Umm no... it doesnt. While there may be varying definitions of what a sandbox constitutes, if yours is simply that it be non-linear then its wrong.
A sandbox is pretty much exactly what it is described as - you (the player) can mold, manipulate, move, effect, etc the 'world' (sand) in a meaningful way, and the players are in control of the world as opposed to the world being in control of the players (or atleast the players are in as much control as possible in a game defined by rules and code).
This is usually represented in the forms of things like player-driven economies, player-housing, area control, open-ended worlds, land ownership, etc (although none of these are a requirement for it to be a sandbox, they are just some common game-specific sandbox features). Most sandboxes ARE also non-linear just because of the very nature of the game lending itself towards that style of gameplay better. But saying "non-linear = sandbox" is like saying "player-housing = sandbox".
The reason for the existance of this thread - and quite often the confusion - is that single-player games like GTA are commonly lumped into the 'sandbox' category because they are non-linear and have large open-ended worlds. They are generally more 'sandboxy' than other single-player games due to having common sandbox features, but they are not actual sandboxes just because they are non-linear.
The complete disregard for reality in this thread has reached a very amusing point of absurdity, but an unfortunate deadend for reasonable discourse. I'm going to go have breakfast. Enjoy!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
well was reading something somebody said over in another forum regarding, you guessed it,,, TESO.
What came up, seem to be the standard sandbox TES fan hatred for the MMO which they call a WoW Clone.
Well I am not here to argue if its a WoW Clone or not. The point made was that these fans want the "Sand" in the MMO that the single player game has.
But when I stop and think about it, how much "Sand" do these games really have, "IF YOU WANTED TO BRING THAT SAND OVER TO THE MMO" in the forms of a Sandbox MMO?
Would a GTA MMO be Themepark or Sandbox? same question for a Saints Row MMO,,,
and the big name on this site,,, a The Elder Scrolls MMO...
Whats the "Sand" in these games to even bring to the MMO table that isnt already here in general across all MMO?
Exploring? Well not sure how Exploring is a sandbox feature, since you can do that in EQ, Vanguard, even WoW.
well you tell me.
You are confusing sandbox with open world, they are not the same thing. Saints row and the like are open world games meaning that you are not limited to a linear path and can take whichever direction you wish to travel in. Sandbox games have an open world as part of the package but there are a great many more systems that come together to make the whole; fully fledged craft skills, player built housing and cities etc. A sandbox gives the player the tools and says go do it, it doesn't take you by the hand. That said I think the next true implementation or evolution if you like of the modern MMO is going to be the themebox; a true sandbox MMO with themepark elements or even a number of different themed areas with linear quests etc. placed in various areas of tyhe gameworld. A true sandbox is also perpetual, in that the players can alter what is going on in the world by their actions. Players burn down a village it stays burned until players rebuild it, it doesn't pop up again a few seconds later so that someone else can burn it as a quest objective ( not many games in the past have mastered this aspect).
Originally posted by LoktofeitGeneral understanding and exact definition are two different things.
That is what I said, and it isn't semantics either.
The problem here is, a meaningful discussion requires definitions, especially when term use does not provide clear understanding and description of the term.
I stand firm on point that TES or GTA are no sandboxes, they are open world games.
The only thing different with TES or GTA is that the game world is freely accessible instead of usual "unfolding" as you progress through the game. You could implement this narrated progression in both games and it would not change the design intentions at all.
They are open world games but that does not make them a sandbox.
Originally posted by davestr1zl Umm no... it doesnt. While there may be varying definitions of what a sandbox constitutes, if yours is simply that it be non-linear then its wrong.A sandbox is pretty much exactly what it is described as - you (the player) can mold, manipulate, move, effect, etc the 'world' (sand) in a meaningful way, and the players are in control of the world as opposed to the world being in control of the players (or atleast the players are in as much control as possible in a game defined by rules and code).This is usually represented in the forms of things like player-driven economies, player-housing, area control, open-ended worlds, land ownership, etc (although none of these are a requirement for it to be a sandbox, they are just some common game-specific sandbox features). Most sandboxes ARE also non-linear just because of the very nature of the game lending itself towards that style of gameplay better. But saying "non-linear = sandbox" is like saying "player-housing = sandbox".
The point you are missing is that there is no control if all is linear.
Eric is spot on:
Originally posted by eric1000 You are confusing sandbox with open world, they are not the same thing. Saints row and the like are open world games meaning that you are not limited to a linear path and can take whichever direction you wish to travel in.
Open world is just about movement within the game world. Sandbox on the other had is how this world works and interaction.
TES works like any other RPG, you can just move freely around.
Would a GTA MMO be Themepark or Sandbox? same question for a Saints Row MMO,,,
A GTA/saints row mmo could be sandbox if you can change the gaming environment. If you blow up a liquor store it will be in ruins until someone builds up a new store, you can build up your headquarters, you can make advertisement for your syndicate in the game world, you can hire goons to guard your protected areas, you can take over others areas.
I do not wish to argue the whole board over linearity or the definition of "sandbox". We all have our own idea's as to what that really means.
I do however, want to say in my point of view that the excellent games mentioned in the OP do have some sandy elements.
1) Ownership. These games allow me to not only interact with a world, but allow me to own a piece of it.Or at least simulate ownership and emotional investment within the world.
2) Economy. While not a true player based economy because the games cater to the only player, the games do have a variety of ways to make money. The economy is what the player makes of it. In TES games you can make money through skills or adventure or even trade if you like. You could be a blacksmith and make coin that way, or an alchemist. Different ways to go about it and make your character the way you want it.
3) Freedom. Most games are not as good as the games mentioned IMO. The good thing about these games I see, is that after a usually fairly short mandatory introdution and training area, you can choose to follow the path of bredcrumbs (or big neon lit arrows) and complete the main quest or overarching story. Or you can go do anything else you want to do within the confines and boundaries of the game world.(Like going out and blasting Rad Roaches with your BB Gun,y'know, just for fun.)
PLUS - Most of these games have some sort of actual housing elements.Yeah, I'm one of thoseguys. I like housing. I like decorating my houses in Skyrim. I wish it was a little easier to get that stuff right where I want it ! LOL
While not being fully sandbox games, I do see sandy elements in those great games.
( Note to self-Don't say anything bad about Drizzt.)
"The industry" cannot agree on meaning of the term just like anyone on these boards.
At the end, usage isn't the as same definition.
But it is. Llanguage is a form of communication by sound and in order to communicate the word has to represent something and be accepted by the people who use it. It can adapt different meanings, but those meaning have to be understood by those parties that use it.
For this reason you really have to distinguish between 'single player sandbox' and 'MMORPG sandbox' since one genre's definition does not match the other's.
"The industry" cannot agree on meaning of the term just like anyone on these boards.
At the end, usage isn't the as same definition.
But it is. Llanguage is a form of communication by sound and in order to communicate the word has to represent something and be accepted by the people who use it. It can adapt different meanings, but those meaning have to be understood by those parties that use it.
For this reason you really have to distinguish between 'single player sandbox' and 'MMORPG sandbox' since one genre's definition does not match the other's.
not really true. actually not even close to being true. actually I have no idea why anyone would ever think this to be true.
actually who even made this concept up? its silly
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
GTA is about as much of an 'open world' as mother teresa's vigania is.
I dont care if you all resort to using the word 'sandbox' or the phrase 'open world' as a gamer GTA3 and 4 where the most restrictive game I had ever played since Sonic the Hedgehog.
GTA3 SA ONLY with cheat mode is in an execption to that rule
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
GTA is about as much of an 'open world' as mother teresa's vigania is.
I dont care if you all resort to using the word 'sandbox' or the phrase 'open world' as a gamer GTA3 and 4 where the most restrictive game I had ever played since Sonic the Hedgehog.
GTA3 SA ONLY with cheat mode is in an execption to that rule
You must have never played any games in between.....
well was reading something somebody said over in another forum regarding, you guessed it,,, TESO.
What came up, seem to be the standard sandbox TES fan hatred for the MMO which they call a WoW Clone.
Well I am not here to argue if its a WoW Clone or not. The point made was that these fans want the "Sand" in the MMO that the single player game has.
But when I stop and think about it, how much "Sand" do these games really have, "IF YOU WANTED TO BRING THAT SAND OVER TO THE MMO" in the forms of a Sandbox MMO?
Would a GTA MMO be Themepark or Sandbox? same question for a Saints Row MMO,,,
and the big name on this site,,, a The Elder Scrolls MMO...
Whats the "Sand" in these games to even bring to the MMO table that isnt already here in general across all MMO?
Exploring? Well not sure how Exploring is a sandbox feature, since you can do that in EQ, Vanguard, even WoW.
well you tell me.
To answer your question, then we have to eliminate whether or not the feature is something that we personally like in an Sandbox feature.
TES is not a true sandbox, you don't create your own quests in game, you do it with mods, you can't build your own house, you do it with mods, you can't create your own armor, you do it with mods. But what it does bring is Linear quests in an Non-linear fashion, you are never bound by the game into any single factions until you yourself makes that decision. You are given choices that separates your story from others. And you aren't limited in the ways you can kill another.
( I can kill by placing poison, I can kill by stealth with daggers, with bows, with two handed weapons, with pickpocketing hearts, with my shield, with magic...etc ) Its based on your playstyle, not based on class, not based on factions, its based on you the player.
What many Open world games bring is the feeling of an Sandbox not the actual sandbox. Thats what is missing in TESO, TESO limited you into Factions based on Race, bound you into a specific role based on class, and limits the exploration of the zones by sealing off regions of the world for their future expansions.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
Citing Wikipedia as an authority on definitions is unwise because it is not a reliable source. In this particular instance the search word "Sandbox game" is redirected to the article titled "open world". You don't have to have much experience in games to know that those two are not synonyms nor do they imply causation.
I'm sure you can think of games that are sandboxes but are not open world games and vice versa. Then again those depend on your definitions of open world and sandbox too. But in case you don't come up with any: Black & White is an example of the former and is certainly a sandbox to a degree. GTA and Skyrim is a good example of the latter in my books atleast. I have played many proper sandboxes and, by contrast, those two do not really earn to be called sanboxes.
Gdemami and davestr1zl are right: Non-linearity does not mean that the game is sandbox.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Not only is the world ready to be shaped by the minds of the Developers, they are creating their own quests, they are setting their own laws, their own rules within the world they are creating. They are gods creating a world of their own, that is the true Sand Box.
When they are done and it goes to the release launch dates, thats when the Sandbox no longer is a Sandbox and its just a Shadow of its former self.
What we want is for the developer to secure off a small piece of the world they have created and give us the freedom to become gods ourself , not as powerful as them, but enough to govern our little pieces of the land.
Its when we challenge the Developers themselves that Sandbox games fails.
Because when millions of players have the powers of the developers, then all its left is chaos, thats why Themepark games are so popular, the rules can not be bent, laws can not be broken, Players are players and Developers have all the power.
Imagine Minecraft being an Multiplayer game, where while you are working so hard getting that Star Ship Enterprise to come to shape, someone comes over and plants an Nuke and blows your 3 month of hardwork into pieces, guess what, in a sandbox, they have the rights to do so.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
Single player game, sandbox means that game is more like a free world to explore with some rules set in (that feel like laws of physics) and non-sandbox means that game is more like an interactive story, a limited part of word where rules that make it feel like scripting.
In sandbox game, you are generally free to do what you want, if there is a storyline then it is at least partially optional and often non-linear (a linear but sandbox game, imho, is Freelancer, where game itself is very freeform, but storyline is completely linear sequence of events). Generally you feel like you can do this, or that, or that, and there are no walls constantly that stop you (walls like doors that dont open because only one that leads further down the quest line is supposed to, walls like being tied to one linear passage inside a huge city because your current storyline takes you down that passage, etc).
This may or may not include freedom in building your character (like TES series), or freedom to change the world around you (like Minecraft).
In sandbox, ultimately you entertain yourself in a virtual world. Be that Transport Tycoon, GTA, Elder Scrolls or Freeancer, you are free to do whatever you want, and if you dont know how to busy yourself, you wont get much fun from the game.
In non-sandbox game, you are geenrally tied to linear plot. Game is usually a sequence of levels or events, where you cannot deviate aside much. It may have non-linear plot but it still will feel like a scripted story nevertheless. This is the game that entertains you, it often feels like a movie, and some people like that.
Now, obviously, transitioning to MMO, some parts of sandbox just cannot survive.
For example, Darkfall features TES leveling model. What that came to is that first - the game felt VERY grindy and EVERYBODY macroed their skils, and second - hybrids were winning, always, over specialised classes. So yes, some freedom must be taken away in order for it to work in an MMO format. This is unfortunate, but true. And ultimately for player's good, UNLESS its done the way D3 balance fixes were done - making people feel nerfed every patch.
However, on the other hand, sandbox in MMO offers other options unavailable in single-player games - and that is player-driven content. Think EVE. Economy driven by players, 99% of stuff you buy for your ship made by players, corporations run by players. This is kinda what they did with TES modding - you make content and let others experience it. Or you make events together - like, go and raid some city, or make a fair, or build a new city etc.
Ultimately, mmo is about persistent multiplayer, but sandbox means that content of the game mostly comes from players, and mostly the game is about "live in a new alternate reality", while non-sandbox means that content of the game mostly comes from developers releasing "content patches" that players "consume", and is about "come experience this, that and that scripted event we made for you".
IMHO, hate about WoW and nostalgia about vanilla WoW was exactly because WoW went from first model - where it was about a new persistent world to live int - to second model - where its about consuming new content patch and then waiting for new content patch to consume. Activities that were player-driven were taken out of the game, replaced by scripts (world pvp -> BG, grouping -> DF). Classes that were very different were normalised and homogenised.
GTA is about as much of an 'open world' as mother teresa's vigania is.
I dont care if you all resort to using the word 'sandbox' or the phrase 'open world' as a gamer GTA3 and 4 where the most restrictive game I had ever played since Sonic the Hedgehog.
GTA3 SA ONLY with cheat mode is in an execption to that rule
You must have never played any games in between.....
Sims, simcity, elder scrolls, Neverwinter nights
that kind of explains it.
Now in all fairness I have played games that are just as restrictive as those two games but they didnt FEEL as restrictive. No One Lives Forever 2 as a good example. never the less, calling GTA 3 and 4 a sandbox or 'open' anything is crazy on a massive scale.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_world
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_gameplay
The complete disregard for reality in this thread has reached a very amusing point of absurdity, but an unfortunate deadend for reasonable discourse. I'm going to go have breakfast. Enjoy!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
You are confusing sandbox with open world, they are not the same thing. Saints row and the like are open world games meaning that you are not limited to a linear path and can take whichever direction you wish to travel in. Sandbox games have an open world as part of the package but there are a great many more systems that come together to make the whole; fully fledged craft skills, player built housing and cities etc. A sandbox gives the player the tools and says go do it, it doesn't take you by the hand. That said I think the next true implementation or evolution if you like of the modern MMO is going to be the themebox; a true sandbox MMO with themepark elements or even a number of different themed areas with linear quests etc. placed in various areas of tyhe gameworld. A true sandbox is also perpetual, in that the players can alter what is going on in the world by their actions. Players burn down a village it stays burned until players rebuild it, it doesn't pop up again a few seconds later so that someone else can burn it as a quest objective ( not many games in the past have mastered this aspect).
That is what I said, and it isn't semantics either.
The problem here is, a meaningful discussion requires definitions, especially when term use does not provide clear understanding and description of the term.
I stand firm on point that TES or GTA are no sandboxes, they are open world games.
The only thing different with TES or GTA is that the game world is freely accessible instead of usual "unfolding" as you progress through the game. You could implement this narrated progression in both games and it would not change the design intentions at all.
They are open world games but that does not make them a sandbox.
The point you are missing is that there is no control if all is linear.
Eric is spot on:
Open world is just about movement within the game world. Sandbox on the other had is how this world works and interaction.
TES works like any other RPG, you can just move freely around.
A GTA/saints row mmo could be sandbox if you can change the gaming environment. If you blow up a liquor store it will be in ruins until someone builds up a new store, you can build up your headquarters, you can make advertisement for your syndicate in the game world, you can hire goons to guard your protected areas, you can take over others areas.
I do not wish to argue the whole board over linearity or the definition of "sandbox". We all have our own idea's as to what that really means.
I do however, want to say in my point of view that the excellent games mentioned in the OP do have some sandy elements.
1) Ownership. These games allow me to not only interact with a world, but allow me to own a piece of it.Or at least simulate ownership and emotional investment within the world.
2) Economy. While not a true player based economy because the games cater to the only player, the games do have a variety of ways to make money. The economy is what the player makes of it. In TES games you can make money through skills or adventure or even trade if you like. You could be a blacksmith and make coin that way, or an alchemist. Different ways to go about it and make your character the way you want it.
3) Freedom. Most games are not as good as the games mentioned IMO. The good thing about these games I see, is that after a usually fairly short mandatory introdution and training area, you can choose to follow the path of bredcrumbs (or big neon lit arrows) and complete the main quest or overarching story. Or you can go do anything else you want to do within the confines and boundaries of the game world.(Like going out and blasting Rad Roaches with your BB Gun,y'know, just for fun.)
PLUS - Most of these games have some sort of actual housing elements.Yeah, I'm one of thoseguys. I like housing. I like decorating my houses in Skyrim. I wish it was a little easier to get that stuff right where I want it ! LOL
While not being fully sandbox games, I do see sandy elements in those great games.
( Note to self-Don't say anything bad about Drizzt.)
An acerbic sense of humor is NOT allowed here.
For this reason you really have to distinguish between 'single player sandbox' and 'MMORPG sandbox' since one genre's definition does not match the other's.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
not really true. actually not even close to being true. actually I have no idea why anyone would ever think this to be true.
actually who even made this concept up? its silly
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
GTA is about as much of an 'open world' as mother teresa's vigania is.
I dont care if you all resort to using the word 'sandbox' or the phrase 'open world' as a gamer GTA3 and 4 where the most restrictive game I had ever played since Sonic the Hedgehog.
GTA3 SA ONLY with cheat mode is in an execption to that rule
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
You must have never played any games in between.....
To answer your question, then we have to eliminate whether or not the feature is something that we personally like in an Sandbox feature.
TES is not a true sandbox, you don't create your own quests in game, you do it with mods, you can't build your own house, you do it with mods, you can't create your own armor, you do it with mods. But what it does bring is Linear quests in an Non-linear fashion, you are never bound by the game into any single factions until you yourself makes that decision. You are given choices that separates your story from others. And you aren't limited in the ways you can kill another.
( I can kill by placing poison, I can kill by stealth with daggers, with bows, with two handed weapons, with pickpocketing hearts, with my shield, with magic...etc ) Its based on your playstyle, not based on class, not based on factions, its based on you the player.
What many Open world games bring is the feeling of an Sandbox not the actual sandbox. Thats what is missing in TESO, TESO limited you into Factions based on Race, bound you into a specific role based on class, and limits the exploration of the zones by sealing off regions of the world for their future expansions.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
Citing Wikipedia as an authority on definitions is unwise because it is not a reliable source. In this particular instance the search word "Sandbox game" is redirected to the article titled "open world". You don't have to have much experience in games to know that those two are not synonyms nor do they imply causation.
I'm sure you can think of games that are sandboxes but are not open world games and vice versa. Then again those depend on your definitions of open world and sandbox too. But in case you don't come up with any: Black & White is an example of the former and is certainly a sandbox to a degree. GTA and Skyrim is a good example of the latter in my books atleast. I have played many proper sandboxes and, by contrast, those two do not really earn to be called sanboxes.
Gdemami and davestr1zl are right: Non-linearity does not mean that the game is sandbox.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
You must have misunderstood me then.
Non-linear design is what sandbox essentially is.
The only true Sandbox is
" Alpha Stage of an MMO being developed"
Not only is the world ready to be shaped by the minds of the Developers, they are creating their own quests, they are setting their own laws, their own rules within the world they are creating. They are gods creating a world of their own, that is the true Sand Box.
When they are done and it goes to the release launch dates, thats when the Sandbox no longer is a Sandbox and its just a Shadow of its former self.
What we want is for the developer to secure off a small piece of the world they have created and give us the freedom to become gods ourself , not as powerful as them, but enough to govern our little pieces of the land.
Its when we challenge the Developers themselves that Sandbox games fails.
Because when millions of players have the powers of the developers, then all its left is chaos, thats why Themepark games are so popular, the rules can not be bent, laws can not be broken, Players are players and Developers have all the power.
Imagine Minecraft being an Multiplayer game, where while you are working so hard getting that Star Ship Enterprise to come to shape, someone comes over and plants an Nuke and blows your 3 month of hardwork into pieces, guess what, in a sandbox, they have the rights to do so.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
Single player game, sandbox means that game is more like a free world to explore with some rules set in (that feel like laws of physics) and non-sandbox means that game is more like an interactive story, a limited part of word where rules that make it feel like scripting.
In sandbox game, you are generally free to do what you want, if there is a storyline then it is at least partially optional and often non-linear (a linear but sandbox game, imho, is Freelancer, where game itself is very freeform, but storyline is completely linear sequence of events). Generally you feel like you can do this, or that, or that, and there are no walls constantly that stop you (walls like doors that dont open because only one that leads further down the quest line is supposed to, walls like being tied to one linear passage inside a huge city because your current storyline takes you down that passage, etc).
This may or may not include freedom in building your character (like TES series), or freedom to change the world around you (like Minecraft).
In sandbox, ultimately you entertain yourself in a virtual world. Be that Transport Tycoon, GTA, Elder Scrolls or Freeancer, you are free to do whatever you want, and if you dont know how to busy yourself, you wont get much fun from the game.
In non-sandbox game, you are geenrally tied to linear plot. Game is usually a sequence of levels or events, where you cannot deviate aside much. It may have non-linear plot but it still will feel like a scripted story nevertheless. This is the game that entertains you, it often feels like a movie, and some people like that.
Now, obviously, transitioning to MMO, some parts of sandbox just cannot survive.
For example, Darkfall features TES leveling model. What that came to is that first - the game felt VERY grindy and EVERYBODY macroed their skils, and second - hybrids were winning, always, over specialised classes. So yes, some freedom must be taken away in order for it to work in an MMO format. This is unfortunate, but true. And ultimately for player's good, UNLESS its done the way D3 balance fixes were done - making people feel nerfed every patch.
However, on the other hand, sandbox in MMO offers other options unavailable in single-player games - and that is player-driven content. Think EVE. Economy driven by players, 99% of stuff you buy for your ship made by players, corporations run by players. This is kinda what they did with TES modding - you make content and let others experience it. Or you make events together - like, go and raid some city, or make a fair, or build a new city etc.
Ultimately, mmo is about persistent multiplayer, but sandbox means that content of the game mostly comes from players, and mostly the game is about "live in a new alternate reality", while non-sandbox means that content of the game mostly comes from developers releasing "content patches" that players "consume", and is about "come experience this, that and that scripted event we made for you".
IMHO, hate about WoW and nostalgia about vanilla WoW was exactly because WoW went from first model - where it was about a new persistent world to live int - to second model - where its about consuming new content patch and then waiting for new content patch to consume. Activities that were player-driven were taken out of the game, replaced by scripts (world pvp -> BG, grouping -> DF). Classes that were very different were normalised and homogenised.
Sims, simcity, elder scrolls, Neverwinter nights
that kind of explains it.
Now in all fairness I have played games that are just as restrictive as those two games but they didnt FEEL as restrictive. No One Lives Forever 2 as a good example. never the less, calling GTA 3 and 4 a sandbox or 'open' anything is crazy on a massive scale.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me