Sure, I agree with the OP. people don't want the freedom of a sandbox game. That is why Skyrim and Minecraft didn't sell well, right?
Just because no sandbox MMO has sold well untill now, doesn't automatically mean that there isn't enough interest for it. Maybe they are just more difficult to create or the big bucks are just not willing to deviate from what they see as the safe path (themepark).
I would argue that Skyrim is an open-world, non-linear themepark, not a sandbox. Unless I missed the parts where you could do anything you wanted (farm, build, make music....ect).
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
Ya know, that's what I want an open non linear theme park, i have no interest in farming or owning a post office. I wanna kill stuff while exploring interesting locations.
Indeed! I'm calling BS on the notion that there is this mythical mass of players that want a sandbox virtual world MMO. If there was one, I would hear about it, devs would see it, and there would be games for that crowd. As it stands, there's hardly one, and it has been like that for so long that merely saying there hasn't been the right one yet is not going to cut it. Many have tried, many have failed and even if these games were any good they would've showed much more interest from the public, don't you think?
How can you have a "massive" virtual world when you only have a handful of players to fill it. And how can you get funding to something that has such a small audience. You are doomed to wander from indie game to indie game...
Admit it. You are to rest of the MMORPG players what LARPers are to P&P role players. "Regular people" snicker at people who play D&D but everyone laughs at LARPers (no offense meant - but they do).
Ben "Yahtzee" Crosshaw hit the nail in the head: -"Eve players are to nerds what nerds are to normal people."
Even if some recent themeparks have failed or will fail in your eyes, I'm quite confident in saying that there will be no major shift towards sandboxes of any sort. People still love themeparks - they just don't like shitty games, thats all.
NOBODY here ever claimed there is a massive crowd for a PURE Sandbox! Nobody. I don't know whom you are talking to here.
What people rightfully DID claim however is, that many would enjoy sandbox ELEMENTS to enrich otherwise sterile and limited pure themeparks. And I think there would be many, who would enjoy such elements. Why people always must try to negate an argument by taking it to an extreme nobody really said is beyond me.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Indeed! I'm calling BS on the notion that there is this mythical mass of players that want a sandbox virtual world MMO. If there was one, I would hear about it, devs would see it, and there would be games for that crowd. As it stands, there's hardly one, and it has been like that for so long that merely saying there hasn't been the right one yet is not going to cut it. Many have tried, many have failed and even if these games were any good they would've showed much more interest from the public, don't you think?
How can you have a "massive" virtual world when you only have a handful of players to fill it. And how can you get funding to something that has such a small audience. You are doomed to wander from indie game to indie game...
Admit it. You are to rest of the MMORPG players what LARPers are to P&P role players. "Regular people" snicker at people who play D&D but everyone laughs at LARPers (no offense meant - but they do).
Ben "Yahtzee" Crosshaw hit the nail in the head: -"Eve players are to nerds what nerds are to normal people."
Even if some recent themeparks have failed or will fail in your eyes, I'm quite confident in saying that there will be no major shift towards sandboxes of any sort. People still love themeparks - they just don't like shitty games, thats all.
So now that you are done belittling everyone and their opinion and taste, do you have any arguments besides your "feeling" and the absence of evidence.
Because the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The market will move to where the business exists. Like survival of the fittest, if sandbox games attracted the largest share, the style the UO presented (aka sandbox) would have continued to dominate in other games rather than EQ style (aka themepark) which dominates today. [mod edit]
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Ya know, that's what I want an open non linear theme park, i have no interest in farming or owning a post office. I wanna kill stuff while exploring interesting locations.
And the crowd wanting that is probably bigger than the crowd wanting a sandbox.
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
Sure, I agree with the OP. people don't want the freedom of a sandbox game. That is why Skyrim and Minecraft didn't sell well, right?
Just because no sandbox MMO has sold well untill now, doesn't automatically mean that there isn't enough interest for it. Maybe they are just more difficult to create or the big bucks are just not willing to deviate from what they see as the safe path (themepark).
I would argue that Skyrim is an open-world, non-linear themepark, not a sandbox. Unless I missed the parts where you could do anything you wanted (farm, build, make music....ect).
It is about as close as you can get with a rpg. The concept of a RPG is restricted by default imo. You mentioned this: 'the parts where you could do anything you wanted (farm, build, make music....ect)' Imo it shows why it is a lot more difficult to create this in MMORPG form. The more choice a developer wants to give to you, the more work it becomes to create it.
That is why I also mentioned Minecraft as another example which you chose to ignore for some reason. Unless you don't see that game as a sandbox game either. Then nvm, because I really don't feel like some sandbox semantics debate. I have personally a very lose definition of the term sandbox. To me it doesn't require specific features, because those are just about your personal preference. The reason why I mention this is because you can't create a game that lets you do EVERYTHING. Every sandbox game has restrictions.
There's a plenty big sandbox crowd out there, thing is, most of them have given up on the MMO genres ability to scratch their itch.
But with minecraft still being one of the most played games out there, I think the demand for "sandbox" type games is there. Now all we need are these sleezball companies to quit making smash and grab rip-offs and actually release some quality MMO games.
Of course, most companies that try usually wind up publishing products that are either buggy messes, or nothing but a griefers paradise (MO and Darkfall, I'm lookin at you). Seems the only company to get it right is CCP.
What is the point of this thread other than to insult other people? I get warnings for much less overt jabs at people.
OP's just venting over the declining interest in traditional themeparks. Can't blame him really, I was distrout when AAA developers labeled sandbox as too risky. In the end we are going to see more and more Sandbox themepark hybrids than anything else. Traditional Themepark is pretty much dead, traditional sandbox is considered to risky, a mix is going to be the safest route in most developers eyes.
I like theme-parks cause the good ones have instances or dungeons and running them can be fun for a while; but I like sandbox games cause they tend to offer interesting things to work towards however they tend to lack PVE and solo play options and tend to drain my time reserves with little to keep me interested in the constant struggle to hold on to what I do get(usually with hardcore sandboxes like Eve).
I really think more games should use the dual world rule system that mimics GW2. You need real good solo play because we never start out playing in groups in any mmo. I like group search tools and events that make it easy to jump in to a group and do something fun. But you need grand pvp goals and personal stations or what have you, too, for that sense of evolving world scheme.But whatever type of game it is, it's always better if it has spaceships
Truth is we want the game to be fun weather it is sandy or parky and when you give us something that is broken or has features that suck the life out of it there are consequences. Usually less money for your company.
Darkfall was close but mostly there is little room for solo stuff in sandy games because your just setting yourself up for a 1 on five steam roll. And where are the raid experiences in Hardcore games; that is what I want. WoW was the first raid mmo that I played and it was really done well but it seems to get left out and a hard spawn gets substituted in for it like that is more fun; it's not by the way.
I would like to see a hardcore world and parky world in one game. Sort of a GW2 with a 3rd hard core PVP world with player owned stuff and make it SCI-FI please.
I guarantee if done right we will show our thanks in money.
Trouble is that it is hard to get a group of gamers together that understand and are also really good programmers, I think.
Sure, I agree with the OP. people don't want the freedom of a sandbox game. That is why Skyrim and Minecraft didn't sell well, right?
Just because no sandbox MMO has sold well untill now, doesn't automatically mean that there isn't enough interest for it. Maybe they are just more difficult to create or the big bucks are just not willing to deviate from what they see as the safe path (themepark).
I would argue that Skyrim is an open-world, non-linear themepark, not a sandbox. Unless I missed the parts where you could do anything you wanted (farm, build, make music....ect).
It is about as close as you can get with a rpg. The concept of a RPG is restricted by default imo. You mentioned this: 'the parts where you could do anything you wanted (farm, build, make music....ect)' Imo it shows why it is a lot more difficult to create this in MMORPG form. The more choice a developer wants to give to you, the more work it becomes to create it.
That is why I also mentioned Minecraft as another example which you chose to ignore for some reason. Unless you don't see that game as a sandbox game either. Then nvm, because I really don't feel like some sandbox semantics debate. I have personally a very lose definition of the term sandbox. To me it doesn't require specific features, because those are just about your personal preference. The reason why I mention this is because you can't create a game that gives you lets you do EVERYTHING. Every sandbox game has restrictions.
I ignored Minecraft because it is a sandbox, IMO. My point was to show that those two games are not similar.
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
What is the point of this thread other than to insult other people? I get warnings for much less overt jabs at people.
I know right? Moderation at its finest right here. Not only that, but the OP even KNEW he was trolling, and creating a topic that would flame, proof is his freaking picture he linked, a fire suit, really? It's one thing when someone replies to an OP with a picture of one, but knowing what will come before you hit, "Post Message" just seems down right stupid IMO.
Great job MMORPG... jumped on that one real fast.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
I have a game I can play now thats a sandbox and I always play a sandbox in the future.
I dont care what themeparks are out, who plays them, how many play, etc as long as I have something I like to play.
If there was no Mortal Online, I would probably play Darkfall. If that dies I would probably play Salem. If that isnt there I would probably play Xyson or Wurm. If those arent around I would probably play Archeage. If that isnt around. I would play UO, EVE or wait for Embers of Caerus.
I really dont care if sandboxes stay niche or not. Im having fun now and will always have something to play.
Randomly killing stuff while exploring "interesting places" sounds like the most boring gaming experience in the universe. Who would want to play that for more than a couple hours?
Sure, I agree with the OP. people don't want the freedom of a sandbox game. That is why Skyrim and Minecraft didn't sell well, right?
Just because no sandbox MMO has sold well untill now, doesn't automatically mean that there isn't enough interest for it. Maybe they are just more difficult to create or the big bucks are just not willing to deviate from what they see as the safe path (themepark).
I would argue that Skyrim is an open-world, non-linear themepark, not a sandbox. Unless I missed the parts where you could do anything you wanted (farm, build, make music....ect).
It is about as close as you can get with a rpg. The concept of a RPG is restricted by default imo. You mentioned this: 'the parts where you could do anything you wanted (farm, build, make music....ect)' Imo it shows why it is a lot more difficult to create this in MMORPG form. The more choice a developer wants to give to you, the more work it becomes to create it.
That is why I also mentioned Minecraft as another example which you chose to ignore for some reason. Unless you don't see that game as a sandbox game either. Then nvm, because I really don't feel like some sandbox semantics debate. I have personally a very lose definition of the term sandbox. To me it doesn't require specific features, because those are just about your personal preference. The reason why I mention this is because you can't create a game that gives you lets you do EVERYTHING. Every sandbox game has restrictions.
I ignored Minecraft because it is a sandbox, IMO. My point was to show that those two games are not similar.
So you can do anything in Minecraft? How do you explain the many mods then? If you compare vanilla Minecraft to Minecraft with all mods included, then vanilla pales in comparison. There is always room to include more features. There are always restrictions and in the case of Minecraft they slowly get lifted with mods. But Minecraft has it easier then a rpg would.
The problem with rpg is that the genre comes with default restrictions. You already need story progression, character development and a world with premade content to explore (the world needs to be shaped with the lore in mind for the lore to make sense). This already needs development time and you haven't even begun creating sandbox mechanics. At the same time you have to make sure that you don't let players mess with the world too much, for the lore to make sense. Add the MMO part to it and you need to make sure that every single player has room to make all those choices.
Now look at minecraft. No lore. So that gets rid of 2 problems. Less restrictions for sandbox mechanics and less development time. Way easier to turn that game into a sandbox.
So I think that a sandbox MMO is just an immense task. Minecraft MMO would be a mess for example. It only works now because there are many different servers with many different rulesets (which are restrictions mind you).
Sandbox is itself a myth in a way, there is a surprisingly large amount of people that if you would ask, what they understand under the term sandbox, they would basically paint you a image of a themepark without a main storyline and clearly defined goals but still with lots of content, with player involvement, not necessarily creation of objects, in the game world (l2 castles with tax system), with player groups offering community services (a wow example would be a organized group outside of guilds willing to sell or help on achievments or grinding pvp tokens) and with many things to do where every ability the game offers the players has some use (fishing on the open sea with waterwalk).
Basically some kind of "game for everyone" older mmos were aspiring to become, before dropping the attempts for the most part because it is easyer to make a game focused in one direction, empty space or space movie.
Originally posted by Psychow Randomly killing stuff while exploring "interesting places" sounds like the most boring gaming experience in the universe. Who would want to play that for more than a couple hours?
That pretty much describes every video game in existence.
I sit on a man's back, choking him and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by all possible means - except by getting off his back.
Indeed! I'm calling BS on the notion that there is this mythical mass of players that want a sandbox virtual world MMO. If there was one, I would hear about it, devs would see it, and there would be games for that crowd. As it stands, there's hardly one, and it has been like that for so long that merely saying there hasn't been the right one yet is not going to cut it. Many have tried, many have failed and even if these games were any good they would've showed much more interest from the public, don't you think?
How can you have a "massive" virtual world when you only have a handful of players to fill it. And how can you get funding to something that has such a small audience. You are doomed to wander from indie game to indie game...
Admit it. You are to rest of the MMORPG players what LARPers are to P&P role players. "Regular people" snicker at people who play D&D but everyone laughs at LARPers (no offense meant - but they do).
Ben "Yahtzee" Crosshaw hit the nail in the head: -"Eve players are to nerds what nerds are to normal people."
Even if some recent themeparks have failed or will fail in your eyes, I'm quite confident in saying that there will be no major shift towards sandboxes of any sort. People still love themeparks - they just don't like shitty games, thats all.
So now that you are done belittling everyone and their opinion and taste, do you have any arguments besides your "feeling" and the absence of evidence.
Because the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Lets see, where ARE the sandbox games? I want one too, having said that, I don't see s**t out there, and I could care less about EvE...
Not really a "feeling" but a truth...
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
EvE is in no way a sandbox game and there hasn't been a true sandbox games sense SWG. Sorry but I think many here don't even have a concept of what sandbox gaming is. The issue with sandbox games from a developer standpoint is no true point to the design. Sandbox is the hardest concept to make as there is no true determined path in the game and allows players to do what they want when they want too. SWG was really the only one that got this right but even then there where tons of issues from using maps from eq and just repainting them to the bug issues that where enharent threw out.
However even with all those said issues many people stayed for it was a truly open world sandbox where you could "Do what you want the way you wanted". Those that never played would never understand unless you go threw the tons of postings on SWG from the fans of the day. In the end, sandbox games could do wonders, however I don't know a developer or investor that would be willing to test that.
Closest thing we will have to sandbox in the future is Planetside 2 and even that is really not a true sandbox. Meh, one day maybe, some companies have tried and failed, it seems to me many get great ideas and start the development, but then their friends or teams after a year decide it going no-ware or promises where never kept etc and those teams break up. Then the cycle repeats itself till games like darkfall do get released and are 1/8 of what they wanted them too be. Meh, if you ask me, the MMO genre is on a decline.
"The monster created isn't by the company that makes the game, it's by the fans that make it something it never was"
Indeed! I'm calling BS on the notion that there is this mythical mass of players that want a sandbox virtual world MMO. If there was one, I would hear about it, devs would see it, and there would be games for that crowd. As it stands, there's hardly one, and it has been like that for so long that merely saying there hasn't been the right one yet is not going to cut it. Many have tried, many have failed and even if these games were any good they would've showed much more interest from the public, don't you think?
How can you have a "massive" virtual world when you only have a handful of players to fill it. And how can you get funding to something that has such a small audience. You are doomed to wander from indie game to indie game...
Admit it. You are to rest of the MMORPG players what LARPers are to P&P role players. "Regular people" snicker at people who play D&D but everyone laughs at LARPers (no offense meant - but they do).
Ben "Yahtzee" Crosshaw hit the nail in the head: -"Eve players are to nerds what nerds are to normal people."
Even if some recent themeparks have failed or will fail in your eyes, I'm quite confident in saying that there will be no major shift towards sandboxes of any sort. People still love themeparks - they just don't like shitty games, thats all.
So now that you are done belittling everyone and their opinion and taste, do you have any arguments besides your "feeling" and the absence of evidence.
Because the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Lets see, where ARE the sandbox games? I want one too, having said that, I don't see s**t out there, and I could care less about EvE...
Not really a "feeling" but a truth...
Minecraft is as close as you can get. All because Mojang was so smart to allow mods which lead to continous additional development of new features for that game. This game is also immensely popular (just based on purchases). So there is a market for it. I just think that a sandbox MMO is very complicated to design.
Comments
I would argue that Skyrim is an open-world, non-linear themepark, not a sandbox. Unless I missed the parts where you could do anything you wanted (farm, build, make music....ect).
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
Ya know, that's what I want an open non linear theme park, i have no interest in farming or owning a post office. I wanna kill stuff while exploring interesting locations.
NOBODY here ever claimed there is a massive crowd for a PURE Sandbox! Nobody. I don't know whom you are talking to here.
What people rightfully DID claim however is, that many would enjoy sandbox ELEMENTS to enrich otherwise sterile and limited pure themeparks. And I think there would be many, who would enjoy such elements. Why people always must try to negate an argument by taking it to an extreme nobody really said is beyond me.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
The market will move to where the business exists. Like survival of the fittest, if sandbox games attracted the largest share, the style the UO presented (aka sandbox) would have continued to dominate in other games rather than EQ style (aka themepark) which dominates today. [mod edit]
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
And the crowd wanting that is probably bigger than the crowd wanting a sandbox.
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
Oh yeah this is why World of Darkness doesn't have major anticipation behind it right? lol..../facepalm
www.daneslaw.com
@GamerKurisu
Awaiting Darkfall Unholy Wars
What is the point of this thread other than to insult other people? I get warnings for much less overt jabs at people.
It is about as close as you can get with a rpg. The concept of a RPG is restricted by default imo. You mentioned this: 'the parts where you could do anything you wanted (farm, build, make music....ect)' Imo it shows why it is a lot more difficult to create this in MMORPG form. The more choice a developer wants to give to you, the more work it becomes to create it.
That is why I also mentioned Minecraft as another example which you chose to ignore for some reason. Unless you don't see that game as a sandbox game either. Then nvm, because I really don't feel like some sandbox semantics debate. I have personally a very lose definition of the term sandbox. To me it doesn't require specific features, because those are just about your personal preference. The reason why I mention this is because you can't create a game that lets you do EVERYTHING. Every sandbox game has restrictions.
There's a plenty big sandbox crowd out there, thing is, most of them have given up on the MMO genres ability to scratch their itch.
But with minecraft still being one of the most played games out there, I think the demand for "sandbox" type games is there. Now all we need are these sleezball companies to quit making smash and grab rip-offs and actually release some quality MMO games.
Of course, most companies that try usually wind up publishing products that are either buggy messes, or nothing but a griefers paradise (MO and Darkfall, I'm lookin at you). Seems the only company to get it right is CCP.
OP's just venting over the declining interest in traditional themeparks. Can't blame him really, I was distrout when AAA developers labeled sandbox as too risky. In the end we are going to see more and more Sandbox themepark hybrids than anything else. Traditional Themepark is pretty much dead, traditional sandbox is considered to risky, a mix is going to be the safest route in most developers eyes.
It's funny cause it's mostly true.
I like theme-parks cause the good ones have instances or dungeons and running them can be fun for a while; but I like sandbox games cause they tend to offer interesting things to work towards however they tend to lack PVE and solo play options and tend to drain my time reserves with little to keep me interested in the constant struggle to hold on to what I do get(usually with hardcore sandboxes like Eve).
I really think more games should use the dual world rule system that mimics GW2. You need real good solo play because we never start out playing in groups in any mmo. I like group search tools and events that make it easy to jump in to a group and do something fun. But you need grand pvp goals and personal stations or what have you, too, for that sense of evolving world scheme.But whatever type of game it is, it's always better if it has spaceships
Truth is we want the game to be fun weather it is sandy or parky and when you give us something that is broken or has features that suck the life out of it there are consequences. Usually less money for your company.
Darkfall was close but mostly there is little room for solo stuff in sandy games because your just setting yourself up for a 1 on five steam roll. And where are the raid experiences in Hardcore games; that is what I want. WoW was the first raid mmo that I played and it was really done well but it seems to get left out and a hard spawn gets substituted in for it like that is more fun; it's not by the way.
I would like to see a hardcore world and parky world in one game. Sort of a GW2 with a 3rd hard core PVP world with player owned stuff and make it SCI-FI please.
I guarantee if done right we will show our thanks in money.
Trouble is that it is hard to get a group of gamers together that understand and are also really good programmers, I think.
I ignored Minecraft because it is a sandbox, IMO. My point was to show that those two games are not similar.
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
I know right? Moderation at its finest right here. Not only that, but the OP even KNEW he was trolling, and creating a topic that would flame, proof is his freaking picture he linked, a fire suit, really? It's one thing when someone replies to an OP with a picture of one, but knowing what will come before you hit, "Post Message" just seems down right stupid IMO.
Great job MMORPG... jumped on that one real fast.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
Whatever man.
I still want AAA virtual world-mmorpg with great economy and fun gameplay.
Heres how I see it...
I have a game I can play now thats a sandbox and I always play a sandbox in the future.
I dont care what themeparks are out, who plays them, how many play, etc as long as I have something I like to play.
If there was no Mortal Online, I would probably play Darkfall. If that dies I would probably play Salem. If that isnt there I would probably play Xyson or Wurm. If those arent around I would probably play Archeage. If that isnt around. I would play UO, EVE or wait for Embers of Caerus.
I really dont care if sandboxes stay niche or not. Im having fun now and will always have something to play.
Randomly killing stuff while exploring "interesting places" sounds like the most boring gaming experience in the universe. Who would want to play that for more than a couple hours?
So you can do anything in Minecraft? How do you explain the many mods then? If you compare vanilla Minecraft to Minecraft with all mods included, then vanilla pales in comparison. There is always room to include more features. There are always restrictions and in the case of Minecraft they slowly get lifted with mods. But Minecraft has it easier then a rpg would.
The problem with rpg is that the genre comes with default restrictions. You already need story progression, character development and a world with premade content to explore (the world needs to be shaped with the lore in mind for the lore to make sense). This already needs development time and you haven't even begun creating sandbox mechanics. At the same time you have to make sure that you don't let players mess with the world too much, for the lore to make sense. Add the MMO part to it and you need to make sure that every single player has room to make all those choices.
Now look at minecraft. No lore. So that gets rid of 2 problems. Less restrictions for sandbox mechanics and less development time. Way easier to turn that game into a sandbox.
So I think that a sandbox MMO is just an immense task. Minecraft MMO would be a mess for example. It only works now because there are many different servers with many different rulesets (which are restrictions mind you).
Sandbox is itself a myth in a way, there is a surprisingly large amount of people that if you would ask, what they understand under the term sandbox, they would basically paint you a image of a themepark without a main storyline and clearly defined goals but still with lots of content, with player involvement, not necessarily creation of objects, in the game world (l2 castles with tax system), with player groups offering community services (a wow example would be a organized group outside of guilds willing to sell or help on achievments or grinding pvp tokens) and with many things to do where every ability the game offers the players has some use (fishing on the open sea with waterwalk).
Basically some kind of "game for everyone" older mmos were aspiring to become, before dropping the attempts for the most part because it is easyer to make a game focused in one direction, empty space or space movie.
Flame on!
That pretty much describes every video game in existence.
I sit on a man's back, choking him and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by all possible means - except by getting off his back.
HA! Fat chance sucker!
I want the same though.
Lets see, where ARE the sandbox games? I want one too, having said that, I don't see s**t out there, and I could care less about EvE...
Not really a "feeling" but a truth...
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
EvE is in no way a sandbox game and there hasn't been a true sandbox games sense SWG. Sorry but I think many here don't even have a concept of what sandbox gaming is. The issue with sandbox games from a developer standpoint is no true point to the design. Sandbox is the hardest concept to make as there is no true determined path in the game and allows players to do what they want when they want too. SWG was really the only one that got this right but even then there where tons of issues from using maps from eq and just repainting them to the bug issues that where enharent threw out.
However even with all those said issues many people stayed for it was a truly open world sandbox where you could "Do what you want the way you wanted". Those that never played would never understand unless you go threw the tons of postings on SWG from the fans of the day. In the end, sandbox games could do wonders, however I don't know a developer or investor that would be willing to test that.
Closest thing we will have to sandbox in the future is Planetside 2 and even that is really not a true sandbox. Meh, one day maybe, some companies have tried and failed, it seems to me many get great ideas and start the development, but then their friends or teams after a year decide it going no-ware or promises where never kept etc and those teams break up. Then the cycle repeats itself till games like darkfall do get released and are 1/8 of what they wanted them too be. Meh, if you ask me, the MMO genre is on a decline.
"The monster created isn't by the company that makes the game, it's by the fans that make it something it never was"
i is sandbox fan
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Minecraft is as close as you can get. All because Mojang was so smart to allow mods which lead to continous additional development of new features for that game. This game is also immensely popular (just based on purchases). So there is a market for it. I just think that a sandbox MMO is very complicated to design.
HEY THE 50 PEOPLE WHO POST ON THIS SITE WOULD DISAGREEEEE