you want , build / craft / fight monsters / explore .. they give you the world , the tools and off you go .
So why is it that some games that have:
Housing system
Crafting classes
Gathering classes
Multiple PvE options
Multiple PvP options
Large Scenic world
...are still labeled as theme park?
Because if you take out any single or all of those systems listed and you can still solo level your way to end game with little or no impact in game play it isn't a sandbox.
Sandbox games are about each system being so important to each other that if any single one of them is missing the game collapses.
Take housing out of Lotro and the core game remains the same.
Take crafting out of Wow and the core game remains the same.
Take instanced pvp out of nearly any mmo and the core game remains the same.
Take out the entire known world in Wow and many end game players wouldn't even notice it gone and can still queue up for every dungeon and pvp instance.
A themepark is a collection of systems that have very little to do with each other and the player using them has little impact on the global game. A Sandbox is about each player controlled system being entirely dependent upon each other.
Wait, why is a sandbox so desperately dependent on each pillar existing?
That seems to be a critically unstable platform for any game. One subpar element and the mmorpg fails.
A themeparks die if developers don't provide a stream of developer made content to keep their players around. It is a constant race to keep the players interested and subpar or late content patches could kill the game at any time.
Sandbox developers only have to ensure their systems work in a sandbox game and only attract enough players interested in keeping the game alive.
Which game sounds more fragile? Which game has more problems than the other? Which game attracts the same type of player? Why even bring up which is superior? They are different. They both exist for a reason: to attract different audiences.
I could use the same argument in F2P versus P2P, ironically.
I'm not even suggesting themepark or sandbox is better, merely that pidgeonholing a game as one in order to defame it seems silly, as many very successful MMORPGs use a hybrid of both systems.
a theme park RPG you go from zone to zone on a levelling ride doing quests and eventually after doing all the rides you reach end game in which they add in gear grind time sinks via raids which have time locks on the raid dungeons .
in sandbox you are free to do whatever you want , build / craft / fight monsters / explore .. they give you the world , the tools and off you go .
So why is it that some games that have:
Housing system
Crafting classes
Gathering classes
Multiple PvE options
Multiple PvP options
Large Scenic world
...are still labeled as theme park?
are you truly free to do whatever you want in those games ? For example NeverWinter is classic example of theme park because as you level from 1 to 60 you go to various areas and go on the rides ( quest area & dungeons ) then move onto the next ride ( quest area & dungeons )
For me a sandbox game is a game that lets you discover the games content at your own pace.
examples: EQ1, SWG, Vanguard, Final fantasy 11, EVE to name a few.
A theme park game tells you exactly where to go and how to go through their content.
examples: SWTOR, WOW, Neverwinter, STO, Tera, GW2 and so on.
Games that might be sandbox games but they are not out are : Archage, Repopulation, Earthrise
You can go to any of these games web sits to get a better idea of how they play. Looking and playing these games are the best way to figure out if you like one game style over another.
I personally like sandbox games. The biggest reason is that they don't hold your hand. I am tired of all these mmos holding my hand now a days.
a theme park RPG you go from zone to zone on a levelling ride doing quests and eventually after doing all the rides you reach end game in which they add in gear grind time sinks via raids which have time locks on the raid dungeons .
in sandbox you are free to do whatever you want , build / craft / fight monsters / explore .. they give you the world , the tools and off you go .
So why is it that some games that have:
Housing system
Crafting classes
Gathering classes
Multiple PvE options
Multiple PvP options
Large Scenic world
...are still labeled as theme park?
are you truly free to do whatever you want in those games ? For example NeverWinter is classic example of theme park because as you level from 1 to 60 you go to various areas and go on the rides ( quest area & dungeons ) then move onto the next ride ( quest area & dungeons )
If that is the only option, quest areas and dungeons- and you are restricted from any alternatives, then I would probably say no, you are truly not free to do whatever you want.
That said, I have not played Neverwinter, so I do not know whether it is that restricted, per your concept of a theme park.
For me a sandbox game is a game that lets you discover the games content at your own pace.
examples: EQ1, SWG, Vanguard, Final fantasy 11, EVE to name a few.
A theme park game tells you exactly where to go and how to go through their content.
examples: SWTOR, WOW, Neverwinter, STO, Tera, GW2 and so on.
Games that might be sandbox games but they are not out are : Archage, Repopulation, Earthrise
You can go to any of these games web sits to get a better idea of how they play. Looking and playing these games are the best way to figure out if you like one game style over another.
I personally like sandbox games. The biggest reason is that they don't hold your hand. I am tired of all these mmos holding my hand now a days.
This is an alternate take on sandbox I find interesting, does a sandbox truly require that you have zero implemented tutorials or prerequisite story completion in the game to teach you how to use the tools, or simply the option to ignore these features... and take a different path for personal development?
I think if SWTOR added player and guild ships, it could be a pretty good sandbox.
It could never be a sandbox because it is a linear gameplay which takes you on a ride from level 1 onwards .
Ulima Online for example you started a new character you didn't have any quests and there were no levels but you gained skill by doing actions with the tools provided or the ones players crafted .
This is an alternate take on sandbox I find interesting, does a sandbox truly require that you have zero implemented tutorials or prerequisite story completion in the game to teach you how to use the tools, or simply the option to ignore these features... and take a different path for personal development?
Well, to begin with, you are spot on in saying that MMOs are a combination of both. IMO, they are a combination of three components, but that's discussion for another thread.
So, based on MMOs being a combination of themepark and sandbox content, when an MMO is called one or the other, the statement is made to say that it leans heavily or predominantly in that direction. That lack of adequate in-game instructions on how to use the tools and features is actually a common flaw of sandbox focused MMOs, not a feature.
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
For me a sandbox game is a game that lets you discover the games content at your own pace.
examples: EQ1, SWG, Vanguard, Final fantasy 11, EVE to name a few.
A theme park game tells you exactly where to go and how to go through their content.
examples: SWTOR, WOW, Neverwinter, STO, Tera, GW2 and so on.
Games that might be sandbox games but they are not out are : Archage, Repopulation, Earthrise
You can go to any of these games web sits to get a better idea of how they play. Looking and playing these games are the best way to figure out if you like one game style over another.
I personally like sandbox games. The biggest reason is that they don't hold your hand. I am tired of all these mmos holding my hand now a days.
This is an alternate take on sandbox I find interesting, does a sandbox truly require that you have zero implemented tutorials or prerequisite story completion in the game to teach you how to use the tools, or simply the option to ignore these features... and take a different path for personal development?
In a sandbox game you should be able to take any path you want. There should be no restrictions on you. Look back on EQ1 and FF11 they both dropped you into the game. After that you went were you wanted, you figured out how to play as you played longer. There is no real path set for you character to take. You make your path. You discover the games story.
Think of it like if you were dropped off in a city you have never been. How do you find your way around? Who do you talk to? What do you do? There is no guiding path that tell you were to go in that city. You have to figure it all out for your self. Now there are guides at times but you don't have to use them you can just explore. As you get to know more of the city you may start to help other people out, all up to you. You are making your own path.
That is the best description for a open world i can think of.
For me a sandbox game is a game that lets you discover the games content at your own pace.
examples: EQ1, SWG, Vanguard, Final fantasy 11, EVE to name a few.
A theme park game tells you exactly where to go and how to go through their content.
examples: SWTOR, WOW, Neverwinter, STO, Tera, GW2 and so on.
Games that might be sandbox games but they are not out are : Archage, Repopulation, Earthrise
You can go to any of these games web sits to get a better idea of how they play. Looking and playing these games are the best way to figure out if you like one game style over another.
I personally like sandbox games. The biggest reason is that they don't hold your hand. I am tired of all these mmos holding my hand now a days.
This is an alternate take on sandbox I find interesting, does a sandbox truly require that you have zero implemented tutorials or prerequisite story completion in the game to teach you how to use the tools, or simply the option to ignore these features... and take a different path for personal development?
In a sandbox game you should be able to take any path you want. There should be no restrictions on you. Look back on EQ1 and FF11 they both dropped you into the game. After that you went were you wanted, you figured out how to play as you played longer. There is no real path set for you character to take. You make your path. You discover the games story.
Think of it like if you were dropped off in a city you have never been. How do you find your way around? Who do you talk to? What do you do? There is no guiding path that tell you were to go in that city. You have to figure it all out for your self. Now there are guides at times but you don't have to use them you can just explore. As you get to know more of the city you may start to help other people out, all up to you. You are making your own path.
That is the best description for a open world i can think of.
I see. So let's say a game gets you started with basic tutorials and/or early requirements (such as a newbie area), but once you hit say level 10 the game unlocks a large plethora of options from that point forward in which you can go any direction you want, including changing to a different archetype/class , is that still just a theme park, or a sandbox game, or a hybrid?
Sandbox really is just an environment with certain tools available that are given to the player with little to no restriction.
This notion that you have freedom to do whatever you want is bogus. You will always be limited by the tools and the depth of the tools made available to you and this is why even within the realm of sandbox games they are not all equally sandboxy.
When people on these forums talk about sandbox, they're not referring to the game design concept, but rather certain set features that they personally desire in a game and so you have all these varying definitions.
Open world pvp is not inherently sandbox.
Player housing is not inherently sandbox.
No feature is. It's the lack of restriction on those features that make that particular freedom a sandbox feature. And the fewer the restrictions, the farther along on the sandbox scale something goes.
i.e. :
You can build a house. But there is only one pre-set form to choose from and it is limited to "housing areas".
You can build 8 pre-set types of houses. They are not limited to any specific area.
You can build 10 types of houses. They are not limited to any specific area, and their interiors can be customized from 50 pre-set options.
You can build a house from materials into any shape you wish. No area restriction. You can craft interior furniture/decorations from materials.
And so on, a single feature can be deep or shallow. Sandbox doesn't inherently imply depth or complexity, it simply implies a degree of freedom. That freedom can mean a lot or a little - depending on the tools provided.
Think of it like if you were dropped off in a city you have never been. How do you find your way around? Who do you talk to? What do you do? There is no guiding path that tell you were to go in that city. You have to figure it all out for your self. Now there are guides at times but you don't have to use them you can just explore. As you get to know more of the city you may start to help other people out, all up to you. You are making your own path.
That is the best description for a open world i can think of.
Sorry I had to post again just to comment on this. Have you ever traveled? If that's how it happened in the real world no one would ever leave their birth town. That's bonkers.
The very moment you arrive in any, let's say non-destitute country you will not only be able to find an information booth (and they have pamphlets about lodging, transportation, food, attractions), but there will be signage usually with pictures of things like buses, taxis, and trains, there will be security guards who can point you in the right direction. And most importantly, it's typically laid out in a linear path using things like ropes, walls, closed doors, possibly big giant red arrows.
You do not arrive in some empty field (at least I hope you don't) and start wandering around aimlessly.
I can understand that some simple action games like Mega Man X can get away with teaching you passively without tutorials
I jump into a wall,, I start sliding down, i'll hit my jump button- hey I can wall jump!
I hold down my attack button, hey, the shot charges!
But for the complexities of MMOs, not having something more robust as a teaching tool can make that same playstyle difficult to learn, and especially to master.
Comments
A themeparks die if developers don't provide a stream of developer made content to keep their players around. It is a constant race to keep the players interested and subpar or late content patches could kill the game at any time.
Sandbox developers only have to ensure their systems work in a sandbox game and only attract enough players interested in keeping the game alive.
Which game sounds more fragile? Which game has more problems than the other? Which game attracts the same type of player? Why even bring up which is superior? They are different. They both exist for a reason: to attract different audiences.
You stay sassy!
I could use the same argument in F2P versus P2P, ironically.
I'm not even suggesting themepark or sandbox is better, merely that pidgeonholing a game as one in order to defame it seems silly, as many very successful MMORPGs use a hybrid of both systems.
are you truly free to do whatever you want in those games ? For example NeverWinter is classic example of theme park because as you level from 1 to 60 you go to various areas and go on the rides ( quest area & dungeons ) then move onto the next ride ( quest area & dungeons )
For me a sandbox game is a game that lets you discover the games content at your own pace.
examples: EQ1, SWG, Vanguard, Final fantasy 11, EVE to name a few.
A theme park game tells you exactly where to go and how to go through their content.
examples: SWTOR, WOW, Neverwinter, STO, Tera, GW2 and so on.
Games that might be sandbox games but they are not out are : Archage, Repopulation, Earthrise
You can go to any of these games web sits to get a better idea of how they play. Looking and playing these games are the best way to figure out if you like one game style over another.
I personally like sandbox games. The biggest reason is that they don't hold your hand. I am tired of all these mmos holding my hand now a days.
If that is the only option, quest areas and dungeons- and you are restricted from any alternatives, then I would probably say no, you are truly not free to do whatever you want.
That said, I have not played Neverwinter, so I do not know whether it is that restricted, per your concept of a theme park.
This is an alternate take on sandbox I find interesting, does a sandbox truly require that you have zero implemented tutorials or prerequisite story completion in the game to teach you how to use the tools, or simply the option to ignore these features... and take a different path for personal development?
I think if SWTOR added player and guild ships, it could be a pretty good sandbox.
Not really, but I wonder how many people will shit their pants with rage.
It could never be a sandbox because it is a linear gameplay which takes you on a ride from level 1 onwards .
Ulima Online for example you started a new character you didn't have any quests and there were no levels but you gained skill by doing actions with the tools provided or the ones players crafted .
Well, to begin with, you are spot on in saying that MMOs are a combination of both. IMO, they are a combination of three components, but that's discussion for another thread.
So, based on MMOs being a combination of themepark and sandbox content, when an MMO is called one or the other, the statement is made to say that it leans heavily or predominantly in that direction. That lack of adequate in-game instructions on how to use the tools and features is actually a common flaw of sandbox focused MMOs, not a feature.
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
In a sandbox game you should be able to take any path you want. There should be no restrictions on you. Look back on EQ1 and FF11 they both dropped you into the game. After that you went were you wanted, you figured out how to play as you played longer. There is no real path set for you character to take. You make your path. You discover the games story.
Think of it like if you were dropped off in a city you have never been. How do you find your way around? Who do you talk to? What do you do? There is no guiding path that tell you were to go in that city. You have to figure it all out for your self. Now there are guides at times but you don't have to use them you can just explore. As you get to know more of the city you may start to help other people out, all up to you. You are making your own path.
That is the best description for a open world i can think of.
I see. So let's say a game gets you started with basic tutorials and/or early requirements (such as a newbie area), but once you hit say level 10 the game unlocks a large plethora of options from that point forward in which you can go any direction you want, including changing to a different archetype/class , is that still just a theme park, or a sandbox game, or a hybrid?
Some bizarre definitions of sandbox out there.
Sandbox really is just an environment with certain tools available that are given to the player with little to no restriction.
This notion that you have freedom to do whatever you want is bogus. You will always be limited by the tools and the depth of the tools made available to you and this is why even within the realm of sandbox games they are not all equally sandboxy.
When people on these forums talk about sandbox, they're not referring to the game design concept, but rather certain set features that they personally desire in a game and so you have all these varying definitions.
Open world pvp is not inherently sandbox.
Player housing is not inherently sandbox.
No feature is. It's the lack of restriction on those features that make that particular freedom a sandbox feature. And the fewer the restrictions, the farther along on the sandbox scale something goes.
i.e. :
You can build a house. But there is only one pre-set form to choose from and it is limited to "housing areas".
You can build 8 pre-set types of houses. They are not limited to any specific area.
You can build 10 types of houses. They are not limited to any specific area, and their interiors can be customized from 50 pre-set options.
You can build a house from materials into any shape you wish. No area restriction. You can craft interior furniture/decorations from materials.
And so on, a single feature can be deep or shallow. Sandbox doesn't inherently imply depth or complexity, it simply implies a degree of freedom. That freedom can mean a lot or a little - depending on the tools provided.
Sorry I had to post again just to comment on this. Have you ever traveled? If that's how it happened in the real world no one would ever leave their birth town. That's bonkers.
The very moment you arrive in any, let's say non-destitute country you will not only be able to find an information booth (and they have pamphlets about lodging, transportation, food, attractions), but there will be signage usually with pictures of things like buses, taxis, and trains, there will be security guards who can point you in the right direction. And most importantly, it's typically laid out in a linear path using things like ropes, walls, closed doors, possibly big giant red arrows.
You do not arrive in some empty field (at least I hope you don't) and start wandering around aimlessly.
I can understand that some simple action games like Mega Man X can get away with teaching you passively without tutorials