There wasnt a single implementation of it that is any good.
Sometimes people like an idea, but not any implementation of it.
That's actually a better analogy than you think it is. If you think you like socialism, but can't find a single real-world implementation of it that you like, then you don't like socialism. You might think you like it, but you're simply mistaken, as you dislike the consequences of actually implementing it in the real world.
It's one thing to dislike the first implementation of something that sounds good in theory. But if it's been tried enough different times by enough different people in enough different places in enough different ways, then eventually, if you still can't find an implementation you like, the problem isn't the people implementing it or their particular methods. The problem is that you don't like socialism, period. Or sandboxes, as is the topic for this post.
If the sandboxes you play (I'm guessing mostly UWO and Tale in the Desert by the amount you plug them) tick all your boxes then fair play, have fun. But for a lot of people in certain aspects these games just dont cut the mustard.
With the former, for me, I didnt like the cash shop. The latter, the lack of combat and dated graphics.
I'd be surprised if you really can't see how these variables might be of some consequence for some gamers?
I'm not saying that you need to like the same sandbox games that I do. If you like Eve, or Darkfall, or Wurm, or some other sandbox, that's fine. You can call yourself a sandbox fan on that basis, even if you don't like any sandbox games that I like.
But if you're going to complain that the implementation of every sandbox MMORPG is so bad that it ruined the game for you, then you'll probably say the same of every future sandbox, too. If you really like sandbox games, then you'll be able to like a game that gets some details "wrong".
More broadly, if you'll only like a video game that exactly matches some theoretical perfect game in your head, then you'll dislike all of the video games that ever have existed and all that ever will--and thus, I'd say you dislike video games in general. And would probably also dislike the theoretical perfect game even if it did exist, but merely for reasons that wouldn't be obvious until then.
I'd like one with gameplay like Morrowind. Classless or heavily customizable. Free roaming where I can go and do as I please. A few quest lines, but none of the kill x or gather x tasks. Not something with FFA full loot. Preferably a fairly deep gear system with open application (If I can find it, steal it, or buy it, then I can use it without penalty). Housing would be a big plus as I need a home and a place to store my junk. Zero instancing. No battlegrounds or arenas. Gathering and crafting professions are a must and should be able to produce gear that's at least as good as dropped, purchased or stolen. I'd prefer it have a faction system that I can join after rolling my character. I don't want level to be a be-all end-all stat. I want to be able to group with higher or lower levels without hassle.
I would play this in an instant. Where is it?
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
I'd like one with gameplay like Morrowind. Classless or heavily customizable. Free roaming where I can go and do as I please. A few quest lines, but none of the kill x or gather x tasks. Not something with FFA full loot. Preferably a fairly deep gear system with open application (If I can find it, steal it, or buy it, then I can use it without penalty). Housing would be a big plus as I need a home and a place to store my junk. Zero instancing. No battlegrounds or arenas. Gathering and crafting professions are a must and should be able to produce gear that's at least as good as dropped, purchased or stolen. I'd prefer it have a faction system that I can join after rolling my character. I don't want level to be a be-all end-all stat. I want to be able to group with higher or lower levels without hassle.
I would play this in an instant. Where is it?
Xsyon? Sounds like you might like it. It does have FFA Loot outside of your tribal or homestead lands, but you are pefectly safe inside your area.
No quest lines either, but Tribes can create quests for you to complete.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
Title doesnt compute. For example: I like the idea socialism. There wasnt a single implementation of it that is any good. Sometimes people like an idea, but not any implementation of it.
That's actually a better analogy than you think it is. If you think you like socialism, but can't find a single real-world implementation of it that you like, then you don't like socialism. You might think you like it, but you're simply mistaken, as you dislike the consequences of actually implementing it in the real world.
It's one thing to dislike the first implementation of something that sounds good in theory. But if it's been tried enough different times by enough different people in enough different places in enough different ways, then eventually, if you still can't find an implementation you like, the problem isn't the people implementing it or their particular methods. The problem is that you don't like socialism, period. Or sandboxes, as is the topic for this post.
Compromise and try the Nordic version of socialism.
Never considered and I don't consider UWO as AAA title. Far from it.
I understand why many ppl find this title appealing as I know it has many interesting features , though never crossed my mind to call it AAA title.
Imo only current Sandbox title that has right to be called AAA (and even that some ppl may find controversial since it clearly started as indie and is not backed by huge corporation , but well there is no definition of AAA title in dictionary I am aware of) is EVE and UO -but UO is 'legacy very old game' - so it actally does not matter in this case anymore.
If I say "you don't like breaking your leg", is that being judgmental? Or is it a simple statement of fact?
If UWO isn't AAA, then you've got too narrow of a definition of AAA. If UWO isn't AAA, then neither are LotRO, EQ2, Rift, AoC, or a lot of other games that we'd normally think of as AAA. I guess arguing that AAA takes something really huge, and that WoW and SWTOR are the only AAA MMORPGs ever made is at least defensible. But in that case, I'd say your definition is too narrow.
There wasnt a single implementation of it that is any good.
Sometimes people like an idea, but not any implementation of it.
That's actually a better analogy than you think it is. If you think you like socialism, but can't find a single real-world implementation of it that you like, then you don't like socialism. You might think you like it, but you're simply mistaken, as you dislike the consequences of actually implementing it in the real world.
It's one thing to dislike the first implementation of something that sounds good in theory. But if it's been tried enough different times by enough different people in enough different places in enough different ways, then eventually, if you still can't find an implementation you like, the problem isn't the people implementing it or their particular methods. The problem is that you don't like socialism, period. Or sandboxes, as is the topic for this post.
The reason socialism has never truely worked is because it has only ever been implemented by governments looking to exploit the facets of socialism that furthered their agenda of power and control. At any rate, the whole analogy is flawed because the variables involved in government classifications are distinctly different from the ones involved in developing and playing games (as if that needed to be said).
You're view of the world seems to be that if something doesn't or hasn't existed before, then it never will. This is not actually the case.
At the end of the day, the untapped potential of sandbox games is staggering. The reason people are generally discontent with sandboxes is because they can see all the unrealized possibilities. Not that it's easy or cheap to tap that potential.... But if a game studio with enough money and resources were to make a sandbox game then we might just catch a glimpse of the future potential of gaming. It's just that none of the adequately equipped studio's have made an honest attempt for quite some time (aka the beginning).
I can't find a single first person shooter that I like. You know why? Because I don't like first person shooters. It's not an insult. It's a simple statement of fact. But I don't go to first person shooter forums and complain that all the first person shooters on the market are terrible.
If you want an AAA sandbox game, then stop whining about it and go play one. Here, I'll even give you a link:
And if you want to complain ~30 years of experience in designing games, several hundred million dollars in annual revenue, and the sort of large budgets you'd expect from a company of that size isn't enough to make Tecmo-Koei an AAA developer, then you've got too narrow of a definition of AAA.
If you like one sandbox game and not another, that's fine. If you don't like sandbox games at all, that's fine, too. But what I don't like is people coming in to loudly whine that there aren't any good sandbox games at all. I say the reason for that is that such people don't like sandboxes, and they should stop whining about it.
Bull. Pay-to-win game. "Buy a treasure chest! Get a random ship." I know how that works, I played a Nexon game. Tons of in-game crap you pay a $1 or $2 for... And the small chance of getting a unique item. I'll stick with the lottery.
Ah, so an item mall makes a game AAA? Well then, I guess WoW isn't an AAA game, either. Or does it only take something random in the item mall to make a game not AAA, so that WoW is AAA now, but wouldn't be if it sold you a $1 ticket with a 4% chance of winning a sparkly mount or some such?
You know what the item mall ships in UWO are, don't you? They're alternate versions of ships obtainable through normal gameplay, except that let you use them at lower levels. So if WoW let you buy level 80 greens in an item mall and use them at level 20, would that make WoW no longer AAA?
If you can't find a pasta dish in our restaurant that you like, then you're not a pasta fan.
Not always true...
Bad analogy. Something closer would be, if you can't find pasta that you like in any restaurant at all, then you don't like pasta. One particular restaurant might just be a bad restaurant, but not all restaurants are bad.
If you can't find a pasta dish in our restaurant that you like, then you're not a pasta fan.
Not always true...
Bad analogy. Something closer would be, if you can't find pasta that you like in any restaurant at all, then you don't like pasta. One particular restaurant might just be a bad restaurant, but not all restaurants are bad.
> implying that there are as many types of mmos as there are pasta
> Implying pasta and mmos have the same amount of time to develop their types and refine themselves.
> Imply that mmos can't possibly continue to evolve and come up with new unknown different ways to go about their model
My point is you make a whole lot of assumptions. a whole lot.
Just because there is no italian restaraunt that I like doesn't mean there isn't one being made, or that there wasn't one, or that one of them WAS my favorite until they screwed up the sauce, or that perhaps just perhaps MMOS have been around 20 years when Pasta has had generations to perfect itself.
MMOs are still in their infancy, to act like they are a fully fleshed out product is dilusional.
If you can't find a pasta dish in our restaurant that you like, then you're not a pasta fan.
Not always true...
Bad analogy. Something closer would be, if you can't find pasta that you like in any restaurant at all, then you don't like pasta. One particular restaurant might just be a bad restaurant, but not all restaurants are bad.
Your analogy is as bad. If you would have just few pasta restaurants then yeah I can see that some pasta fan might not like any from those like 7-8 restaurants. Especially that some of them would serve old pasta or some kind of dish that is not really pasta anymore (UO) ,etc
The reason socialism has never truely worked is because it has only ever been implemented by governments looking to exploit the facets of socialism that furthered their agenda of power and control. At any rate, the whole analogy is flawed because the variables involved in government classifications are distinctly different from the ones involved in developing and playing games (as if that needed to be said).
You're view of the world seems to be that if something doesn't or hasn't existed before, then it never will. This is not actually the case.
You can like socialism or not. That's not the point of this thread, and I'm trying not to turn this into a political argument.
But if socialism is to be implemented at all, then it will inevitably have to be implemented by governments. And seeing to further their agenta of power and control is what governments do. If that's enough to ruin the implementation of socialism, then the problem is socialism.
Or to take another example, if you would like grouping, except that you don't like grouping with people because people are jerks, then you don't like grouping, period.
A lot of people here must be one of these Observer guys since they know every outcome of every possible sandbox game that will ever be released.
It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result.
If you try one pasta dish at one restaurant and don't like it, and then try a different pasta dish at a different restaurant and don't like it, and keep doing this for a while, then at some point, the reasonable thing to do is to give up and accept that you just don't like pasta.
It's not 100% proof that there will never be a pasta dish that you like. But eventually it becomes highly probable that you'd have a better chance of finding something that you like by trying a different type of food. Maybe you should try burritos and see if you like them better.
So it is with sandboxes. If you try one sandbox game and don't like it, fine. Maybe it was just a bad game, or did some things you disliked. Maybe you'd like some other sandbox game better. But if you've tried all the sandbox games out and didn't like any of them, then maybe you should consider giving up on sandboxes and playing some other games that aren't sandboxes.
It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result.
If you try one pasta dish at one restaurant and don't like it, and then try a different pasta dish at a different restaurant and don't like it, and keep doing this for a while, then at some point, the reasonable thing to do is to give up and accept that you just don't like pasta.
It's not 100% proof that there will never be a pasta dish that you like. But eventually it becomes highly probable that you'd have a better chance of finding something that you like by trying a different type of food. Maybe you should try burritos and see if you like them better.
So it is with sandboxes. If you try one sandbox game and don't like it, fine. Maybe it was just a bad game, or did some things you disliked. Maybe you'd like some other sandbox game better. But if you've tried all the sandbox games out and didn't like any of them, then maybe you should consider giving up on sandboxes and playing some other games that aren't sandboxes.
Look I'm tired of analogies, you are wrong, and everyone is telling you so.
Name a non buggy sand box game?
Can't?
Ok so you are saying that all sand box players should endure the buggy horrible MESS that is sandbox games right now?
THERE ARE NO COMPLETED SANDBOX GAMES! They're all broken indy pieces of crap! Saying otherwise is down right lying to yourself.
The reason no one who likes sandboxes likes current ones is because .... drum roll please.... THEY SUCK!
Or, considering there are a finite amount of MMOs available and perhaps a handful that would fit the said criteria, the best analogy would be:
Just because i don't fancy the pick of those 4 or 5 women stood at the bar with rectums for faces and barely intelligible English, doesn't mean i am going 'fruity'
Comments
That's actually a better analogy than you think it is. If you think you like socialism, but can't find a single real-world implementation of it that you like, then you don't like socialism. You might think you like it, but you're simply mistaken, as you dislike the consequences of actually implementing it in the real world.
It's one thing to dislike the first implementation of something that sounds good in theory. But if it's been tried enough different times by enough different people in enough different places in enough different ways, then eventually, if you still can't find an implementation you like, the problem isn't the people implementing it or their particular methods. The problem is that you don't like socialism, period. Or sandboxes, as is the topic for this post.
I think this sums up the view of people who are against Full loot PVP in Sandbox games.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
I'm not saying that you need to like the same sandbox games that I do. If you like Eve, or Darkfall, or Wurm, or some other sandbox, that's fine. You can call yourself a sandbox fan on that basis, even if you don't like any sandbox games that I like.
But if you're going to complain that the implementation of every sandbox MMORPG is so bad that it ruined the game for you, then you'll probably say the same of every future sandbox, too. If you really like sandbox games, then you'll be able to like a game that gets some details "wrong".
More broadly, if you'll only like a video game that exactly matches some theoretical perfect game in your head, then you'll dislike all of the video games that ever have existed and all that ever will--and thus, I'd say you dislike video games in general. And would probably also dislike the theoretical perfect game even if it did exist, but merely for reasons that wouldn't be obvious until then.
I like aspects of most sandbox games, but it's just impossible for them to live up to the idea I have formed in my head of "The Perfect Sandbox".
I just do my best to enjoy the different ones that we have.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
So, where are all these good sandboxes?
I'd like one with gameplay like Morrowind. Classless or heavily customizable. Free roaming where I can go and do as I please. A few quest lines, but none of the kill x or gather x tasks. Not something with FFA full loot. Preferably a fairly deep gear system with open application (If I can find it, steal it, or buy it, then I can use it without penalty). Housing would be a big plus as I need a home and a place to store my junk. Zero instancing. No battlegrounds or arenas. Gathering and crafting professions are a must and should be able to produce gear that's at least as good as dropped, purchased or stolen. I'd prefer it have a faction system that I can join after rolling my character. I don't want level to be a be-all end-all stat. I want to be able to group with higher or lower levels without hassle.
I would play this in an instant. Where is it?
Xsyon? Sounds like you might like it. It does have FFA Loot outside of your tribal or homestead lands, but you are pefectly safe inside your area.
No quest lines either, but Tribes can create quests for you to complete.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
That's actually a better analogy than you think it is. If you think you like socialism, but can't find a single real-world implementation of it that you like, then you don't like socialism. You might think you like it, but you're simply mistaken, as you dislike the consequences of actually implementing it in the real world.
It's one thing to dislike the first implementation of something that sounds good in theory. But if it's been tried enough different times by enough different people in enough different places in enough different ways, then eventually, if you still can't find an implementation you like, the problem isn't the people implementing it or their particular methods. The problem is that you don't like socialism, period. Or sandboxes, as is the topic for this post.
Compromise and try the Nordic version of socialism.If I say "you don't like breaking your leg", is that being judgmental? Or is it a simple statement of fact?
If UWO isn't AAA, then you've got too narrow of a definition of AAA. If UWO isn't AAA, then neither are LotRO, EQ2, Rift, AoC, or a lot of other games that we'd normally think of as AAA. I guess arguing that AAA takes something really huge, and that WoW and SWTOR are the only AAA MMORPGs ever made is at least defensible. But in that case, I'd say your definition is too narrow.
The reason socialism has never truely worked is because it has only ever been implemented by governments looking to exploit the facets of socialism that furthered their agenda of power and control. At any rate, the whole analogy is flawed because the variables involved in government classifications are distinctly different from the ones involved in developing and playing games (as if that needed to be said).
You're view of the world seems to be that if something doesn't or hasn't existed before, then it never will. This is not actually the case.
At the end of the day, the untapped potential of sandbox games is staggering. The reason people are generally discontent with sandboxes is because they can see all the unrealized possibilities. Not that it's easy or cheap to tap that potential.... But if a game studio with enough money and resources were to make a sandbox game then we might just catch a glimpse of the future potential of gaming. It's just that none of the adequately equipped studio's have made an honest attempt for quite some time (aka the beginning).
Runescape time cards are sold in Walmart. It doesn't get much more AAA than that. I guess you define that term by the polish or something?
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
Ah, so an item mall makes a game AAA? Well then, I guess WoW isn't an AAA game, either. Or does it only take something random in the item mall to make a game not AAA, so that WoW is AAA now, but wouldn't be if it sold you a $1 ticket with a 4% chance of winning a sparkly mount or some such?
You know what the item mall ships in UWO are, don't you? They're alternate versions of ships obtainable through normal gameplay, except that let you use them at lower levels. So if WoW let you buy level 80 greens in an item mall and use them at level 20, would that make WoW no longer AAA?
If you can't find a pasta dish in our restaurant that you like, then you're not a pasta fan.
Not always true...
If you can't find a pasta dish in the entire world that you like, then you aren't a pasta fan.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
Bad analogy. Something closer would be, if you can't find pasta that you like in any restaurant at all, then you don't like pasta. One particular restaurant might just be a bad restaurant, but not all restaurants are bad.
For me I am a sandbox fan and always find one to play at a particular time. Even if there is some things I dont like about it or the company.
A lot of people here must be one of these Observer guys since they know every outcome of every possible sandbox game that will ever be released.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
> implying that there are as many types of mmos as there are pasta
> Implying pasta and mmos have the same amount of time to develop their types and refine themselves.
> Imply that mmos can't possibly continue to evolve and come up with new unknown different ways to go about their model
My point is you make a whole lot of assumptions. a whole lot.
Just because there is no italian restaraunt that I like doesn't mean there isn't one being made, or that there wasn't one, or that one of them WAS my favorite until they screwed up the sauce, or that perhaps just perhaps MMOS have been around 20 years when Pasta has had generations to perfect itself.
MMOs are still in their infancy, to act like they are a fully fleshed out product is dilusional.
If you like any sandbox game right now, then you like bad games. wheeeee
Your analogy is as bad. If you would have just few pasta restaurants then yeah I can see that some pasta fan might not like any from those like 7-8 restaurants. Especially that some of them would serve old pasta or some kind of dish that is not really pasta anymore (UO) ,etc
Besides that kind of analogies are silly anyways.
You can like socialism or not. That's not the point of this thread, and I'm trying not to turn this into a political argument.
But if socialism is to be implemented at all, then it will inevitably have to be implemented by governments. And seeing to further their agenta of power and control is what governments do. If that's enough to ruin the implementation of socialism, then the problem is socialism.
Or to take another example, if you would like grouping, except that you don't like grouping with people because people are jerks, then you don't like grouping, period.
It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result.
If you try one pasta dish at one restaurant and don't like it, and then try a different pasta dish at a different restaurant and don't like it, and keep doing this for a while, then at some point, the reasonable thing to do is to give up and accept that you just don't like pasta.
It's not 100% proof that there will never be a pasta dish that you like. But eventually it becomes highly probable that you'd have a better chance of finding something that you like by trying a different type of food. Maybe you should try burritos and see if you like them better.
So it is with sandboxes. If you try one sandbox game and don't like it, fine. Maybe it was just a bad game, or did some things you disliked. Maybe you'd like some other sandbox game better. But if you've tried all the sandbox games out and didn't like any of them, then maybe you should consider giving up on sandboxes and playing some other games that aren't sandboxes.
Look I'm tired of analogies, you are wrong, and everyone is telling you so.
Name a non buggy sand box game?
Can't?
Ok so you are saying that all sand box players should endure the buggy horrible MESS that is sandbox games right now?
THERE ARE NO COMPLETED SANDBOX GAMES! They're all broken indy pieces of crap! Saying otherwise is down right lying to yourself.
The reason no one who likes sandboxes likes current ones is because .... drum roll please.... THEY SUCK!
Or, considering there are a finite amount of MMOs available and perhaps a handful that would fit the said criteria, the best analogy would be:
Just because i don't fancy the pick of those 4 or 5 women stood at the bar with rectums for faces and barely intelligible English, doesn't mean i am going 'fruity'
Name one and I will give you a list for why it is not good or it is simply too old.
My gaming blog
The current selection of sandbox games sucks save Fallen Earth IMO. I liked that one and still dabble in it from time to time.
Otherwise that's why I've renewed my accounts to AC, and to a lesser extent UO.
Einherjar_LC says: WTB the true successor to UO or Asheron's Call pst!