Almost everything seems to be a "linear themepark". What is stopping the "sandbox" crowd from simply not picking up the quests, and going out and exploring the worlds that the developers have created?
Almost everything seems to be a "linear themepark". What is stopping the "sandbox" crowd from simply not picking up the quests, and going out and exploring the worlds that the developers have created?
The massive amount of negativity and lack of creativity, even though they are sandbox fans seems to be the reason. I went off exploring and enjoyed myself a lot, I spent five hours exploring, I even managed to get into undeveloped areas with nothing but foundation textures in place and then eventually fell off the map.
I leveled on BAMs much higher level than me in groups and didnt really follow the quests. Just try to have fun instead of being so negative.
I then started doing 10v10 duels once I got 22 and was wagering money on them, was good gambling fun.
Almost everything seems to be a "linear themepark". What is stopping the "sandbox" crowd from simply not picking up the quests, and going out and exploring the worlds that the developers have created?
The massive amount of negativity and lack of creativity, even though they are sandpark fans. I went off exploring and enjoyed myself a lot, I spent five hours exploring, I even managed to get into undeveloped areas with nothing but foundation textures in place and then eventually fell off the map.
I leveled on BAMs much higher level than me in groups and didnt really follow the quests. Just try to have fun instead of being so negative.
I then started doing 10v10 duels once I got 22 and was wagering money on them, was good gambling fun.
Those 10v10 duels sounds amazing, once I finish the first section of my thesis I hope ill be able to take part as well, did frogster state anywhere during what time the different betas are open?
Almost everything seems to be a "linear themepark". What is stopping the "sandbox" crowd from simply not picking up the quests, and going out and exploring the worlds that the developers have created?
well nothing but that would still make the game a themepark. Simply ignoring the content doesnt make a game a sandbox.
Sandbox games are designed so PLAYERS create content. Devs simply give players mechanics that they can then use to create dynamic content. I.E. Eve online.
Themepark games start at A a new character and end at Z the final boss. Then a content patch is released and it starts all over again. Players are extremely limited on dynamic player driven content.
So simply ignoring what little content there is wont magically create player run economics, dynamic resources, fights for territory that have meaning, etc etc etc.
Almost everything seems to be a "linear themepark". What is stopping the "sandbox" crowd from simply not picking up the quests, and going out and exploring the worlds that the developers have created?
well nothing but that would still make the game a themepark. Simply ignoring the content doesnt make a game a sandbox.
Sandbox games are designed so PLAYERS create content. Devs simply give players mechanics that they can then use to create dynamic content. I.E. Eve online.
Themepark games start at A a new character and end at Z the final boss. Then a content patch is released and it starts all over again. Players are extremely limited on dynamic player driven content.
So simply ignoring what little content there is wont magically create player run economics, dynamic resources, fights for territory that have meaning, etc etc etc.
first im just letting everyone know that i posted this in the wrong thread, im not trying say tera is isnt a themepark or sandbox.
but Rift is a themepark mmo. there is an economy, there is an open world to explore, there are things to do other than "kill the final boss" i'm just wondering in games like that is there something stopping the players from creating content. they would just have to get together and do it right?
if a developer implemented a system to have meaningful territoy wars, couldnt that be considered thempark too?
TERA has meaningful territory wars or ways of gaining control of them and certain elements of the game that can be changed by the players in control and still is considered 100% themepark by everyone it seems.
Almost everything seems to be a "linear themepark". What is stopping the "sandbox" crowd from simply not picking up the quests, and going out and exploring the worlds that the developers have created?
well nothing but that would still make the game a themepark. Simply ignoring the content doesnt make a game a sandbox.
Sandbox games are designed so PLAYERS create content. Devs simply give players mechanics that they can then use to create dynamic content. I.E. Eve online.
Themepark games start at A a new character and end at Z the final boss. Then a content patch is released and it starts all over again. Players are extremely limited on dynamic player driven content.
So simply ignoring what little content there is wont magically create player run economics, dynamic resources, fights for territory that have meaning, etc etc etc.
first im just letting everyone know that i posted this in the wrong thread, im not trying say tera is isnt a themepark or sandbox.
but Rift is a themepark mmo. there is an economy, there is an open world to explore, there are things to do other than "kill the final boss" i'm just wondering in games like that is there something stopping the players from creating content. they would just have to get together and do it right?
if a developer implemented a system to have meaningful territoy wars, couldnt that be considered thempark too?
Guess I wasnt clear, so Ill go ahead and write a thesis.
There is next to 0 player generated content in themepark games because there is 0 sand.
Lets start with economics.
In pretty much every themepark game the economy is player driven not loot / mob driven. By that I mean players make the items, supply the ammo / weapons, and material resources are used to do this.
This creates an entire spattering of PLAYER driven content.
Resources can be controlled by players thus driving prices up (or down) and affecting everyone int he game
Crafting means something. If I sell you a bag, you wont have that bag forever and eventually you will need another bag, this allows a crafter to be an actual "class" in the game instead of a side profession
Mob loot is not the sole driving factor of the game. The pve content is there if you choose to do it but you are not required to do so to compete.
Everything bought and sold is a player interaction.
Now since we have this nice economical base we can now build on that with pvp.
Fights are no longer about points or rank they are about land, resources, control, and influence. Wars aren't 5 mintues long or the first to 50 they are weeks or months, or years long and intense struggles drive the game. Spying, counter intel, mercenaries, bounty hunters, supply lines, economic "pvp" etc etc can all be created from these as spin offs and start becoming huge portions of the game.
You no longer log in and hope to get a group to kill Deathwing. You log in and hope to get your friends together so you can lead a coordinated strike into enemy territory and destroy their industrial base so they can no longer field ships to fight off your combat wing.
Do you see the difference?
That is what a sandbox is and you simply can not get that type of game play from a themepark game. Its like trying to find a penis on a woman it just isnt there.
I just do not get it, I played the EU this past weekend as well and never saw any of this stuff some people are claiming in Tera, if you are making your assertions based on the KTera then please specify as such.
I personally got off the rails in Tera and went out to explore the world and I found a very empty world once you walk away from the train tracks the Tera developers want you to level down.
Just because a world is big, does not make it a sandbox, especially when its nothing but vast amounts of empty space.
Either some people do not have a clue what makes a game a sandbox game, or they are just flat out making things up.
Tera is unbelievably linear even past 20, it is not a WoW clone and the whole idea of comparing it to WoW is just ludicrous, if anything compare it to Aion, L2, heck even some of the F2P's like perfect world.
Granted hard to compare to any of those either considering its a political/seige game with only one faction and only one starting area.
I am seriously starting to feel like people were playing a different game than I was.
most people think of eve as a sandbox, but i dont see how it is drastically different from other so called themeparks.
Sandbox Game = Any MMORPG that relies HEAVILY on player interaction and participation. In games such as EVE players create 90% of the content. Sure there are NPC factions and missions to run... but once you get further out into the Universe that is New Eden you suddenly find yourself at the mercy of the players. People work together to survive... hunt... trade... everything. A Sandbox Game is one with complete freedom. If I want to kill you I should be allowed to anywhere in the game world... BUT there should be laws in place to discourage for example murder in an NPC area.
+ Open World
+ Full Loot
+Player Creations (Buildings)
+ Guild VS Guild Mentality
------------------------------------------
EVE right now is the BEST example of what I feel a true MMO is... even if I loathe the combat in the game I love everything else about it. It's the only MMO that has truly taken on a life of it's own with a REAL economy and a lot of emotional investment into what happens and changes.
Best example I have is the fact I HATE crafting in MMO's... yet in EVE I found myself LOVING IT because it felt so real... trying to take over a stations selling of certain goods became a game unto itself and I enjoyed doing it. I've never since enjoyed crafting / trade.
------------------------------------
Back to Tera.... It sounds like a hybrid in the sense they do have more of what I consider a true combat system (FPS / TPS). However I do need to call it a themepark for several reasons
- No complete freedom (Safe Zones)
- No building of any kind I'm aware of
- Generic Questing / Gear system in place
Exploring does not count as a "Sandbox" feature unless by some godly power the map is constantly changing around causing new areas to explore.
I think those of us who like sandbox features would be satisfied if sandbox like features are placed in themepark games to exhibit a balance between the two. So far the games that have gotten much applause from the expecting masses have all been hybrids of one type or another. TERA being one of them. I think if they have housing, exploration, guild vs guild, a dynamic world and ample smart crafting and cosmetics i think most people would be happy with the hybrids because it will be something different then what we've all seen from the themepark gamemachine that tends to be the bigger ip's and titles.
I keep hearing the term but I don't know any of them.
Because the ones that come to my mind are titles plagued by problems, shoddy implimentation, dodgy finances, and are generally extremely poorly received, unless we talk pre-NGE SWG I can't recall any by a major studio.
What "tools" does a sandbox require to classify as such?
I think a lot of professed sandbox fans are pragmatists and accept compromises like Vanguard or ArcheAge. Things get confusing though when people try to equate sandbox to full loot pvp and things like that. Your example of exploration fails in most games because of restrictions to exploring as a main occupation. The biggest reason is areas being zoned by level so you have only a few choices based on what level you are.
if a developer implemented a system to have meaningful territoy wars, couldnt that be considered thempark too?
Devs who design a system where players drive the content is sandbox. Territory wars are one example of that.
Territory wars in EVE drive the game, they effect just about everything from prices of minerals to where its safe to hunt or mine. But the wars themselves are player driven and CCP really have no control over them. They don't follow a story, they create one. It is a very good example of sandboxy content. When people complain they've run out of "content" in WoW, you know what they mean, they've done the raids/5mans ect and feel bored. EVE players rarely talk about running out of content, because the main focus of the game isn't limited by how fast a team of devs can come up with ideas.
Does this alone make a game a "sandbox" game? no, but there isn't any one specific thing that makes a game a sandbox game. Sandbox is just a lable we use for our MMOs, and its a pretty neblous one at that.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
Exactly nothing but this is a semi-troll post or at the very least a rant about pre-concieved notions.
I will bite though, what I want from a Sandbox is as follows:
1. PvP is segregated on their own shards with minimal to zero zupport from the devs.
2. A PvE open world where exploration is the rule rather then the thumb. Questing from one hub to the next is stupid and stymies creativity and exploration.
3. Classless skill based game with no holy trinity. Everyone is responsible for their own health useage.
4. a Diablo/Asheron's Call style loot system.
5. No raiding
6. level progression that takes months if not years to reach the level cap. The journey should be the reward, but that doesnt mean there shouldnt be skill progression in the interem. So if it takes me 2 months go from level 100 to 101 but in that 2 months ive aquired better gear, a few skills, and a lifetime worths of friends.
7. NO FACTIONS
8. No capitol cities, each village or town you come across should have access to rare crafting patterns and trainers.
9. PLAYER HOUSING IN THE WORLD
10. No flying Mounts
11. Hundreds if not thousands of explorable dungeons with each having a rare boss or mini boss at the end.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Exactly nothing but this is a semi-troll post or at the very least a rant about pre-concieved notions.
I will bite though, what I want from a Sandbox is as follows:
1. PvP is segregated on their own shards with minimal to zero zupport from the devs.
2. A PvE open world where exploration is the rule rather then the thumb. Questing from one hub to the next is stupid and stymies creativity and exploration.
3. Classless skill based game with no holy trinity. Everyone is responsible for their own health useage.
4. a Diablo/Asheron's Call style loot system.
5. No raiding
6. level progression that takes months if not years to reach the level cap. The journey should be the reward, but that doesnt mean there shouldnt be skill progression in the interem. So if it takes me 2 months go from level 100 to 101 but in that 2 months ive aquired better gear, a few skills, and a lifetime worths of friends.
7. NO FACTIONS
8. No capitol cities, each village or town you come across should have access to rare crafting patterns and trainers.
9. PLAYER HOUSING IN THE WORLD
10. No flying Mounts
11. Hundreds if not thousands of explorable dungeons with each having a rare boss or mini boss at the end.
12. NO INSTANCING OR PHASING
13. NO BATTLEGROUNDS, PVP SHOULD BE IN THE WORLD
In general, a open game with much freedom especially in the PVP department.
Tera for me is a themepark with cool combat and a few other interesting aspects but its nothing close to a sandbox. Being a themepark doesnt mean it cant be enjoyed for people that prefer sandboxes it just means that they probably wont feel the game enjoyable eough to stay very long.
Random starting areas, quest hubs all over the world, populated world even out in the middle of nowhere.
I remember when AC was brand new, I was 2 hours of run time out in the middle of nowhere came on a dungeon, went in to explore got stuck in a wall and petitioned a GM for help. He shows up and is like " Hey I didnt know this was out here, hold on lemme look around. " I sat there while the GM explored the dungeon for the first time.
That to me is pretty sandbox.
SWG another example of sandbox...
Anarchy Online to a degree sandbox...
Vanguard...
To even suggest Tera is sandbox just does not compute.
As mentioned above, a sandbox MMORPG is not just about exploring, its about being able to interact with the world and even change it. So far, only original UO has made a serious attempt. In UO circa 1997 you were able to do things you can't in SWTOR for instance, such as put plates and food on a table for a feast or sit in a chair.
The real reason we don't see many sandbox games anymore is that it is almost impossible to integrate open world PVP into them. UO foundered on this - the original beauty of the system was fatally marred by open PVP to the point where they were losing subscribers. They "Trammelized" the system to limit open PVP because the supposed counterbalance - player justice - was simply not enough.
Every MMORPG since then has grappled with this dilemna. Many people do not have killing other players as their top priority for fun. But in open PVP it doesn't matter what they want - the "hard core PVPers" make the choice for everyone. And the companies either let their populations plummet as the "hard core PVPers" drive off the rest of their customers. Or they go "theme park" and severely limit PVP to instances.
Unfortunately, I don't think there is an easy solution. The key here is human online psychology. You can create a beautiful, highly detailed and interactive sandbox world like UO. The designers even had an ecology where animals hunted one another and balanced populations. But what happened is that once players were let loose on this world, they killed everything in sight faster than it could balance and the ecosystem collapsed.
It is also a fact that advancement in online games is almost 100 percent keyed to killing stuff, whether MOBs or other players. It is ingrained in players that:
- if I CAN kill, I MUST kill
Not only that - anyone who disagrees, who thinks other activities have value, is a Care Bear who MUST be killed!
The next step is that the killing has to be near-continuous. It is like crack - players must have greater and greater doses to feel they are accomplishing anything. I have a Jedi Sentinel in SWTOR at level 25. She must have killed, by conservative estimates, maybe 5,000 NPC people personally by now. Add in various MOB creatures and robots and you are probably in six figure range for kills by just one player avatar who is barely half way to max level. Only a theme park can manage industrial scale slaughter like this. People are herded down carefully limited paths and targets are placed in their path to ensure that the swords never stop swinging and the blasters never get cool. At that rate, killing eventually becomes not only meaningless, but boring - many players in SWTOR, sated, are complaining that they can't go from point A to point B without having to butcher half a city.
Creating a sandbox is not a problem. Creating a sandbox with open world PVP that doesn't get burned down by its own players is.
Lot of misconceptions about sandboxes in this thread.
Just think of free to do as you please type game with a HUGE world open to explore. With large player based economy, crafting that means something. Where you can dabble in a hundred different things. Where you are not led around like a dog on a leash all day.
And BTW, sandbox does not mean open world pvp with full loot like many say it is. Can think of several sandbox games not based on pvp at all.
Its a game with choice, freedoms, and features galore. Biggest one coming up is Archeage and there are 2-3 more coming out by smaller companies but look good.
As mentioned above, a sandbox MMORPG is not just about exploring, its about being able to interact with the world and even change it. So far, only original UO has made a serious attempt. In UO circa 1997 you were able to do things you can't in SWTOR for instance, such as put plates and food on a table for a feast or sit in a chair.
The real reason we don't see many sandbox games anymore is that it is almost impossible to integrate open world PVP into them. UO foundered on this - the original beauty of the system was fatally marred by open PVP to the point where they were losing subscribers. They "Trammelized" the system to limit open PVP because the supposed counterbalance - player justice - was simply not enough.
Every MMORPG since then has grappled with this dilemna. Many people do not have killing other players as their top priority for fun. But in open PVP it doesn't matter what they want - the "hard core PVPers" make the choice for everyone. And the companies either let their populations plummet as the "hard core PVPers" drive off the rest of their customers. Or they go "theme park" and severely limit PVP to instances.
Unfortunately, I don't think there is an easy solution. The key here is human online psychology. You can create a beautiful, highly detailed and interactive sandbox world like UO. The designers even had an ecology where animals hunted one another and balanced populations. But what happened is that once players were let loose on this world, they killed everything in sight faster than it could balance and the ecosystem collapsed.
It is also a fact that advancement in online games is almost 100 percent keyed to killing stuff, whether MOBs or other players. It is ingrained in players that:
- if I CAN kill, I MUST kill
Not only that - anyone who disagrees, who thinks other activities have value, is a Care Bear who MUST be killed!
The next step is that the killing has to be near-continuous. It is like crack - players must have greater and greater doses to feel they are accomplishing anything. I have a Jedi Sentinel in SWTOR at level 25. She must have killed, by conservative estimates, maybe 5,000 NPC people personally by now. Add in various MOB creatures and robots and you are probably in six figure range for kills by just one player avatar who is barely half way to max level. Only a theme park can manage industrial scale slaughter like this. People are herded down carefully limited paths and targets are placed in their path to ensure that the swords never stop swinging and the blasters never get cool. At that rate, killing eventually becomes not only meaningless, but boring - many players in SWTOR, sated, are complaining that they can't go from point A to point B without having to butcher half a city.
Creating a sandbox is not a problem. Creating a sandbox with open world PVP that doesn't get burned down by its own players is.
It's so funny reading a WoW player trying to describe a Sandbox MMO. Your post is clearly a few weeks of Sandbox experience. You my friend are far from the truth of what a Sandbox MMO.
Comments
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
The massive amount of negativity and lack of creativity, even though they are sandbox fans seems to be the reason. I went off exploring and enjoyed myself a lot, I spent five hours exploring, I even managed to get into undeveloped areas with nothing but foundation textures in place and then eventually fell off the map.
I leveled on BAMs much higher level than me in groups and didnt really follow the quests. Just try to have fun instead of being so negative.
I then started doing 10v10 duels once I got 22 and was wagering money on them, was good gambling fun.
oops accidentally posted in wrong thread.
I've got the straight edge.
Oh well, atleast it relates to TERA since this is one of the most common points brought up against it.
Those 10v10 duels sounds amazing, once I finish the first section of my thesis I hope ill be able to take part as well, did frogster state anywhere during what time the different betas are open?
well nothing but that would still make the game a themepark. Simply ignoring the content doesnt make a game a sandbox.
Sandbox games are designed so PLAYERS create content. Devs simply give players mechanics that they can then use to create dynamic content. I.E. Eve online.
Themepark games start at A a new character and end at Z the final boss. Then a content patch is released and it starts all over again. Players are extremely limited on dynamic player driven content.
So simply ignoring what little content there is wont magically create player run economics, dynamic resources, fights for territory that have meaning, etc etc etc.
first im just letting everyone know that i posted this in the wrong thread, im not trying say tera is isnt a themepark or sandbox.
but Rift is a themepark mmo. there is an economy, there is an open world to explore, there are things to do other than "kill the final boss" i'm just wondering in games like that is there something stopping the players from creating content. they would just have to get together and do it right?
if a developer implemented a system to have meaningful territoy wars, couldnt that be considered thempark too?
I've got the straight edge.
TERA has meaningful territory wars or ways of gaining control of them and certain elements of the game that can be changed by the players in control and still is considered 100% themepark by everyone it seems.
most people think of eve as a sandbox, but i dont see how it is drastically different from other so called themeparks.
I've got the straight edge.
Guess I wasnt clear, so Ill go ahead and write a thesis.
There is next to 0 player generated content in themepark games because there is 0 sand.
Lets start with economics.
In pretty much every themepark game the economy is player driven not loot / mob driven. By that I mean players make the items, supply the ammo / weapons, and material resources are used to do this.
This creates an entire spattering of PLAYER driven content.
Resources can be controlled by players thus driving prices up (or down) and affecting everyone int he game
Crafting means something. If I sell you a bag, you wont have that bag forever and eventually you will need another bag, this allows a crafter to be an actual "class" in the game instead of a side profession
Mob loot is not the sole driving factor of the game. The pve content is there if you choose to do it but you are not required to do so to compete.
Everything bought and sold is a player interaction.
Now since we have this nice economical base we can now build on that with pvp.
Fights are no longer about points or rank they are about land, resources, control, and influence. Wars aren't 5 mintues long or the first to 50 they are weeks or months, or years long and intense struggles drive the game. Spying, counter intel, mercenaries, bounty hunters, supply lines, economic "pvp" etc etc can all be created from these as spin offs and start becoming huge portions of the game.
You no longer log in and hope to get a group to kill Deathwing. You log in and hope to get your friends together so you can lead a coordinated strike into enemy territory and destroy their industrial base so they can no longer field ships to fight off your combat wing.
Do you see the difference?
That is what a sandbox is and you simply can not get that type of game play from a themepark game. Its like trying to find a penis on a woman it just isnt there.
I just do not get it, I played the EU this past weekend as well and never saw any of this stuff some people are claiming in Tera, if you are making your assertions based on the KTera then please specify as such.
I personally got off the rails in Tera and went out to explore the world and I found a very empty world once you walk away from the train tracks the Tera developers want you to level down.
Just because a world is big, does not make it a sandbox, especially when its nothing but vast amounts of empty space.
Either some people do not have a clue what makes a game a sandbox game, or they are just flat out making things up.
Tera is unbelievably linear even past 20, it is not a WoW clone and the whole idea of comparing it to WoW is just ludicrous, if anything compare it to Aion, L2, heck even some of the F2P's like perfect world.
Granted hard to compare to any of those either considering its a political/seige game with only one faction and only one starting area.
I am seriously starting to feel like people were playing a different game than I was.
sandbox crowd wants a non buggy mortal online? lol
Sandbox Game = Any MMORPG that relies HEAVILY on player interaction and participation. In games such as EVE players create 90% of the content. Sure there are NPC factions and missions to run... but once you get further out into the Universe that is New Eden you suddenly find yourself at the mercy of the players. People work together to survive... hunt... trade... everything. A Sandbox Game is one with complete freedom. If I want to kill you I should be allowed to anywhere in the game world... BUT there should be laws in place to discourage for example murder in an NPC area.
+ Open World
+ Full Loot
+Player Creations (Buildings)
+ Guild VS Guild Mentality
------------------------------------------
EVE right now is the BEST example of what I feel a true MMO is... even if I loathe the combat in the game I love everything else about it. It's the only MMO that has truly taken on a life of it's own with a REAL economy and a lot of emotional investment into what happens and changes.
Best example I have is the fact I HATE crafting in MMO's... yet in EVE I found myself LOVING IT because it felt so real... trying to take over a stations selling of certain goods became a game unto itself and I enjoyed doing it. I've never since enjoyed crafting / trade.
------------------------------------
Back to Tera.... It sounds like a hybrid in the sense they do have more of what I consider a true combat system (FPS / TPS). However I do need to call it a themepark for several reasons
- No complete freedom (Safe Zones)
- No building of any kind I'm aware of
- Generic Questing / Gear system in place
Exploring does not count as a "Sandbox" feature unless by some godly power the map is constantly changing around causing new areas to explore.
Full Sail University - Game Design
i am getting a clearer understanding, thanks for your reply's and well written posts.
I've got the straight edge.
I think those of us who like sandbox features would be satisfied if sandbox like features are placed in themepark games to exhibit a balance between the two. So far the games that have gotten much applause from the expecting masses have all been hybrids of one type or another. TERA being one of them. I think if they have housing, exploration, guild vs guild, a dynamic world and ample smart crafting and cosmetics i think most people would be happy with the hybrids because it will be something different then what we've all seen from the themepark gamemachine that tends to be the bigger ip's and titles.
Which games are these mythical sandbox games?
I keep hearing the term but I don't know any of them.
Because the ones that come to my mind are titles plagued by problems, shoddy implimentation, dodgy finances, and are generally extremely poorly received, unless we talk pre-NGE SWG I can't recall any by a major studio.
What "tools" does a sandbox require to classify as such?
I think a lot of professed sandbox fans are pragmatists and accept compromises like Vanguard or ArcheAge. Things get confusing though when people try to equate sandbox to full loot pvp and things like that. Your example of exploration fails in most games because of restrictions to exploring as a main occupation. The biggest reason is areas being zoned by level so you have only a few choices based on what level you are.
Devs who design a system where players drive the content is sandbox. Territory wars are one example of that.
Territory wars in EVE drive the game, they effect just about everything from prices of minerals to where its safe to hunt or mine. But the wars themselves are player driven and CCP really have no control over them. They don't follow a story, they create one. It is a very good example of sandboxy content. When people complain they've run out of "content" in WoW, you know what they mean, they've done the raids/5mans ect and feel bored. EVE players rarely talk about running out of content, because the main focus of the game isn't limited by how fast a team of devs can come up with ideas.
Does this alone make a game a "sandbox" game? no, but there isn't any one specific thing that makes a game a sandbox game. Sandbox is just a lable we use for our MMOs, and its a pretty neblous one at that.
Everything creates huge amounts of negativity on the internet, that's what the internet is for: Negativity, porn and lolcats.
Exactly nothing but this is a semi-troll post or at the very least a rant about pre-concieved notions.
I will bite though, what I want from a Sandbox is as follows:
1. PvP is segregated on their own shards with minimal to zero zupport from the devs.
2. A PvE open world where exploration is the rule rather then the thumb. Questing from one hub to the next is stupid and stymies creativity and exploration.
3. Classless skill based game with no holy trinity. Everyone is responsible for their own health useage.
4. a Diablo/Asheron's Call style loot system.
5. No raiding
6. level progression that takes months if not years to reach the level cap. The journey should be the reward, but that doesnt mean there shouldnt be skill progression in the interem. So if it takes me 2 months go from level 100 to 101 but in that 2 months ive aquired better gear, a few skills, and a lifetime worths of friends.
7. NO FACTIONS
8. No capitol cities, each village or town you come across should have access to rare crafting patterns and trainers.
9. PLAYER HOUSING IN THE WORLD
10. No flying Mounts
11. Hundreds if not thousands of explorable dungeons with each having a rare boss or mini boss at the end.
12. NO INSTANCING OR PHASING
13. NO BATTLEGROUNDS, PVP SHOULD BE IN THE WORLD
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
In general, a open game with much freedom especially in the PVP department.
Tera for me is a themepark with cool combat and a few other interesting aspects but its nothing close to a sandbox. Being a themepark doesnt mean it cant be enjoyed for people that prefer sandboxes it just means that they probably wont feel the game enjoyable eough to stay very long.
Acheron's Call is a good example.
Random starting areas, quest hubs all over the world, populated world even out in the middle of nowhere.
I remember when AC was brand new, I was 2 hours of run time out in the middle of nowhere came on a dungeon, went in to explore got stuck in a wall and petitioned a GM for help. He shows up and is like " Hey I didnt know this was out here, hold on lemme look around. " I sat there while the GM explored the dungeon for the first time.
That to me is pretty sandbox.
SWG another example of sandbox...
Anarchy Online to a degree sandbox...
Vanguard...
To even suggest Tera is sandbox just does not compute.
As mentioned above, a sandbox MMORPG is not just about exploring, its about being able to interact with the world and even change it. So far, only original UO has made a serious attempt. In UO circa 1997 you were able to do things you can't in SWTOR for instance, such as put plates and food on a table for a feast or sit in a chair.
The real reason we don't see many sandbox games anymore is that it is almost impossible to integrate open world PVP into them. UO foundered on this - the original beauty of the system was fatally marred by open PVP to the point where they were losing subscribers. They "Trammelized" the system to limit open PVP because the supposed counterbalance - player justice - was simply not enough.
Every MMORPG since then has grappled with this dilemna. Many people do not have killing other players as their top priority for fun. But in open PVP it doesn't matter what they want - the "hard core PVPers" make the choice for everyone. And the companies either let their populations plummet as the "hard core PVPers" drive off the rest of their customers. Or they go "theme park" and severely limit PVP to instances.
Unfortunately, I don't think there is an easy solution. The key here is human online psychology. You can create a beautiful, highly detailed and interactive sandbox world like UO. The designers even had an ecology where animals hunted one another and balanced populations. But what happened is that once players were let loose on this world, they killed everything in sight faster than it could balance and the ecosystem collapsed.
It is also a fact that advancement in online games is almost 100 percent keyed to killing stuff, whether MOBs or other players. It is ingrained in players that:
- if I CAN kill, I MUST kill
Not only that - anyone who disagrees, who thinks other activities have value, is a Care Bear who MUST be killed!
The next step is that the killing has to be near-continuous. It is like crack - players must have greater and greater doses to feel they are accomplishing anything. I have a Jedi Sentinel in SWTOR at level 25. She must have killed, by conservative estimates, maybe 5,000 NPC people personally by now. Add in various MOB creatures and robots and you are probably in six figure range for kills by just one player avatar who is barely half way to max level. Only a theme park can manage industrial scale slaughter like this. People are herded down carefully limited paths and targets are placed in their path to ensure that the swords never stop swinging and the blasters never get cool. At that rate, killing eventually becomes not only meaningless, but boring - many players in SWTOR, sated, are complaining that they can't go from point A to point B without having to butcher half a city.
Creating a sandbox is not a problem. Creating a sandbox with open world PVP that doesn't get burned down by its own players is.
I have seen people complain that there isn't enough content in EvE Online... Kind of had to do a double take when I read that.
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
Lot of misconceptions about sandboxes in this thread.
Just think of free to do as you please type game with a HUGE world open to explore. With large player based economy, crafting that means something. Where you can dabble in a hundred different things. Where you are not led around like a dog on a leash all day.
And BTW, sandbox does not mean open world pvp with full loot like many say it is. Can think of several sandbox games not based on pvp at all.
Its a game with choice, freedoms, and features galore. Biggest one coming up is Archeage and there are 2-3 more coming out by smaller companies but look good.
It's so funny reading a WoW player trying to describe a Sandbox MMO. Your post is clearly a few weeks of Sandbox experience. You my friend are far from the truth of what a Sandbox MMO.