there is a difference between "everything is crap" and "nothing is to my liking"
What difference are you talking about? Wording something in a nicer way or what?
I would have to guess you are just going on word choice.
Simply because its valid for an opinion to be: Nothing is to my liking, because everything is crap. (there is no difference there, its simply an explination to the opinion).
I really don't know what you are getting at with that. To me the point is games are subjective and everyone has their opinions. As long as opinions are expressed as such they are 100% valid.
My issue is when someone takes their opinion and tries to state it as a universal fact or... declares the opinions they don't agree with as invalid.
You can do that in an environment based on Objective facts. Its a bit harder to do in a subjective environment.
The reason I posted in this thread is because the OP tries to invalidate opinions they don't agree with. Neither side of the arguement is "correct", because its subjective opinion. Quite simply if you are sick of certain threads... don't read them, use the block function or both.
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.
Horrendous example you make there Quiz.
You can't find a FPS game that you like because you don't like FPS games.
That's radically different than..
You can't find a FPS game that you like because there are no FPS games that are made well in your OPINION.
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.
Probability and logic are not interchangeable. The probability that you will like pasta might be low, but that does not mean you will never find pasta that you like... ahhh...!
Fair enough. But after a while, does it not become unreasonable to insist that you certainly do like pasta?
I find myself going back there once or twice a year, imo that is the best overall sandbox game around.
The most talked about reason for people not likeing a sandbox game, is graphics. You cannot explain it to players, they just dont want to believe that you have to give up graphics if you want quality gameplay, especially with huge areas to build on and explore, they just dont get it.
Most of todays MMO players are spoiled bratts or just mean spirited, they want it all and they want it yesterday.
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.
Probability and logic are not interchangeable. The probability that you will like pasta might be low, but that does not mean you will never find pasta that you like... ahhh...!
Fair enough. But after a while, does it not become unreasonable to insist that you certainly do like pasta?
Sure why not... if you have never ever liked something. It may become reasonable at some point to figure out you don't like it.
Its a far different story than say... playing UO and loving it.. until its changed. Then playing SWG and loving it until its changed
Then never finding another game of that type you like since.
Using your example... You loved the first pasta dish you try. They then change it and you don't like it. They won't change it back... every other place makes pasta the same exact *new* way so obviously you don't like it.
Now if you could make the original dish yourself... you would love it because that didn't change.
The problem is you for some reason need $50 million to $100 million plus to make the pasta or just can't do it yourself. Nobody else will make it for you... they will only make the new and improved pasta that you hate.
I'm not sure where this becomes that hard to follow.
Again going back to your example. It doesn't mean you hate pasta... it simply means you don't like the way everyone has decided to prepare it. Obviously if someone decides to offer the original version you tried and really enjoyed... you'll be back to um eating pasta.
I'm working on the premise that smaller mmorpgs could offer sandbox features and accessible gameplay and good performance on a smaller scale with player investment/fun -> overall more rewarding. "It got old fast" was something I heard a lot in the first few months of WAR. "It never got going" could be said of a lot of sandbox mmorpgs?
Smaller mmorpgs might innovative/differentiate from flashy mainstream titles is their way of carving out a niche with less risk of a) "investment cow" keeling over dead during development or b) ending up sh*tting all over what works a lot better as a simpler, experimental project & therefore more chance of it being finished according to the intended vision... if less ambitious in scale & assets?
The final post for this thread should be: Its your choice what you want to play. There are all types of games out there. Every single game doesnt appeal to everyone.
Some people like themeparks and some people like sandboxes. Some people like FFA PVP and some people dont. Some people like facerollers, and some people like complexity. Some people like something that is not out there but dont play anything. Its all weighing the options.
The final choice comes down to each individual weighing what they like or dont like about a particular game and choosing what best fits them. For example, I would like an immersion life-like(non-spaceship), survivalist type sandbox like mortal without the bugs and hackers where the developers dont reward murderers as much but still like the danger and adrenalin of full-loot pvp. So I go back and forth between mortal online and darkfall and wont play the themeparks because I get bored doing so.
Hypothetically, lets say that the only 2 games out there were EVE and Rift. I would have to weigh which I hate more... playing a spaceship or playing a themepark or playing nothing and just going out to mmorpg.com and complaining about the games I dont want to play.
And just because I feel that way doesnt mean everyone has to.
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.
Probability and logic are not interchangeable. The probability that you will like pasta might be low, but that does not mean you will never find pasta that you like... ahhh...!
Fair enough. But after a while, does it not become unreasonable to insist that you certainly do like pasta?
Sure I guess. But you've made an assumption that a lot of people here have never enjoyed any previous sandbox games. As someone else has already pointed out, a fair number of people have enjoyed sandbox games at some point in time before they were changed in a drastic way. For me, this game was SWG. I would probably still be playing SWG today if certain things had not changed. Of this I have little doubt.
And as for our working analogy, it would be like saying someone took my favorite pasta dish and decided to change it by adding sweaty sock broth and rat hair. Just slightly less appetizing!
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
Did Quizzical (OP) ever give a LIST of these good sandbox games to which he's referring, by any chance? I didn't read the entire thread, so.....anyone able to copy/paste a quick recap?
Did Quizzical (OP) ever give a LIST of these good sandbox games to which he's referring, by any chance? I didn't read the entire thread, so.....anyone able to copy/paste a quick recap?
I agree with Quizzical to a certain extent, in that I feel a lot of people who say there arent any good sandboxes have way too high standards. However, I wouldnt overlook the fact that every sandbox out right now does have some major flaws, or is just plain awkward for some (EVE combat).
A game needs to come out with a sandbox foundation with themepark elements. Basically:
Darkfall with some quests and a seperation of noob zones. Add a skill cap and afk auto-kick and you would have a very fun game.
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.
Probability and logic are not interchangeable. The probability that you will like pasta might be low, but that does not mean you will never find pasta that you like... ahhh...!
Fair enough. But after a while, does it not become unreasonable to insist that you certainly do like pasta?
Sure I guess. But you've made an assumption that a lot of people here have never enjoyed any previous sandbox games. As someone else has already pointed out, a fair number of people have enjoyed sandbox games at some point in time before they were changed in a drastic way. For me, this game was SWG. I would probably still be playing SWG today if certain things had not changed. Of this I have little doubt.
And as for our working analogy, it would be like saying someone took my favorite pasta dish and decided to change it by adding sweaty sock broth and rat hair. Just slightly less appetizing!
In which case, it's also possible that they used to like sandboxes and don't anymore.
One problem is that real games sometimes can't compete with nostalgia. One major reason why the pre-NGE version of SWG is so popular today is that it was taken away. If the NGE had never happened, then many of the players who want pre-NGE SWG today would have kept playing it, gotten sick of it, and moved on. And then they wouldn't think it was as great as they do now. Not being allowed to have something sometimes makes you want it more.
Now, that's not the only reason there were people who liked the early versions of SWG. Had the NGE never happened and the game never had the plug pulled, there would still be some people playing SWG today. And there would still be people who said they played the game for years, but eventually got tired of it. But I'm willing to bet that a very large fraction of the people on both of those categories have since found some other sandbox game that they like.
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.
Unfortunetly me subscribing to the games you consider to be sandbox, does not legitimize me as a sandbox 'fan'. You do not define the terms. As much as you wish you did. Its a changeable set of principals, which if taken to the nth degree would render most games outside of the definition. Relative levels of sandbox differ greatly.
I would argue that 'theme parks' fall considerably short of the grade also, but thats a whole other argument concerning the genre of MMORPGs in general. By the by.
I am going to argue that the implementation of every 'sandbox' MMO is so bad it ruined it for me. However that doesn't translate to every MMO in the future, and for you to imply so is conceited. I really dont like 'sandbox' games in their current guise(s). If you consider an awful cash shop or the lack of combat as mere details in a game then I pity your ineptitude (whilst we're being conceited).
I wont only like a 'theoretical perfect game in my head'. As I said, 'sandboxes', in their current form, within the context of gaming and that could be achieved within the industry, fail way short of the grade. I'm excited for games in the future, some with more sandbox-esque elements, some without. I'm not quite sure why you brought Utopianism into it. I'm not quite sure what is wrong in identifying when things can be superior. Saying I've disliked every game that has ever existed (and the perfect theoretical game if it existed), is beyond moronic, so congrats on that one, I thought such levels of stupidity were conversely utopian so thanks for pushing the boundries.
The term sandbox does not by proxy equate to 'what is in the market now'.
I'm not sure why everyone is giving Quiz a hard time here. I think he may have a point. 1st, I think you need to differentiate a few things.
- There is a difference between people who have never found a sandbox they think is good and people who have played a sandbox they enjoyed, but simply gotten tired of it and quit. The latter thus are eliminated from the group being discussed.
- When looking at the people who enjoyed a sandbox but tired of it and quit, these people really should not fall into the category of those who say there are no good sanboxes out. What they are really saying is that they don't like any other sandboxes that are out. Those other games are still out, and most likely still good, they are just done with them (the exception to this could be SWG players, which I will discuss further down). That eliminates these people from the subject group.
- The next group are the previously refernced group of those who loved SWG. To many, this was the perfect sandbox apparently. I am truly sorry for what SOE did to your game and I'm not sure there has been a bigger injustice in the gaming world. However, it seems that many of these people also are unable to find another sandbox they enjoy. Is it possible that after trying all the other options out there, that maybe you don't really like sandboxes? Isn't it possible to like a particular game without truly liking the genre? I hate racing games...truly, utterly despise them. However, my favorite game for the Nintenfo 64 years ago was Excitebike 64. Still hate racing games, but have wonderful fond memories of playing Excitebike 64 with my friends.
- Now, on to the people who have never found a sandbox game they like. There are those who have only tried a few games and just not been happy. I'll eliminate them as their sample size is just too small to consider. Then there are the people who have tried every sandbox released since Al Gore created the interweb and never found a game they would consider good. Ah ha! These are the subject target! If you have really tried all those available games and didn't like any of them, but are clinging to the hope of your yet to be released perfect sandbox...then maybe, just maybe you really don't like sandboxes. Isn't that a possibility?
Sure I guess. But you've made an assumption that a lot of people here have never enjoyed any previous sandbox games. As someone else has already pointed out, a fair number of people have enjoyed sandbox games at some point in time before they were changed in a drastic way. For me, this game was SWG. I would probably still be playing SWG today if certain things had not changed. Of this I have little doubt.
And as for our working analogy, it would be like saying someone took my favorite pasta dish and decided to change it by adding sweaty sock broth and rat hair. Just slightly less appetizing!
In which case, it's also possible that they used to like sandboxes and don't anymore.
One problem is that real games sometimes can't compete with nostalgia. One major reason why the pre-NGE version of SWG is so popular today is that it was taken away. If the NGE had never happened, then many of the players who want pre-NGE SWG today would have kept playing it, gotten sick of it, and moved on. And then they wouldn't think it was as great as they do now. Not being allowed to have something sometimes makes you want it more.
Now, that's not the only reason there were people who liked the early versions of SWG. Had the NGE never happened and the game never had the plug pulled, there would still be some people playing SWG today. And there would still be people who said they played the game for years, but eventually got tired of it. But I'm willing to bet that a very large fraction of the people on both of those categories have since found some other sandbox game that they like.
Sure. I can't really argue with those things because it's possible and maybe even likely.
Here's the thing though. Maybe I would have played SWG for 7 or 8 years before getting tired. But during that time, graphics tech would have improved, hardware would have improved, better features might be available... and it's very likely many of these things could not be added to an existing engine or not without causing a lot of implementation woes.
But like many gamers, I want to have my cake and eat it too. And to be perfectly honest, I believe the game I'm looking for is called Arche Age. But for the sake of this discussion, I think the name of the game is irrelevent. Just because I enjoy a certain style of gameplay, that does not mean I should have to sacrifice other things that I find nearly as important: graphics, client stability, server stability, customer service, a stable community population and a payment model I can justify over the longterm just to name a few. Yes, gameplay trumps all of these. But a combination of them sucking is probably enough for me to take my dollar elsewhere.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
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.
There are no good sandbox games that I like. SWG was my favorite sandbox game and all others that I have tried are trash...to me anyway.
For every sandbox game i have played, i can pretty exactly say, what i dont like about it, and what therefore ultimatly kept me fom playing them. The point is, that most games do have some features i like, (obviously, often the sandbox features) and of course some i do not like. Sadly, all the games i tested, have too many features, (well, not features, just "things") i do not like.
And before someone says "Well, what you want is then most likely impossible!" i say, that ArcheAge looks like its pretty close to my "dream game", because:
1. it does not look and plays like its 10 years old
2. Its seems not to have clunky, boring combat, a clunky and stupid UI, etc
3. It is being developed with AAA funding, which lowers the chance, but of course not eridicates, of all kind of stupid stuff hapening with the game.
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.
Probability and logic are not interchangeable. The probability that you will like pasta might be low, but that does not mean you will never find pasta that you like... ahhh...!
Fair enough. But after a while, does it not become unreasonable to insist that you certainly do like pasta?
Sure I guess. But you've made an assumption that a lot of people here have never enjoyed any previous sandbox games. As someone else has already pointed out, a fair number of people have enjoyed sandbox games at some point in time before they were changed in a drastic way. For me, this game was SWG. I would probably still be playing SWG today if certain things had not changed. Of this I have little doubt.
And as for our working analogy, it would be like saying someone took my favorite pasta dish and decided to change it by adding sweaty sock broth and rat hair. Just slightly less appetizing!
But I'm willing to bet that a very large fraction of the people on both of those categories have since found some other sandbox game that they like.
Now that SWG is gone, there aren't any other good sandbox mmo's that I like...even though you insist that there are.
Different people like different things. Some people like the sandbox genre but dont like anything out there now. Other people like sandboxes and settle with one of the them out now. Im sure some people like sandboxes and are playing what they would describe as their perfect game. The same could be said of the themepark genre.
OP is very manipulative. Your taking someones words and twisting there meaning around your own definitions. Your insulting an entire playerbase. Telling people there is a vast sea of AAA sandbox games waiting to be played, and only linking one that isn't AAA by anyone's standards but your own does not give you or anyone else the right to call someone out on there preferred style of game
The games that have released in the past claiming to be sandbox are indeed, sandbox. But they are not polished in the sense a AAA game is required. Darkfall is not AAA, Mortal is not AAA, Fallen Earth is not AAA, Dawntide, Wurm, Earthrise, Xyson... none of them are AAA.
Uncharted Waters is not a AAA mmo. Its done by a f2p company. 30 years of experience means nothing, I have 15-20 years of playing games, but that doesnt make me a professional gamer. Several hundred million in annual revenue, this is a completely false statement that you just pulled out of your ass on a whim. Considering the highest grossing game is WoW, sadly, and that pulled around 500 mill. Where as the next highest grossing games pulled between 50-100mil, and uncharted waters is no where on the list.
Koei is the only thing you could use to dispute the above.
I would go as far as to say YOU are not a fan of sandbox MMO's. By accepting these terribly made and executed games as being AAA sandboxes is only hurting the sandbox genre more. Your enticing developers to think that making a completely buggy game and releasing an unfinished product (You fully know what I mean by this, dont play stupid) is ok.
All we have here people is a terrible troll, or an attention whore. I will go with the latter considering his/her 6000+ posts.
"In the immediate future, we have this one, and then weve got another one that is actually going to be so were going to have, what we want to do, is in January, what were targeting to do, this may or may not happen, so you cant hold me to it. But what were targeting to do, is have a fun anniversary to the Ilum shenanigans that happened. An alien race might invade, and they might crash into Ilum and there might be some new activities that happen on the planet." ~Gabe Amatangelo
Comments
What difference are you talking about? Wording something in a nicer way or what?
I would have to guess you are just going on word choice.
Simply because its valid for an opinion to be: Nothing is to my liking, because everything is crap. (there is no difference there, its simply an explination to the opinion).
I really don't know what you are getting at with that. To me the point is games are subjective and everyone has their opinions. As long as opinions are expressed as such they are 100% valid.
My issue is when someone takes their opinion and tries to state it as a universal fact or... declares the opinions they don't agree with as invalid.
You can do that in an environment based on Objective facts. Its a bit harder to do in a subjective environment.
The reason I posted in this thread is because the OP tries to invalidate opinions they don't agree with. Neither side of the arguement is "correct", because its subjective opinion. Quite simply if you are sick of certain threads... don't read them, use the block function or both.
Horrendous example you make there Quiz.
You can't find a FPS game that you like because you don't like FPS games.
That's radically different than..
You can't find a FPS game that you like because there are no FPS games that are made well in your OPINION.
Fair enough. But after a while, does it not become unreasonable to insist that you certainly do like pasta?
The last good sandbox game that to release in my opinion was UO.
Darkfall could have been great, they went the PvP route though.
EVE online
I find myself going back there once or twice a year, imo that is the best overall sandbox game around.
The most talked about reason for people not likeing a sandbox game, is graphics. You cannot explain it to players, they just dont want to believe that you have to give up graphics if you want quality gameplay, especially with huge areas to build on and explore, they just dont get it.
Most of todays MMO players are spoiled bratts or just mean spirited, they want it all and they want it yesterday.
Sure why not... if you have never ever liked something. It may become reasonable at some point to figure out you don't like it.
Its a far different story than say... playing UO and loving it.. until its changed. Then playing SWG and loving it until its changed
Then never finding another game of that type you like since.
Using your example... You loved the first pasta dish you try. They then change it and you don't like it. They won't change it back... every other place makes pasta the same exact *new* way so obviously you don't like it.
Now if you could make the original dish yourself... you would love it because that didn't change.
The problem is you for some reason need $50 million to $100 million plus to make the pasta or just can't do it yourself. Nobody else will make it for you... they will only make the new and improved pasta that you hate.
I'm not sure where this becomes that hard to follow.
Again going back to your example. It doesn't mean you hate pasta... it simply means you don't like the way everyone has decided to prepare it. Obviously if someone decides to offer the original version you tried and really enjoyed... you'll be back to um eating pasta.
I'm working on the premise that smaller mmorpgs could offer sandbox features and accessible gameplay and good performance on a smaller scale with player investment/fun -> overall more rewarding. "It got old fast" was something I heard a lot in the first few months of WAR. "It never got going" could be said of a lot of sandbox mmorpgs?
Smaller mmorpgs might innovative/differentiate from flashy mainstream titles is their way of carving out a niche with less risk of a) "investment cow" keeling over dead during development or b) ending up sh*tting all over what works a lot better as a simpler, experimental project & therefore more chance of it being finished according to the intended vision... if less ambitious in scale & assets?
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
The final post for this thread should be: Its your choice what you want to play. There are all types of games out there. Every single game doesnt appeal to everyone.
Some people like themeparks and some people like sandboxes. Some people like FFA PVP and some people dont. Some people like facerollers, and some people like complexity. Some people like something that is not out there but dont play anything. Its all weighing the options.
The final choice comes down to each individual weighing what they like or dont like about a particular game and choosing what best fits them. For example, I would like an immersion life-like(non-spaceship), survivalist type sandbox like mortal without the bugs and hackers where the developers dont reward murderers as much but still like the danger and adrenalin of full-loot pvp. So I go back and forth between mortal online and darkfall and wont play the themeparks because I get bored doing so.
Hypothetically, lets say that the only 2 games out there were EVE and Rift. I would have to weigh which I hate more... playing a spaceship or playing a themepark or playing nothing and just going out to mmorpg.com and complaining about the games I dont want to play.
And just because I feel that way doesnt mean everyone has to.
Sure I guess. But you've made an assumption that a lot of people here have never enjoyed any previous sandbox games. As someone else has already pointed out, a fair number of people have enjoyed sandbox games at some point in time before they were changed in a drastic way. For me, this game was SWG. I would probably still be playing SWG today if certain things had not changed. Of this I have little doubt.
And as for our working analogy, it would be like saying someone took my favorite pasta dish and decided to change it by adding sweaty sock broth and rat hair. Just slightly less appetizing!
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
Did Quizzical (OP) ever give a LIST of these good sandbox games to which he's referring, by any chance? I didn't read the entire thread, so.....anyone able to copy/paste a quick recap?
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
I think it was uncharted waters onlineA game needs to come out with a sandbox foundation with themepark elements. Basically:
Darkfall with some quests and a seperation of noob zones. Add a skill cap and afk auto-kick and you would have a very fun game.
more likely, not a fan of gps.
In which case, it's also possible that they used to like sandboxes and don't anymore.
One problem is that real games sometimes can't compete with nostalgia. One major reason why the pre-NGE version of SWG is so popular today is that it was taken away. If the NGE had never happened, then many of the players who want pre-NGE SWG today would have kept playing it, gotten sick of it, and moved on. And then they wouldn't think it was as great as they do now. Not being allowed to have something sometimes makes you want it more.
Now, that's not the only reason there were people who liked the early versions of SWG. Had the NGE never happened and the game never had the plug pulled, there would still be some people playing SWG today. And there would still be people who said they played the game for years, but eventually got tired of it. But I'm willing to bet that a very large fraction of the people on both of those categories have since found some other sandbox game that they like.
Unfortunetly me subscribing to the games you consider to be sandbox, does not legitimize me as a sandbox 'fan'. You do not define the terms. As much as you wish you did. Its a changeable set of principals, which if taken to the nth degree would render most games outside of the definition. Relative levels of sandbox differ greatly.
I would argue that 'theme parks' fall considerably short of the grade also, but thats a whole other argument concerning the genre of MMORPGs in general. By the by.
I am going to argue that the implementation of every 'sandbox' MMO is so bad it ruined it for me. However that doesn't translate to every MMO in the future, and for you to imply so is conceited. I really dont like 'sandbox' games in their current guise(s). If you consider an awful cash shop or the lack of combat as mere details in a game then I pity your ineptitude (whilst we're being conceited).
I wont only like a 'theoretical perfect game in my head'. As I said, 'sandboxes', in their current form, within the context of gaming and that could be achieved within the industry, fail way short of the grade. I'm excited for games in the future, some with more sandbox-esque elements, some without. I'm not quite sure why you brought Utopianism into it. I'm not quite sure what is wrong in identifying when things can be superior. Saying I've disliked every game that has ever existed (and the perfect theoretical game if it existed), is beyond moronic, so congrats on that one, I thought such levels of stupidity were conversely utopian so thanks for pushing the boundries.
The term sandbox does not by proxy equate to 'what is in the market now'.
Next you'll be arguing that Stalinism = Socialism
As a sanbox fan I'd like to point out that this is a bad thread and was much more interesting when it was about pasta.
I'm not sure why everyone is giving Quiz a hard time here. I think he may have a point. 1st, I think you need to differentiate a few things.
- There is a difference between people who have never found a sandbox they think is good and people who have played a sandbox they enjoyed, but simply gotten tired of it and quit. The latter thus are eliminated from the group being discussed.
- When looking at the people who enjoyed a sandbox but tired of it and quit, these people really should not fall into the category of those who say there are no good sanboxes out. What they are really saying is that they don't like any other sandboxes that are out. Those other games are still out, and most likely still good, they are just done with them (the exception to this could be SWG players, which I will discuss further down). That eliminates these people from the subject group.
- The next group are the previously refernced group of those who loved SWG. To many, this was the perfect sandbox apparently. I am truly sorry for what SOE did to your game and I'm not sure there has been a bigger injustice in the gaming world. However, it seems that many of these people also are unable to find another sandbox they enjoy. Is it possible that after trying all the other options out there, that maybe you don't really like sandboxes? Isn't it possible to like a particular game without truly liking the genre? I hate racing games...truly, utterly despise them. However, my favorite game for the Nintenfo 64 years ago was Excitebike 64. Still hate racing games, but have wonderful fond memories of playing Excitebike 64 with my friends.
- Now, on to the people who have never found a sandbox game they like. There are those who have only tried a few games and just not been happy. I'll eliminate them as their sample size is just too small to consider. Then there are the people who have tried every sandbox released since Al Gore created the interweb and never found a game they would consider good. Ah ha! These are the subject target! If you have really tried all those available games and didn't like any of them, but are clinging to the hope of your yet to be released perfect sandbox...then maybe, just maybe you really don't like sandboxes. Isn't that a possibility?
Sure. I can't really argue with those things because it's possible and maybe even likely.
Here's the thing though. Maybe I would have played SWG for 7 or 8 years before getting tired. But during that time, graphics tech would have improved, hardware would have improved, better features might be available... and it's very likely many of these things could not be added to an existing engine or not without causing a lot of implementation woes.
But like many gamers, I want to have my cake and eat it too. And to be perfectly honest, I believe the game I'm looking for is called Arche Age. But for the sake of this discussion, I think the name of the game is irrelevent. Just because I enjoy a certain style of gameplay, that does not mean I should have to sacrifice other things that I find nearly as important: graphics, client stability, server stability, customer service, a stable community population and a payment model I can justify over the longterm just to name a few. Yes, gameplay trumps all of these. But a combination of them sucking is probably enough for me to take my dollar elsewhere.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
There are no good sandbox games that I like. SWG was my favorite sandbox game and all others that I have tried are trash...to me anyway.
I disagree.
For every sandbox game i have played, i can pretty exactly say, what i dont like about it, and what therefore ultimatly kept me fom playing them. The point is, that most games do have some features i like, (obviously, often the sandbox features) and of course some i do not like. Sadly, all the games i tested, have too many features, (well, not features, just "things") i do not like.
And before someone says "Well, what you want is then most likely impossible!" i say, that ArcheAge looks like its pretty close to my "dream game", because:
1. it does not look and plays like its 10 years old
2. Its seems not to have clunky, boring combat, a clunky and stupid UI, etc
3. It is being developed with AAA funding, which lowers the chance, but of course not eridicates, of all kind of stupid stuff hapening with the game.
Yummy. I'm sold, thats the pasta dish for me.
Now that SWG is gone, there aren't any other good sandbox mmo's that I like...even though you insist that there are.
I dont see the need to continue debating this.
Different people like different things. Some people like the sandbox genre but dont like anything out there now. Other people like sandboxes and settle with one of the them out now. Im sure some people like sandboxes and are playing what they would describe as their perfect game. The same could be said of the themepark genre.
OP is very manipulative. Your taking someones words and twisting there meaning around your own definitions. Your insulting an entire playerbase. Telling people there is a vast sea of AAA sandbox games waiting to be played, and only linking one that isn't AAA by anyone's standards but your own does not give you or anyone else the right to call someone out on there preferred style of game
The games that have released in the past claiming to be sandbox are indeed, sandbox. But they are not polished in the sense a AAA game is required. Darkfall is not AAA, Mortal is not AAA, Fallen Earth is not AAA, Dawntide, Wurm, Earthrise, Xyson... none of them are AAA.
Uncharted Waters is not a AAA mmo. Its done by a f2p company. 30 years of experience means nothing, I have 15-20 years of playing games, but that doesnt make me a professional gamer. Several hundred million in annual revenue, this is a completely false statement that you just pulled out of your ass on a whim. Considering the highest grossing game is WoW, sadly, and that pulled around 500 mill. Where as the next highest grossing games pulled between 50-100mil, and uncharted waters is no where on the list.
Koei is the only thing you could use to dispute the above.
I would go as far as to say YOU are not a fan of sandbox MMO's. By accepting these terribly made and executed games as being AAA sandboxes is only hurting the sandbox genre more. Your enticing developers to think that making a completely buggy game and releasing an unfinished product (You fully know what I mean by this, dont play stupid) is ok.
All we have here people is a terrible troll, or an attention whore. I will go with the latter considering his/her 6000+ posts.
"In the immediate future, we have this one, and then weve got another one that is actually going to be so were going to have, what we want to do, is in January, what were targeting to do, this may or may not happen, so you cant hold me to it. But what were targeting to do, is have a fun anniversary to the Ilum shenanigans that happened. An alien race might invade, and they might crash into Ilum and there might be some new activities that happen on the planet." ~Gabe Amatangelo