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.
The remarkable popularity of DayZ right now shows us that there definitely are a lot of gamers interested in Sandbox games and since DayZ is at its core a fps persistant world not dissimilar to an MMO it is attracting players from the MMO community and is even covered on this site.
According to many posters here, DayZ isn't a sandbox because you can't build houses in it.
This thread smacks of a vile social experiment in the works, and looking at the OP's "flame retardant suit" image posted along with his inflammatory statement, it looks like a success.
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.
The remarkable popularity of DayZ right now shows us that there definitely are a lot of gamers interested in Sandbox games and since DayZ is at its core a fps persistant world not dissimilar to an MMO it is attracting players from the MMO community and is even covered on this site.
According to many posters here, DayZ isn't a sandbox because you can't build houses in it.
lol. Some have claimed eq and wow as sandbox. go figure that out.
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?"
The remarkable popularity of DayZ right now shows us that there definitely are a lot of gamers interested in Sandbox games and since DayZ is at its core a fps persistant world not dissimilar to an MMO it is attracting players from the MMO community and is even covered on this site.
No one is saying 'sandbox' games are not popular as Minecraft (put in other sandbox games as you see fit) sold millions.
However, MMO Sandbox is a niche. They have smaller subs than themeparks.
To companies who are looking to invest time/$$$ into making an MMO, the 'massive' (1M+) sandbox crowd is a myth since they see no evidence of it.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
using your logic, how is it that you can PLAY SKYRIM and not get involved in the story?
come on, I am waiting for a answer pal.
Don't call me pal, buddy.
No, you're not using my logic, my logic is being completely ignored by you.
As the guy above this post I'm quoting wrote, you have to follow the storyline in the tutorial in Rift. Or as another poster pointed out, you can't go to EI as a level 1 in Rfit, and if you want to level high enough to go to EI you have to follow the zone progression that's laid out before you in order to reach that level.
Or as I pointed out. Your character is tied to the storyline. They tell you your story the moment you start the tutorial. You can't avoid it.
Objective based gameplay vs nonobjective based gameplay. That is the only difference between what makes a sandbox and what doesn't. Everything you do in Rift or WoW is tied directly to an objective, and the only way around the objectives in those games is to NOT PLAY.
You act like I'm making some slight towards themepark MMO's and I'm not. I played Rift for 6 months, played WoW for the better part of 5 years, I have nothing against either game. In fact, I think they're both good games.
But what I prefer is to play something that takes me back to when I was playing rpg's with sandbox mode turned on.
The remarkable popularity of DayZ right now shows us that there definitely are a lot of gamers interested in Sandbox games and since DayZ is at its core a fps persistant world not dissimilar to an MMO it is attracting players from the MMO community and is even covered on this site.
No one is saying 'sandbox' games are not popular as Minecraft (put in other sandbox games as you see fit) sold millions.
However, MMO Sandbox is a niche. They have smaller subs than themeparks.
To companies who are looking to invest time/$$$ into making an MMO, the 'massive' (1M+) sandbox crowd is a myth since they see no evidence of it.
CCP would like to inform you that your wrong.
CCP has as many subs as most subscription based themepark MMO's do.
The only difference is, there's very few GOOD sandbox MMO's out there to play, and lots of themeparks.
MMO themeparks are just as much a niche if you take WoW out of the equasion, because most MMO's don't get over 500k subs using the subscription format.
BTW, let me say this once again.
LINEAGE 2 had near 12 million subscribers at one point. Most all of them in Asia. Guess were something like 75% of the WoW playerbase is?
The remarkable popularity of DayZ right now shows us that there definitely are a lot of gamers interested in Sandbox games and since DayZ is at its core a fps persistant world not dissimilar to an MMO it is attracting players from the MMO community and is even covered on this site.
No one is saying 'sandbox' games are not popular as Minecraft (put in other sandbox games as you see fit) sold millions.
However, MMO Sandbox is a niche. They have smaller subs than themeparks.
To companies who are looking to invest time/$$$ into making an MMO, the 'massive' (1M+) sandbox crowd is a myth since they see no evidence of it.
CCP would like to inform you that your wrong.
CCP has as many subs as most subscription based themepark MMO's do.
The only difference is, there's very few GOOD sandbox MMO's out there to play, and lots of themeparks.
MMO themeparks are just as much a niche if you take WoW out of the equasion, because most MMO's don't get over 500k subs using the subscription format.
BTW, let me say this once again.
LINEAGE 2 had near 12 million subscribers at one point. Most all of them in Asia. Guess were something like 75% of the WoW playerbase is?
I didn't know EVE had 1M+ subs. (fun fact, it doesn't)
Aion was pushing 2M+ before the F2P switch this year.
LoTRO/DDO had 500k+ (larger than EVE) before the F2P switch.
The total number of subs for themepark is higher than sandbox mmos. That's just fact.
Like I said before, for various companies, these 'sandbox mmo' crowd exists but are not 'massive'.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
The remarkable popularity of DayZ right now shows us that there definitely are a lot of gamers interested in Sandbox games and since DayZ is at its core a fps persistant world not dissimilar to an MMO it is attracting players from the MMO community and is even covered on this site.
No one is saying 'sandbox' games are not popular as Minecraft (put in other sandbox games as you see fit) sold millions.
However, MMO Sandbox is a niche. They have smaller subs than themeparks.
To companies who are looking to invest time/$$$ into making an MMO, the 'massive' (1M+) sandbox crowd is a myth since they see no evidence of it.
CCP would like to inform you that your wrong.
CCP has as many subs as most subscription based themepark MMO's do.
The only difference is, there's very few GOOD sandbox MMO's out there to play, and lots of themeparks.
MMO themeparks are just as much a niche if you take WoW out of the equasion, because most MMO's don't get over 500k subs using the subscription format.
BTW, let me say this once again.
LINEAGE 2 had near 12 million subscribers at one point. Most all of them in Asia. Guess were something like 75% of the WoW playerbase is?
I didn't know EVE had 1M+ subs. (fun fact, it doesn't)
Aion was pushing 2M+ before the F2P switch this year.
LoTRO/DDO had 500k+ (larger than EVE) before the F2P switch.
The total number of subs for themepark is higher than sandbox mmos. That's just fact.
Like I said before, for various companies, these 'sandbox mmo' crowd exists but are not 'massive'.
Were did I say EVE had 1m+ subs?
Pretty sure I said that most sub based MMO's dont' have over 500k. How many did you say LoTRO had before it went F2P? Curious how you know that as well.
Aion? Say it aint so, 2m subs before it went F2P? Were did you get that number again? And would you like to guess were all those subs come from?
Pretty sure I also said something about there being lots of themepark MMO's to play. Also something about there being very, read VERY, few sandbox ones.
Funny. I keep pointing this out.
LINEAGE 2 had near 12 million subs. L2 wasn't a themepark. It was nice that you took the time to adress everything else i wrote incorrectly, but didn't bother to address this little bit.
Guys, the US is like the SMALLEST factor in MMO subs. That's just a fact.
PS: BTW, Aion, Lineage 2. Both of them have the same developer. One is a traditional themepark, the other is not. One had only a fraction of the subs the other had, and it wasn't the one that wasn't a traditional themepark.
The remarkable popularity of DayZ right now shows us that there definitely are a lot of gamers interested in Sandbox games and since DayZ is at its core a fps persistant world not dissimilar to an MMO it is attracting players from the MMO community and is even covered on this site.
No one is saying 'sandbox' games are not popular as Minecraft (put in other sandbox games as you see fit) sold millions.
However, MMO Sandbox is a niche. They have smaller subs than themeparks.
To companies who are looking to invest time/$$$ into making an MMO, the 'massive' (1M+) sandbox crowd is a myth since they see no evidence of it.
CCP would like to inform you that your wrong.
CCP has as many subs as most subscription based themepark MMO's do.
The only difference is, there's very few GOOD sandbox MMO's out there to play, and lots of themeparks.
MMO themeparks are just as much a niche if you take WoW out of the equasion, because most MMO's don't get over 500k subs using the subscription format.
BTW, let me say this once again.
LINEAGE 2 had near 12 million subscribers at one point. Most all of them in Asia. Guess were something like 75% of the WoW playerbase is?
I didn't know EVE had 1M+ subs. (fun fact, it doesn't)
Aion was pushing 2M+ before the F2P switch this year.
LoTRO/DDO had 500k+ (larger than EVE) before the F2P switch.
The total number of subs for themepark is higher than sandbox mmos. That's just fact.
Like I said before, for various companies, these 'sandbox mmo' crowd exists but are not 'massive'.
That is an urban legend.
If the game is good people will play it, but no one has made a good sandbox for many years now. Everyone jumped on the Themepark bandwagon trying to get a slice profit.
If you have personal reason why you would not play a Sandbox, state them and we can discuss those, but lets leave urgban legend and 14 yo Rationale in relation to the Business out of it shall we?
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
So in Rift, since its Themepark MMO after all, I cant play the game without following main storyline?
yeah ok.....
(sarcasm)
No, because you further it by the shear fact of playing. YOUR CHARACTER is tied to the storyline, you can't get around it.
The storyline is an objective. By playig you are taking part in the storylie and therefore taking part in the objective. You can't get around the structure gameplay of Rift.
Just like your sarcasm clearly shows, you know that.
If you played Skyrim, or any other TES game, you know that you are not bound to any storyline outside of "you were a prisoner, now your free, do what you want". You should know, if you played any TES game, that you never have to adhere to any objective in the game. You're not required, or forced to do anything.
PS: You may not enjoy a game that doesn't put goals in front of you, but that doesn't change the facts.
using your logic, how is it that you can PLAY SKYRIM and not get involved in the story?
come on, I am waiting for a answer pal.
You have obviously never played Skyrim. I logged over a hundred hours without advancing the main story line beyond the tutorial portion. You should really refrain from making comments on games and such of which you have no knowledge or reference. Go play the game and then come comment.
I didn't know EVE had 1M+ subs. (fun fact, it doesn't)
Aion was pushing 2M+ before the F2P switch this year.
LoTRO/DDO had 500k+ (larger than EVE) before the F2P switch.
The total number of subs for themepark is higher than sandbox mmos. That's just fact.
Like I said before, for various companies, these 'sandbox mmo' crowd exists but are not 'massive'.
That is an urban legend.
If the game is good people will play it, but no one has made a good sandbox for many years now. Everyone jumped on the Themepark bandwagon trying to get a slice profit.
If you have personal reason why you would not play a Sandbox, state them and we can discuss those, but lets leave urgban legend and 14 yo Rationale in relation to the Business out of it shall we?
It is an urban legend since there are no evidence of it.
If a company is going to invest in time/$$$ they would want to see evidence that the market exists.
We have a massive amount of military FPS games coming out. Why? COD/BF is selling millions.
Themepark sells more and has more subs, therefore yes to a lot of companies, this 'massive sandbox crowd' is a myth.
When your largest 'sandbox MMO' seller is EVE with 400-500k sub, yeah, its a myth.
Which is the whole point of this thread btw, look at the title. Your suggestion is a derail.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
This is a stupid thread. The OP's and his supporters arugement isn't vaild. You can't say that there isn't a market for something because no has buys it, when no one is offering it. It's like saying town X doesn't like tacos when no sells tacos in that town.
That say it is true that the the market for a hardcore FFA PVP sandbox isn't that large but other then SWG there hasn't been one non FFA PVP sandboxy game I know of.
The fact that EVE has as many players as it does would only be prove that their are more sandbox players out there as EVE is not only a SciFi game, not a only FFA PVP game, it is also a ship game. Eve is about as niche as you can get and yet it still has 400-500k active players for years, which far better then anything these crappy wow clones can say.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
Doesn't it concern you that your terms and definitions have nothing to do with one another?
In a real-world themepark there is no direction enforced upon visitors, and in fact you're totally free to ride whatever rides you want (exactly like Skyrim.)
The terms, when taken in the way we mean, are opposites. Freedom to go where you want, like in Skyrim. Directed game play to have to go where the devs direct you, like in WoW zones.
I'm not going through all this again. We've done this so many times before and I don't care anymore. The subs are speaking much louder than anyone here.
Did you fail to read my post?
You're not directed to go anywhere in a real themepark. Direction or linearity have nothing to do with the defintion of a videogame themepark.
They may be loosely related by common association, but they've never been part of the core definition.
Themepark vs. Sandbox is purely a question of who creates the core experience (the thing you log on each session to do.)
In Skyrim you're playing the devs' game.
In Drawception, you're playing and creating the players' game.
In FarmVille, you're creating your own farm.
In EVE, you're creating and controlling the players' economy and territory.
In WOW, you're playing the devs' game.
In Minecraft, you're creating your own world.
I agree with you Axe, from a Designer's point of view, but I think that, from aplayer's point of view, we have to consider that the the phrase of " you are creating your own world", implies and translates as freedom, and the phrase "you are playing the dev's game" implies and translates as Direction
Ahh, a voice of reason from the other side.
But let me kick your can a little bit.
WE coined the phrase, and we know what we meant. But you guys, developers, have changed the meaning, and now are insisting on using your meaning. That brings up 2 issues....
A) You're ignoring what we meant to say, and what we mean when we say it now.
Changing the meaning not only loses the value of what we, the customers, are saying, but it's insulting. It's also deceptive. You can now claim "Sandbox" when you give us the features you claim are "Sandbox" in a Themepark game.
If you add "player created content" to WoW, such as building houses anywhere they'd fit, or clearing out an instance (already there!), does that make it a Sandbox? Hell no. Period.
And that makes me bluud boil, because it's just another deception to continue this lunatic Themepark craze.
You are right, adding Housing to WoW will not make it a Sandbox game even if adding the Housing will add the Quality/feature of player created Content.
This is why, Player Created Content is not a defining Factor of a Sandbox MMO.
The basis of a Sandbox game is non-directed experience, or Freedom or non linear gameplay, all the terms are interchangeable.
The the rest of the features which as player we have come to expect from Sandbox MMO's are sinply following Logically as one is garnishing the Design with more variety and things to do for the players, since they have that freedom.
The same process applies to Themeparks, it is a Directed Experience, or no Freedom, or Linear Gameplay. The rest of the features that we have come to expect from such a design are following logically as the game is being garnished.
if you want to direct the player down a certain path of progression from point A to Point D, then you will create an Area for progressing from Point A to be and another for progressing from B to C and then from C to D, you can add some crafting for Variety, an Auction House so that players interact duringthis progresion, you can add a couple of instances in key points such as for the transition from B to C and another for C to D. At D you may further the experience by adding a Raid and in anticipation of E.
How does Housing fit in all that? Well, it is low priority it would distract the player from the Directed path, while nothing prevents one from adding it as a feature, it is not required by the design. Furthermore, your time and effort as a designer and develloper would be spent better in making the priority elements more enjoyable, adding instance raids and quests rather than develloping a housing system that is rather disconnected and on the side of the direction you want players to gfollow in your game.
Converselly, if you follow the same Design process now for a Sandbox game, Housing becomes a priority as a feature, while not necesarilly required it is better to have it than not having it since you let the player Free and to set their own goals in the world and not directing them. So a given day the player may just decide to gather berries to make some colors in order to use as Dye for the new Furniture they built a couple of days ago and further decorate their house. While the next day this player may simply decide to spend the Game session adventuring with friends in a Dungeon. Player has the freedom to decide. Housing is a Good feature to have in a Sandbox game.
But it is not necessary in order to make that game a Sandbox per se. It doe snot define your game, what defines it is whether you want to direct players or whether you want to let them undirected.
Lastly prioritizing may not seem as important to the players but in devellopment where you have to meet milestones and have a budget to manage time spent on the right places can make or break your project.
Cheers!
You've hit the nail on the head. Most of these arguments get into specifics that really can be placed in either type of game. It's just that some work better in one type or the other. But it gets away from the very basic, generally defining core concept that makes a game one or the other.
This is a stupid thread. The OP's and his supporters arugement isn't vaild. You can't say that there isn't a market for something because no has buys it, when no one is offering it. It's like saying town X doesn't like tacos when no sells tacos in that town.
That say it is true that the the market for a hardcore FFA PVP sandbox isn't that large but other then SWG there hasn't been one non FFA PVP sandboxy game I know of.
Plenty of companies offered, I don't see 1M+ sub for any of them though.
EVE, Wurm Online, Earthrise, Tale in the desert all are sandbox MMOs.
It is funny how a 'themepark' player like myself knows sandbox titles than suppose 'sandbox MMO' supporters.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
The total number of subs for themepark is higher than sandbox mmos. That's just fact.
Like I said before, for various companies, these 'sandbox mmo' crowd exists but are not 'massive'.
One factor to this could be the lack of AAA sandboxes. If there was a clear leader it's critical mass could increase exposure of the sub-genre.
UO is ancient. SWG lost most of its sandboxiness in expansions. What's left? A few examples are DF, MO, Xsyon, and Wurm. All of them together probably had less of an advertising budget than "Hello Kitty". They simply don't have general market* penetration.
As far as I'm concerned, the _potential_ market for an MMO sandbox is quite large. The current market is not.
* the kind of people who know MMOs exist but have no clue about the diversity since they play their own game and seldom leave it except for other big name titles.
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.
This is a stupid thread. The OP's and his supporters arugement isn't vaild. You can't say that there isn't a market for something because no has buys it, when no one is offering it. It's like saying town X doesn't like tacos when no sells tacos in that town.
That say it is true that the the market for a hardcore FFA PVP sandbox isn't that large but other then SWG there hasn't been one non FFA PVP sandboxy game I know of.
Plenty of companies offered, I don't see 1M+ sub for any of them though.
EVE, Wurm Online, Earthrise, Tale in the desert all are sandbox MMOs.
It is funny how a 'themepark' player like myself knows sandbox titles than suppose 'sandbox MMO' supporters.
EVE: Super hardcore, ship based MMO with FFA PvP
Wurn Online: Terrible graphics(yeah I know they shouldn't matter but they do), very hardcore and very indie
Earthrise: Isn't out yet?
Tale in the desert: Yeah no combat, but is on it's 4 tale.
I have looked at pretty much every sandbox MMO out there. Other then old SWG and UO they are all either super hardcore with a steep learning curve, have some feature that makes the niche reguardless if there were sandbox players or not (not alot of people are going to want to play a combatless game, a ship only game or a ffa pvp game) or they have both.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
This is a stupid thread. The OP's and his supporters arugement isn't vaild. You can't say that there isn't a market for something because no has buys it, when no one is offering it. It's like saying town X doesn't like tacos when no sells tacos in that town.
That say it is true that the the market for a hardcore FFA PVP sandbox isn't that large but other then SWG there hasn't been one non FFA PVP sandboxy game I know of.
Plenty of companies offered, I don't see 1M+ sub for any of them though.
EVE, Wurm Online, Earthrise, Tale in the desert all are sandbox MMOs.
It is funny how a 'themepark' player like myself knows sandbox titles than suppose 'sandbox MMO' supporters.
That doesn't make them good.
Wurm? Seriously? Have you played wurm? I know some people like it, but my brother also like NES emulators on his 2k dollar PC, doesn't mean I will.
Earthrise?
Tales of the desert? Isn't that that one that has no combat in it at all? That's the sandbox mmo that's all about crafting right?
You're using one MMO (edit, mised up earth and beyond with eathrise. this game isn't even out), and two others made by small studios and what most people wouldn't even consdier to be a good game.
With EVE as the only exception. The one that's sub based, and seen overall growth year in and year out, while themeparks left and right are losing subs and going F2P.
One factor to this could be the lack of AAA sandboxes. If there was a clear leader it's critical mass could increase exposure of the sub-genre.
UO is ancient. SWG lost most of its sandboxiness in expansions. What's left? A few examples are DF, MO, Xsyon, and Wurm. All of them together probably had less of an advertising budget than "Hello Kitty". They simply don't have general market* penetration.
As far as I'm concerned, the _potential_ market for an MMO sandbox is quite large. The current market is not.
* the kind of people who know MMOs exist but have no clue about the diversity since they play their own game and seldom leave it except for other big name titles.
Meh, it is just the market working as intended.
There is just no evidence that the demand is there.
Fun fact, I always ask these 'sandbox mmo' supporters if they play any sandbox MMOs and very rarely do they say 'yes' to it.
Which is just sad. So you 'support' it by saying you do but don't actually support one?
Best thing these supporters can do is to actually support a sandbox game and prove that yes, there is a 1M+ sub sandbox MMO!
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
One factor to this could be the lack of AAA sandboxes. If there was a clear leader it's critical mass could increase exposure of the sub-genre.
UO is ancient. SWG lost most of its sandboxiness in expansions. What's left? A few examples are DF, MO, Xsyon, and Wurm. All of them together probably had less of an advertising budget than "Hello Kitty". They simply don't have general market* penetration.
As far as I'm concerned, the _potential_ market for an MMO sandbox is quite large. The current market is not.
* the kind of people who know MMOs exist but have no clue about the diversity since they play their own game and seldom leave it except for other big name titles.
Meh, it is just the market working as intended.
There is just no evidence that the demand is there.
Fun fact, I always ask these 'sandbox mmo' supporters if they play any sandbox MMOs and very rarely do they say 'yes' to it.
Which is just sad. So you 'support' it by saying you do but don't actually support one?
Best thing these supporters can do is to actually support a sandbox game and prove that yes, there is a 1M+ sub sandbox MMO!
And once again.
Lineage 2 had near 12 million subscirbers, and was the only mmo that was ever able to compare to WoW in the number of subs. And yet you keep on saying there isn't a demand for sandboxes. Why do you keep ignoring this?
And I do support a sandbox MMO, EVE. All the other simply suck, and not becuse they're sandboxes, but because they're crappy sandbox GAMES.
Lineage 2 had near 12 million subscirbers, and was the only mmo that was ever able to compare to WoW in the number of subs. And yet you keep on saying there isn't a demand for sandboxes. Why do you keep ignoring this?
And I do support a sandbox MMO, EVE. All the other simply suck, and not becuse they're sandboxes, but because they're crappy sandbox GAMES.
So we are counting 'accounts' made in a F2P as subs?
One factor to this could be the lack of AAA sandboxes. If there was a clear leader it's critical mass could increase exposure of the sub-genre.
UO is ancient. SWG lost most of its sandboxiness in expansions. What's left? A few examples are DF, MO, Xsyon, and Wurm. All of them together probably had less of an advertising budget than "Hello Kitty". They simply don't have general market* penetration.
As far as I'm concerned, the _potential_ market for an MMO sandbox is quite large. The current market is not.
* the kind of people who know MMOs exist but have no clue about the diversity since they play their own game and seldom leave it except for other big name titles.
Meh, it is just the market working as intended.
There is just no evidence that the demand is there.
Fun fact, I always ask these 'sandbox mmo' supporters if they play any sandbox MMOs and very rarely do they say 'yes' to it.
Which is just sad. So you 'support' it by saying you do but don't actually support one?
Best thing these supporters can do is to actually support a sandbox game and prove that yes, there is a 1M+ sub sandbox MMO!
I don't sub to one because while I like sandbox games, I don't have any interest in standard fantasy games, games that make my eyes bleed, games that FFA pvp, or games where I play as a ship. That said I do play haven & hearth and Salem.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
What you described was not the "right" way, only the most efficient way to reach a particular goal. The reasons why and how people play games can be vastly different.
For instance, I've logged over 600 hours in Skyrim, and I've STILL not seen all the content ! That's just because of the way I play, not because there's an epic amount of content...
Yes, exactly!
...and this exact same reply can be applied to anyone who insists there's a "right way" to play WOW.
That was my point!
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
One way is discovered over time by the community, the other, developers reward themepark gameplay more heavily than sandbox. Is that true?
I don't really know what you're trying to say here. All goals are discovered over time by the community, and it's up to them to define for themselves what "the right way to play" is, to reach "the right goal".
Which is why it's nonsenical to imply there's a "right way" to play WOW without also implying there's a "right way" to play EVE or Skyrim. Sure, if your goal is best-in-slot-everything or making lots of ISK or experiencing every Skyrim dungeon, there is a "right way", but every single game ever made is like that -- which is why the argument that WOW has a "right way" fails to differentiate it from Skyrim or EVE.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Lineage 2 had near 12 million subscirbers, and was the only mmo that was ever able to compare to WoW in the number of subs. And yet you keep on saying there isn't a demand for sandboxes. Why do you keep ignoring this?
And I do support a sandbox MMO, EVE. All the other simply suck, and not becuse they're sandboxes, but because they're crappy sandbox GAMES.
So we are counting 'accounts' made in a F2P as subs?
To date, the game has been played by more than 14 million users, mostly based in Asia.
No, that was prior to the F2P, and I even stated that they were mostly Asian.
Guess who MOSTLY plays WoW?
The US is the SMALLEST percentage of MMO gamers. That's a well known fact.
Do you not realize that you, and everyone else, are basing an assumption on the exact same fact? There hasn't been a good sandbox MMO made, outside of one that puts you in the role of a spaceship.
Or if you like. How many people play second life?
LoTRO, F2P
DDO, F2P
EQ, F2P
EQ2, F2P
VG, going F2P
AoC, F2P
WAR, F2P
Aion, F2P
In what world does almost every AAA themepark mmo going F2P constitute overwhelming support or an indication that people would rather play them. Especially when no one's even attempted a AAA sandbox.
There is just no evidence that the demand is there.
I agree. Demand has to be generated. In most cases, products don't sell themselves. Generate a need, generate market image and awareness, position the market image as a solution to the need. That's how demand is created.
McDonald's, Coke, Pepsi, and even President Obama are clear examples of this in action. Mass marketing creates market image and awareness.
When's the last time anyone saw a major advertisement campaign for a sandbox MMORPG? I'm guessing Star Wars Galaxies. I can't recall ever seeing anything significant from any of the Indies. Most can barely afford programmers let alone $10 million (small on today's terms) for their advertising budget. A few even manage to botch their own word of mouth campaigns because of poor PR and low customer satisfaction averages.
I'm not disagreeing that the current market is small-ish. However, that doesn't imply on its own that the potential market isn't significant.
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.
Comments
According to many posters here, DayZ isn't a sandbox because you can't build houses in it.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
This thread smacks of a vile social experiment in the works, and looking at the OP's "flame retardant suit" image posted along with his inflammatory statement, it looks like a success.
lol. Some have claimed eq and wow as sandbox. go figure that out.
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?"
No one is saying 'sandbox' games are not popular as Minecraft (put in other sandbox games as you see fit) sold millions.
However, MMO Sandbox is a niche. They have smaller subs than themeparks.
To companies who are looking to invest time/$$$ into making an MMO, the 'massive' (1M+) sandbox crowd is a myth since they see no evidence of it.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Don't call me pal, buddy.
No, you're not using my logic, my logic is being completely ignored by you.
As the guy above this post I'm quoting wrote, you have to follow the storyline in the tutorial in Rift. Or as another poster pointed out, you can't go to EI as a level 1 in Rfit, and if you want to level high enough to go to EI you have to follow the zone progression that's laid out before you in order to reach that level.
Or as I pointed out. Your character is tied to the storyline. They tell you your story the moment you start the tutorial. You can't avoid it.
Objective based gameplay vs nonobjective based gameplay. That is the only difference between what makes a sandbox and what doesn't. Everything you do in Rift or WoW is tied directly to an objective, and the only way around the objectives in those games is to NOT PLAY.
You act like I'm making some slight towards themepark MMO's and I'm not. I played Rift for 6 months, played WoW for the better part of 5 years, I have nothing against either game. In fact, I think they're both good games.
But what I prefer is to play something that takes me back to when I was playing rpg's with sandbox mode turned on.
CCP would like to inform you that your wrong.
CCP has as many subs as most subscription based themepark MMO's do.
The only difference is, there's very few GOOD sandbox MMO's out there to play, and lots of themeparks.
MMO themeparks are just as much a niche if you take WoW out of the equasion, because most MMO's don't get over 500k subs using the subscription format.
BTW, let me say this once again.
LINEAGE 2 had near 12 million subscribers at one point. Most all of them in Asia. Guess were something like 75% of the WoW playerbase is?
I didn't know EVE had 1M+ subs. (fun fact, it doesn't)
Aion was pushing 2M+ before the F2P switch this year.
LoTRO/DDO had 500k+ (larger than EVE) before the F2P switch.
The total number of subs for themepark is higher than sandbox mmos. That's just fact.
Like I said before, for various companies, these 'sandbox mmo' crowd exists but are not 'massive'.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Were did I say EVE had 1m+ subs?
Pretty sure I said that most sub based MMO's dont' have over 500k. How many did you say LoTRO had before it went F2P? Curious how you know that as well.
Aion? Say it aint so, 2m subs before it went F2P? Were did you get that number again? And would you like to guess were all those subs come from?
Pretty sure I also said something about there being lots of themepark MMO's to play. Also something about there being very, read VERY, few sandbox ones.
Funny. I keep pointing this out.
LINEAGE 2 had near 12 million subs. L2 wasn't a themepark. It was nice that you took the time to adress everything else i wrote incorrectly, but didn't bother to address this little bit.
Guys, the US is like the SMALLEST factor in MMO subs. That's just a fact.
PS: BTW, Aion, Lineage 2. Both of them have the same developer. One is a traditional themepark, the other is not. One had only a fraction of the subs the other had, and it wasn't the one that wasn't a traditional themepark.
Hmmm.
That is an urban legend.
If the game is good people will play it, but no one has made a good sandbox for many years now. Everyone jumped on the Themepark bandwagon trying to get a slice profit.
If you have personal reason why you would not play a Sandbox, state them and we can discuss those, but lets leave urgban legend and 14 yo Rationale in relation to the Business out of it shall we?
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
You have obviously never played Skyrim. I logged over a hundred hours without advancing the main story line beyond the tutorial portion. You should really refrain from making comments on games and such of which you have no knowledge or reference. Go play the game and then come comment.
It is an urban legend since there are no evidence of it.
If a company is going to invest in time/$$$ they would want to see evidence that the market exists.
We have a massive amount of military FPS games coming out. Why? COD/BF is selling millions.
Themepark sells more and has more subs, therefore yes to a lot of companies, this 'massive sandbox crowd' is a myth.
When your largest 'sandbox MMO' seller is EVE with 400-500k sub, yeah, its a myth.
Which is the whole point of this thread btw, look at the title. Your suggestion is a derail.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
This is a stupid thread. The OP's and his supporters arugement isn't vaild. You can't say that there isn't a market for something because no has buys it, when no one is offering it. It's like saying town X doesn't like tacos when no sells tacos in that town.
That say it is true that the the market for a hardcore FFA PVP sandbox isn't that large but other then SWG there hasn't been one non FFA PVP sandboxy game I know of.
The fact that EVE has as many players as it does would only be prove that their are more sandbox players out there as EVE is not only a SciFi game, not a only FFA PVP game, it is also a ship game. Eve is about as niche as you can get and yet it still has 400-500k active players for years, which far better then anything these crappy wow clones can say.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
You've hit the nail on the head. Most of these arguments get into specifics that really can be placed in either type of game. It's just that some work better in one type or the other. But it gets away from the very basic, generally defining core concept that makes a game one or the other.
Once upon a time....
Plenty of companies offered, I don't see 1M+ sub for any of them though.
EVE, Wurm Online, Earthrise, Tale in the desert all are sandbox MMOs.
It is funny how a 'themepark' player like myself knows sandbox titles than suppose 'sandbox MMO' supporters.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
One factor to this could be the lack of AAA sandboxes. If there was a clear leader it's critical mass could increase exposure of the sub-genre.
UO is ancient. SWG lost most of its sandboxiness in expansions. What's left? A few examples are DF, MO, Xsyon, and Wurm. All of them together probably had less of an advertising budget than "Hello Kitty". They simply don't have general market* penetration.
As far as I'm concerned, the _potential_ market for an MMO sandbox is quite large. The current market is not.
* the kind of people who know MMOs exist but have no clue about the diversity since they play their own game and seldom leave it except for other big name titles.
EVE: Super hardcore, ship based MMO with FFA PvP
Wurn Online: Terrible graphics(yeah I know they shouldn't matter but they do), very hardcore and very indie
Earthrise: Isn't out yet?
Tale in the desert: Yeah no combat, but is on it's 4 tale.
I have looked at pretty much every sandbox MMO out there. Other then old SWG and UO they are all either super hardcore with a steep learning curve, have some feature that makes the niche reguardless if there were sandbox players or not (not alot of people are going to want to play a combatless game, a ship only game or a ffa pvp game) or they have both.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
That doesn't make them good.
Wurm? Seriously? Have you played wurm? I know some people like it, but my brother also like NES emulators on his 2k dollar PC, doesn't mean I will.
Earthrise?
Tales of the desert? Isn't that that one that has no combat in it at all? That's the sandbox mmo that's all about crafting right?
You're using one MMO (edit, mised up earth and beyond with eathrise. this game isn't even out), and two others made by small studios and what most people wouldn't even consdier to be a good game.
With EVE as the only exception. The one that's sub based, and seen overall growth year in and year out, while themeparks left and right are losing subs and going F2P.
Bit Edit: Earth and beyond, not earthrise.
Meh, it is just the market working as intended.
There is just no evidence that the demand is there.
Fun fact, I always ask these 'sandbox mmo' supporters if they play any sandbox MMOs and very rarely do they say 'yes' to it.
Which is just sad. So you 'support' it by saying you do but don't actually support one?
Best thing these supporters can do is to actually support a sandbox game and prove that yes, there is a 1M+ sub sandbox MMO!
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
And once again.
Lineage 2 had near 12 million subscirbers, and was the only mmo that was ever able to compare to WoW in the number of subs. And yet you keep on saying there isn't a demand for sandboxes. Why do you keep ignoring this?
And I do support a sandbox MMO, EVE. All the other simply suck, and not becuse they're sandboxes, but because they're crappy sandbox GAMES.
So we are counting 'accounts' made in a F2P as subs?
Cool!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lineage_II
To date, the game has been played by more than 14 million users, mostly based in Asia.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
I don't sub to one because while I like sandbox games, I don't have any interest in standard fantasy games, games that make my eyes bleed, games that FFA pvp, or games where I play as a ship. That said I do play haven & hearth and Salem.
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
Yes, exactly!
...and this exact same reply can be applied to anyone who insists there's a "right way" to play WOW.
That was my point!
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I don't really know what you're trying to say here. All goals are discovered over time by the community, and it's up to them to define for themselves what "the right way to play" is, to reach "the right goal".
Which is why it's nonsenical to imply there's a "right way" to play WOW without also implying there's a "right way" to play EVE or Skyrim. Sure, if your goal is best-in-slot-everything or making lots of ISK or experiencing every Skyrim dungeon, there is a "right way", but every single game ever made is like that -- which is why the argument that WOW has a "right way" fails to differentiate it from Skyrim or EVE.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
No, that was prior to the F2P, and I even stated that they were mostly Asian.
Guess who MOSTLY plays WoW?
The US is the SMALLEST percentage of MMO gamers. That's a well known fact.
Do you not realize that you, and everyone else, are basing an assumption on the exact same fact? There hasn't been a good sandbox MMO made, outside of one that puts you in the role of a spaceship.
Or if you like. How many people play second life?
LoTRO, F2P
DDO, F2P
EQ, F2P
EQ2, F2P
VG, going F2P
AoC, F2P
WAR, F2P
Aion, F2P
In what world does almost every AAA themepark mmo going F2P constitute overwhelming support or an indication that people would rather play them. Especially when no one's even attempted a AAA sandbox.
How do you explain that?
I agree. Demand has to be generated. In most cases, products don't sell themselves. Generate a need, generate market image and awareness, position the market image as a solution to the need. That's how demand is created.
McDonald's, Coke, Pepsi, and even President Obama are clear examples of this in action. Mass marketing creates market image and awareness.
When's the last time anyone saw a major advertisement campaign for a sandbox MMORPG? I'm guessing Star Wars Galaxies. I can't recall ever seeing anything significant from any of the Indies. Most can barely afford programmers let alone $10 million (small on today's terms) for their advertising budget. A few even manage to botch their own word of mouth campaigns because of poor PR and low customer satisfaction averages.
I'm not disagreeing that the current market is small-ish. However, that doesn't imply on its own that the potential market isn't significant.