In very simplified way, one question could be asked to check whether the game is a sandbox: Is there a power curve that underlines the progress through the game? Do I need to get stronger to unlock, access the content as the current content gets consumed?
If the answer is Yes, then it is no sandbox.
The first thing we have to consider on this subject is that we're talking MMORPGs, so these games are designed first and foremost around that moniker. Second we have to consider it's not that a game is a sandbox, it's that it's a sandbox style MMORPG... Which simply implies it's more about playing the game your way, openly, with an amount of that play effecting the world/community in some way. This mostly involves player creation, if going by the traditional sense of the term..
I'm not a fan of putting hardline qualifiers on these kinds of topics as you did above. A game could follow alI of what I mentioned in my considerations, yet at the same time have "other" aspects.
As again we're talking MMORPG's first and foremost. Not actual sandboxes.
If anything when it comes to this term, we might as well just replace sandbox with Sim... Because that's what these aspects more closely represent. SWG as an example was essentially a Star Wars Sim.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
It's the responsibility of the devs and the fans to convince other MMO players, as to why they should accept their product and play it. People shouldn't use words and definitions, if there isn't any clarity that is defining their hobby or product, otherwise it makes them look foolish. Others will not take them seriously, or care what their opinions are, when analyzing their presentation, when they fail at convincing people with their own words and definitions. Now, where is your sound argument, besides the incoherent reply in your post?
You are beating a dead horse.
It is not as much an issues of lack of term defintion as it is complete misuse of it.
There was a recently a post in EVE forums claiming that EVE is not a sandbox because you cannot paint and customize visual appearance of ships. That is the root issue here - people call a sandbox w/e flies their boat regardless whether it makes any sense whatsoever.
As I said many times, feature list =/= design. Ship paint jobs are a feature and therefore do not determine the design. This goes for any feature and any list of features is equally meaningless.
The problem is, people make no difference between terms design and feature, and interchange it all the time. The discussion then is lacking any sense.
In very simplified way, one question could be asked to check whether the game is a sandbox: Is there a power curve that underlines the progress through the game? Do I need to get stronger to unlock, access the content as the current content gets consumed?
If the answer is Yes, then it is no sandbox.
I agree that people are misusing the word "sandbox", and that's my entire point.
I disagree that designs and features are inseparable. Features are designed by the developers, and sometimes the users cannot manipulate the design of them, making them static. If the developers designed this "paint job feature" to be customizable, then it would be user-generated content.
This is why i determine that a virtual world, that is completely manipulated by the developers, is not a sandbox.
I also disagree with your last paragraph. Progression can co-exist with user-generated content, with some limitations of course.
I'll admit that there are a couple sandbox features that AA does have, and that is housing and farming (i admit i might have said that they weren't in the past too). The world can be manipulated, by the placement of these items which can constantly change over time. However, these are pre-constructed objects that are not user-created, and that is the distinction i make.
Never EVER everyone will be happy with a game. In DF ( Darkfall ) everyone said what a nice hardcore sandbox pvp game it is, but the veterans asked for the Devs to make it more noob friendly in the begining ( with questing etc ) to attract new members... This is what ArcheAge did... but people complain about it, for 30 levels that will attact the WoW people and other themepark before they quit...
The problem is, people make no difference between terms design and feature, and interchange it all the time. The discussion then is lacking any sense.
In very simplified way, one question could be asked to check whether the game is a sandbox: Is there a power curve that underlines the progress through the game? Do I need to get stronger to unlock, access the content as the current content gets consumed?
If the answer is Yes, then it is no sandbox.
The primary place this definition shows up is in Gdemami posts.
A more commonly accepted (and useful) definition refers to a sandbox MMORPG feature being afeature that empowers players to shape the shared gaming experience.
Examples of sandbox features are terraforming, OWPVP, non-instanced building, farming, and combat, collision physics, auction house, megaserver, user factions, theft, user juries, user crime reporting.
Examples of themepark features are static quests, instancing, phasing, sharding, NPC vendoring, cut scenes, static factions, software law enforcement.
This definition gives a useful way to measure a gradiant between themepark and sandbox instead of trying to make everything black or white, which usually leads to roughly one game being labeled a "sandbox" (typically the poster's favorite game).
Quite a few aspects of Archeage are player driven so it definitely has some sandbox in it. The trade routes, housing, farms, open world PvP, trial system etc. It isn't a pure sandbox style game like say EVE but it definitely has some elements of it.
Is there a power curve that underlines the progress through the game? Do I need to get stronger to unlock, access the content as the current content gets consumed?
If the answer is Yes, then it is no sandbox.
This has to be the goofiest definition of sandbox I've ever heard. This has nothing at all to do with the topic.
Originally posted by dandurin Examples of sandbox features are terraforming, OWPVP, non-instanced building, farming, and combat, collision physics, auction house, megaserver, user factions, theft, user juries, user crime reporting. Examples of themepark features are static quests, instancing, phasing, sharding, NPC vendoring, cut scenes, static factions, software law enforcement.
Nothing of that has anything to do with game beinga sandbox or themepark.
Examples of sandbox features are terraforming, OWPVP, non-instanced building, farming, and combat, collision physics, auction house, megaserver, user factions, theft, user juries, user crime reporting.
Examples of themepark features are static quests, instancing, phasing, sharding, NPC vendoring, cut scenes, static factions, software law enforcement.
Nothing of that has anything to do with game beinga sandbox or themepark.
Features =/= design.
Nah he is completely correct. Not sure what your definition of sandbox is but the things he listed are more or less spot on for things you expect in a sandbox game. Anything that allows the player to control how the server progresses is sandbox and each of his suggestions does that.
Originally posted by Ender4 Nah he is completely correct.
Nope, he just misuse the terms in same fashion I talked about above.
Originally posted by Gdemami It is not as much an issues of lack of term defintion as it is complete misuse of it.There was a recently a post in EVE forums claiming that EVE is not a sandbox because you cannot paint and customize visual appearance of ships. That is the root issue here - people call a sandbox w/e flies their boat regardless whether it makes any sense whatsoever.As I said many times, feature list =/= design. Ship paint jobs are a feature and therefore do not determine the design. This goes for any feature and any list of features is equally meaningless. The problem is, people make no difference between terms design and feature, and interchange it all the time. The discussion then is lacking any sense.
A game can have same features but one can be a sandbox while the other is themepark. What matters is not the features but how they are implemented - design of the game.
"Sandbox/themepark features" is nonsense, no such thing exists. It is a misuse of terms.
Examples of sandbox features are terraforming, OWPVP, non-instanced building, farming, and combat, collision physics, auction house, megaserver, user factions, theft, user juries, user crime reporting.
Examples of themepark features are static quests, instancing, phasing, sharding, NPC vendoring, cut scenes, static factions, software law enforcement.
Nothing of that has anything to do with game beinga sandbox or themepark.
Features =/= design.
Nah he is completely correct. Not sure what your definition of sandbox is but the things he listed are more or less spot on for things you expect in a sandbox game. Anything that allows the player to control how the server progresses is sandbox and each of his suggestions does that.
WoW has OWPVP, farming, combat, auction house, megaservers(not mega mega but a cluster of servers), so about half the list. Does that make WoW Half sandbox? Obviously not.
This is what Gdemami means when he says features =/= design.
I know you all are experts and have a doctors degree in MMO design buzzwords. But so far I see people put so many of their own values into the word sandbox so much that you all are not even talking about the same subject. There are different sandboxes, and there are different theme parks. Some have more sandboxy stuff in them, some have less, those with less do not stop being sandbox. Some themeparks have sandbox elements, that do not make them sandboxes. They are... (gasp) different.
So you can not talk about features. Features can be put in and taken out of a game without changing its style. You can put housing into a theme park, it does not suddenly turn into a sandbox. You can put quests into a sandbox, it does not suddenly turn into a theme park. You can even add or extract several features without changing its concept. Let us instead talk about differences.
In a sandbox, you have a freedom of character.
In a theme park, you have a predefined character.
This create the rules which the rest of the game has to be built around.
If you have a predefined character, there is not much else that can be done to him, he will get bigger and better, in a known path, and the game has to be built around that path so that the player can build him. If you start a toon, he will grow in a certain way and the game then is there to help him grow as easilly and entertaining as possible. Only thing you can do is change its level, so the game is built around giving you levels, in whatever way the developers thought most fun.
When you have freedom of character, meaning the developers have no set path for you, they just gave you the tools to go out into the world and do whatever you want. They create a situation where they do not know what you want do with your character, and the options have to be a lot wider. You might want to fight all the time, or you might want the be a woodsman, or a bartender, shopkeeper, or just be social and walk around talking to people and maybe sit on your porch and stroke an imaginary kitten. The options are there, and there are also game systems there to reward you for your quirky little joys in life.
And then hybrids of course.
Sandbox, like Ultima Online, SWG, EVE and that social game where you made an avatar and spent all day making and buying clothes, stuff and houses for example (forgot its name) are typical sandboxes, close to pure.
Theme parks are... well, almost the rest..
Hybrids, Anarchy Online, Fallen Earth and Archeage, not because of lack of freedom, or existance of quest hubs, but they are all three combat oriented even with all their freedom of progression.
And if I did not mention your pet project, these are examples, not complete lists.
In SWG beta, developers asked us what we wanted to do when the game went live, what careers we were planning. I said I wanted to be a smuggler bartender, selling drinks over the counter, and goods in the back room. Game went live, I could do just that.
In Ultima Online, first month of release.. I was a tailor, and spent a whole month in the clothes shop, making clothes for those that entered.
In Archeage... you will find my at my farm. It will have all the crafting anyone can require.
"This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force"
AA is a form of MMORPG turing test, OP like many others did not pass. Not unusual, takes a certain type of player to recognize the more subtle qualities of the game, many will not find them.
Now, i know some of you will say these aren't MMOs, with the exception of Landmark, however, what do they all have in common? They have tools and creative modes, and they aren't just for building. You can create scripts, avatars, textures, buildings, and in some cases, your own A.I. You can pretty much build your own MMO in SL if you have the skills, although i wouldn't recommend it, since the tech is really crappy for an MMO. Landmark will soon have storybricks, and tools to create your own quests and scripts (from what i've read anyway).
The point is, developers need to provide the creative tools (shovels & buckets), for their virtual environments (cities & zones, etc.). Otherwise, you get developer created content which remains static until they change it. In other words, a themepark.
Could housing and farming in AA be considered sandbox tools, by changing the environment? One could argue yes, but then all the other MMOs that have harvesting and housing could be considered sandboxes too, and i don't think anyone here would seriously say WoW is a sandbox since it also has farming, and soon it will have garrisons.
Examples of sandbox features are terraforming, OWPVP, non-instanced building, farming, and combat, collision physics, auction house, megaserver, user factions, theft, user juries, user crime reporting.
Examples of themepark features are static quests, instancing, phasing, sharding, NPC vendoring, cut scenes, static factions, software law enforcement.
Nothing of that has anything to do with game beinga sandbox or themepark.
Features =/= design.
Nah he is completely correct. Not sure what your definition of sandbox is but the things he listed are more or less spot on for things you expect in a sandbox game. Anything that allows the player to control how the server progresses is sandbox and each of his suggestions does that.
WoW has OWPVP, farming, combat, auction house, megaservers(not mega mega but a cluster of servers), so about half the list. Does that make WoW Half sandbox? Obviously not.
This is what Gdemami means when he says features =/= design.
Wow has instanced farming and instanced garrisons. Try harder.
You're really claiming a game with literally hundreds of servers should count as megaserver? The point is the more a game divides players by shards, the less sandboxy it is.
Yes, WoW has OWPVP... on PVP servers. Surprise, PVP servers are more sandboxy than PVE servers.
WoW having non-instanced combat doesn't make it "a sandbox", but it sure makes it more sandboxy than DDO, which does not. In any event, I did not produce an exhaustive list of sandbox features, so a game having 50% of those features doesn't make it 50% sandbox.
As for "auction house", it's just in there as a contrast with "vendoring". The more a game relies on vendoring stuff instead of player trade, the less sandboxy it becomes.
A game can have same features but one can be a sandbox while the other is themepark. What matters is not the features but how they are implemented - design of the game.
You have repeatedly asserted that what matters is "sandbox design", and repeatedly failed to define what "sandbox design" is. Probably because you can't without talking about the dreaded "features".
"Sandbox/themepark features" is nonsense, no such thing exists. It is a misuse of terms.
Well it's "nonsense" to you, because you stubbornly adhere to a definition that no one else uses.
Basically:
a) you like Eve
b) "sandbox" means "good" these days
c) you want only Eve to be "good", so
d) you define "sandbox" so as to apply only to Eve
I have to admit I had the same experience as described by the op.
I logged in and saw some golden exclamation marks hovering over some heads. I did some stuff I was asked to and ran to some other guys with golden question marks hovering over their heads. After maybe one hour I logged off and did not start the game again ...
This is definitely not what I had expected after what I heard about the game!
Personally I find it pretty easy to define a 'sandbox' game, it all comes down to freedom of choice and freedom of action. A 'sandbox' game should feel like a 'sandbox' from the very first minute and not after I hit a certain level. A 'sandbox' game gives me the possibility to freely interact with the environment and does not force me to do the exact same stuff everyone is doing. If I look at the starting experience of AA I can clearly see everyone is doing the excact same stuff at the beginning. This is not 'sandbox' this is just boring.
In a 'sandbox' game players should make different experiences after they start their adventure. There should be a lot of different ways to evolve a character and an individual game experience. If every player is doing the exact same stuff for the first hours of the game, it clearly does not feel like a 'sandbox'. And to my mind the op is absolutly right with his question!
To my honest opinion the starting in a 'sandbox' game should looke something like that:
I am thrown into an unknown world and my first task is to figure out what to do in this world. There is no tutorial and there is no strange guy with a hovering exclamation mark over his head who tells me: 'Do this and that and than go to this guy' and when I come to this other guy he says: 'Do this and that and than go to this guy'.
I want to decide what to do and where to go!
Maybe I want to start by picking some flowers and make a nice colorfull girdle of flowers?
Maybe I want to beat the first NPC I meet with my bare fists, instantly realizing that it was a bad idea when I hear my death cry?
Maybe I want to ask this NPC if there are any interesting news and he will tell me to wander to an area where young players recently started to build a village?
Maybe I want to be a lonesome wolf in the wilderness and start collecting some leafs and grass to build my first simple animal trap. I am sure I will find some flint and figure out how to make a camp fire?
Maybe I want to carve a whistle from that tree over there and start as a wandering musician?
Maybe I want to be a beggar? This branch there looks like a perfect beggars staff. I will take it and wander around to find people that might give me a dime.
Maybe I just want to wander around the first day to explore the world I was thrown into?
Maybe ...
Maybe ...
Maybe ...
To my mind this is what makes a game a 'sandbox': freedom of choice and freedom of action! The basic question is will the game let me do that? And no I dont need to play a game for a certain amount of hours or until I reach a certain level, I can realize this from the frist minutes in game.
Originally posted by dandurinYou have repeatedly asserted that what matters is "sandbox design", and repeatedly failed to define what "sandbox design" is. Probably because you can't without talking about the dreaded "features".
If you keep misusing the terms, there is no way you can understand what I say and what sandbox design is.
Been skimming the posts on this thread for a few days, and I got to say, there is some funny stuff here.
That is not to slam anyone at all, but there has been levity through out.
It occurs to me, regardless of this topic, that...
A) This game is creating quite a stir
You guys have true spirit about your gamming preferences, this gives me hopes for a healthy future of gamming.
C) Given this mornings notes on the patch changes to the game, If you keep letting your opinions, form, grow, and season, this game may become a whopper
Now as to the topic.
Sandbox . I want to jump in a mig 29 from BF1942 DCF, and fly in to GT4 bomb all of the cars and leave. And And, do it it all with no electronic devices, or software.
I can't, then I will probably need to do the best I can with what I have.
However if the community keeps letting their opinions be known...who knows.
Bye the way, enjoy the game folks, and God Bless.
See the world and all within it. Live a lifetime in every minute.
If UO2 existed I would play that, until then this will be fine.
For those that keep arguing about those mysterious, eluding sandbox MMORPGs, where you can terraform and shape the world, create dungeons and NPCs with custom AI, design and run story adventures, organize and lead real time world events, all in a seamless non-instanced world, free for all PvP with large scale guild, faction and realm wars fighting for world domination etc. go ahead and list them.
I am very much interested.
Until then, post what features *exactly* you are looking for in the game and I am pretty sure people will be able to give you a conclusive answer... or just use google, that will work too.
Originally posted by fivoroth It's hilarious that the op probably spent more time writing up this topic than actually playing the game.
edit: Not worth it. Sorry.
I did want to mention that the OP was just looking for some answers. He didn't just throw his hands up in the air in frustration after 30 minutes and quit. If you read further in the thread he keeps asking more questions but people just considered him another hater. At least thats what I got from it.
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
"the ultimate fantasy-sandbox" - Directly from the front page of their website lol
Before you can say it isn't that, you have to state what you think fantasy-sandbox is first, because if you're looking for a needle and don't even know what a needle is, you wouldn't even know one if you saw one.
Is this Bill? This sure sounds like the whole "define to me the meaning of the word is". Mr. Clinton please keep in mind most people understand the meaning of what Sandbox is. This game has Sandbox features, but has done a horrible job implementing them early on to introduce and excite players to drudge through hours of mindless questing and poorly told stories.
Don't get me wrong ..... I love the concept and ideas behind this game. I have played it on the Russian servers before we got it in the US. I really want to like the game, but for a modern MMO in 2014 it fails to shine..... especially as a Sandbox.
Comments
The first thing we have to consider on this subject is that we're talking MMORPGs, so these games are designed first and foremost around that moniker. Second we have to consider it's not that a game is a sandbox, it's that it's a sandbox style MMORPG... Which simply implies it's more about playing the game your way, openly, with an amount of that play effecting the world/community in some way. This mostly involves player creation, if going by the traditional sense of the term..
I'm not a fan of putting hardline qualifiers on these kinds of topics as you did above. A game could follow alI of what I mentioned in my considerations, yet at the same time have "other" aspects.
As again we're talking MMORPG's first and foremost. Not actual sandboxes.
If anything when it comes to this term, we might as well just replace sandbox with Sim... Because that's what these aspects more closely represent. SWG as an example was essentially a Star Wars Sim.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I agree that people are misusing the word "sandbox", and that's my entire point.
I disagree that designs and features are inseparable. Features are designed by the developers, and sometimes the users cannot manipulate the design of them, making them static. If the developers designed this "paint job feature" to be customizable, then it would be user-generated content.
This is why i determine that a virtual world, that is completely manipulated by the developers, is not a sandbox.
I also disagree with your last paragraph. Progression can co-exist with user-generated content, with some limitations of course.
I'll admit that there are a couple sandbox features that AA does have, and that is housing and farming (i admit i might have said that they weren't in the past too). The world can be manipulated, by the placement of these items which can constantly change over time. However, these are pre-constructed objects that are not user-created, and that is the distinction i make.
Never EVER everyone will be happy with a game. In DF ( Darkfall ) everyone said what a nice hardcore sandbox pvp game it is, but the veterans asked for the Devs to make it more noob friendly in the begining ( with questing etc ) to attract new members... This is what ArcheAge did... but people complain about it, for 30 levels that will attact the WoW people and other themepark before they quit...
Chill out guys and play the game.
"This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly.
It should be thrown with great force"
The primary place this definition shows up is in Gdemami posts.
A more commonly accepted (and useful) definition refers to a sandbox MMORPG feature being a feature that empowers players to shape the shared gaming experience.
Examples of sandbox features are terraforming, OWPVP, non-instanced building, farming, and combat, collision physics, auction house, megaserver, user factions, theft, user juries, user crime reporting.
Examples of themepark features are static quests, instancing, phasing, sharding, NPC vendoring, cut scenes, static factions, software law enforcement.
This definition gives a useful way to measure a gradiant between themepark and sandbox instead of trying to make everything black or white, which usually leads to roughly one game being labeled a "sandbox" (typically the poster's favorite game).
Someone in another thread stated it well.
theme park = dev driven
sandbox = player driven
Quite a few aspects of Archeage are player driven so it definitely has some sandbox in it. The trade routes, housing, farms, open world PvP, trial system etc. It isn't a pure sandbox style game like say EVE but it definitely has some elements of it.
I played a lot of hours, and Im still finding a lot to do at only level 30.
The PvP is fun and fast. The farming for mats is fun for me. The trade runs are good for gold. The crafting is also fun.
Ill be very happy when it releases, with all of its flaws, its still a hell of a lot of fun.....And, fun is why i play games for.
This has to be the goofiest definition of sandbox I've ever heard. This has nothing at all to do with the topic.
Nothing of that has anything to do with game beinga sandbox or themepark.
Features =/= design.
Nah he is completely correct. Not sure what your definition of sandbox is but the things he listed are more or less spot on for things you expect in a sandbox game. Anything that allows the player to control how the server progresses is sandbox and each of his suggestions does that.
Nope, he just misuse the terms in same fashion I talked about above.
A game can have same features but one can be a sandbox while the other is themepark. What matters is not the features but how they are implemented - design of the game.
"Sandbox/themepark features" is nonsense, no such thing exists. It is a misuse of terms.
WoW has OWPVP, farming, combat, auction house, megaservers(not mega mega but a cluster of servers), so about half the list. Does that make WoW Half sandbox? Obviously not.
This is what Gdemami means when he says features =/= design.
I know you all are experts and have a doctors degree in MMO design buzzwords. But so far I see people put so many of their own values into the word sandbox so much that you all are not even talking about the same subject. There are different sandboxes, and there are different theme parks. Some have more sandboxy stuff in them, some have less, those with less do not stop being sandbox. Some themeparks have sandbox elements, that do not make them sandboxes. They are... (gasp) different.
So you can not talk about features. Features can be put in and taken out of a game without changing its style. You can put housing into a theme park, it does not suddenly turn into a sandbox. You can put quests into a sandbox, it does not suddenly turn into a theme park. You can even add or extract several features without changing its concept. Let us instead talk about differences.
In a sandbox, you have a freedom of character.
In a theme park, you have a predefined character.
This create the rules which the rest of the game has to be built around.
If you have a predefined character, there is not much else that can be done to him, he will get bigger and better, in a known path, and the game has to be built around that path so that the player can build him. If you start a toon, he will grow in a certain way and the game then is there to help him grow as easilly and entertaining as possible. Only thing you can do is change its level, so the game is built around giving you levels, in whatever way the developers thought most fun.
When you have freedom of character, meaning the developers have no set path for you, they just gave you the tools to go out into the world and do whatever you want. They create a situation where they do not know what you want do with your character, and the options have to be a lot wider. You might want to fight all the time, or you might want the be a woodsman, or a bartender, shopkeeper, or just be social and walk around talking to people and maybe sit on your porch and stroke an imaginary kitten. The options are there, and there are also game systems there to reward you for your quirky little joys in life.
And then hybrids of course.
Sandbox, like Ultima Online, SWG, EVE and that social game where you made an avatar and spent all day making and buying clothes, stuff and houses for example (forgot its name) are typical sandboxes, close to pure.
Theme parks are... well, almost the rest..
Hybrids, Anarchy Online, Fallen Earth and Archeage, not because of lack of freedom, or existance of quest hubs, but they are all three combat oriented even with all their freedom of progression.
And if I did not mention your pet project, these are examples, not complete lists.
In SWG beta, developers asked us what we wanted to do when the game went live, what careers we were planning. I said I wanted to be a smuggler bartender, selling drinks over the counter, and goods in the back room. Game went live, I could do just that.
In Ultima Online, first month of release.. I was a tailor, and spent a whole month in the clothes shop, making clothes for those that entered.
In Archeage... you will find my at my farm. It will have all the crafting anyone can require.
"This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly.
It should be thrown with great force"
Hey guys. I'm smart because I play Archeage.
Well, since nobody wanted to make a list of AA's sandbox "features", i'll just list these videos of what sandbox should mean.
Wow has instanced farming and instanced garrisons. Try harder.
You're really claiming a game with literally hundreds of servers should count as megaserver? The point is the more a game divides players by shards, the less sandboxy it is.
Yes, WoW has OWPVP... on PVP servers. Surprise, PVP servers are more sandboxy than PVE servers.
WoW having non-instanced combat doesn't make it "a sandbox", but it sure makes it more sandboxy than DDO, which does not. In any event, I did not produce an exhaustive list of sandbox features, so a game having 50% of those features doesn't make it 50% sandbox.
As for "auction house", it's just in there as a contrast with "vendoring". The more a game relies on vendoring stuff instead of player trade, the less sandboxy it becomes.
You have repeatedly asserted that what matters is "sandbox design", and repeatedly failed to define what "sandbox design" is. Probably because you can't without talking about the dreaded "features".
Well it's "nonsense" to you, because you stubbornly adhere to a definition that no one else uses.
Basically:
a) you like Eve
b) "sandbox" means "good" these days
c) you want only Eve to be "good", so
d) you define "sandbox" so as to apply only to Eve
I have to admit I had the same experience as described by the op.
I logged in and saw some golden exclamation marks hovering over some heads. I did some stuff I was asked to and ran to some other guys with golden question marks hovering over their heads. After maybe one hour I logged off and did not start the game again ...
This is definitely not what I had expected after what I heard about the game!
Personally I find it pretty easy to define a 'sandbox' game, it all comes down to freedom of choice and freedom of action. A 'sandbox' game should feel like a 'sandbox' from the very first minute and not after I hit a certain level. A 'sandbox' game gives me the possibility to freely interact with the environment and does not force me to do the exact same stuff everyone is doing. If I look at the starting experience of AA I can clearly see everyone is doing the excact same stuff at the beginning. This is not 'sandbox' this is just boring.
In a 'sandbox' game players should make different experiences after they start their adventure. There should be a lot of different ways to evolve a character and an individual game experience. If every player is doing the exact same stuff for the first hours of the game, it clearly does not feel like a 'sandbox'. And to my mind the op is absolutly right with his question!
To my honest opinion the starting in a 'sandbox' game should looke something like that:
I am thrown into an unknown world and my first task is to figure out what to do in this world. There is no tutorial and there is no strange guy with a hovering exclamation mark over his head who tells me: 'Do this and that and than go to this guy' and when I come to this other guy he says: 'Do this and that and than go to this guy'.
I want to decide what to do and where to go!
Maybe I want to start by picking some flowers and make a nice colorfull girdle of flowers?
Maybe I want to beat the first NPC I meet with my bare fists, instantly realizing that it was a bad idea when I hear my death cry?
Maybe I want to ask this NPC if there are any interesting news and he will tell me to wander to an area where young players recently started to build a village?
Maybe I want to be a lonesome wolf in the wilderness and start collecting some leafs and grass to build my first simple animal trap. I am sure I will find some flint and figure out how to make a camp fire?
Maybe I want to carve a whistle from that tree over there and start as a wandering musician?
Maybe I want to be a beggar? This branch there looks like a perfect beggars staff. I will take it and wander around to find people that might give me a dime.
Maybe I just want to wander around the first day to explore the world I was thrown into?
Maybe ...
Maybe ...
Maybe ...
To my mind this is what makes a game a 'sandbox': freedom of choice and freedom of action! The basic question is will the game let me do that? And no I dont need to play a game for a certain amount of hours or until I reach a certain level, I can realize this from the frist minutes in game.
If you keep misusing the terms, there is no way you can understand what I say and what sandbox design is.
The issue is on your end, not mine.
Been skimming the posts on this thread for a few days, and I got to say, there is some funny stuff here.
That is not to slam anyone at all, but there has been levity through out.
It occurs to me, regardless of this topic, that...
A) This game is creating quite a stir
C) Given this mornings notes on the patch changes to the game, If you keep letting your opinions, form, grow, and season, this game may become a whopper
Now as to the topic.
Sandbox . I want to jump in a mig 29 from BF1942 DCF, and fly in to GT4 bomb all of the cars and leave. And And, do it it all with no electronic devices, or software.
I can't, then I will probably need to do the best I can with what I have.
However if the community keeps letting their opinions be known...who knows.
Bye the way, enjoy the game folks, and God Bless.
See the world and all within it.
Live a lifetime in every minute.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
If UO2 existed I would play that, until then this will be fine.
For those that keep arguing about those mysterious, eluding sandbox MMORPGs, where you can terraform and shape the world, create dungeons and NPCs with custom AI, design and run story adventures, organize and lead real time world events, all in a seamless non-instanced world, free for all PvP with large scale guild, faction and realm wars fighting for world domination etc. go ahead and list them.
I am very much interested.
Until then, post what features *exactly* you are looking for in the game and I am pretty sure people will be able to give you a conclusive answer... or just use google, that will work too.
edit: Not worth it. Sorry.
I did want to mention that the OP was just looking for some answers. He didn't just throw his hands up in the air in frustration after 30 minutes and quit. If you read further in the thread he keeps asking more questions but people just considered him another hater. At least thats what I got from it.
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
Is this Bill? This sure sounds like the whole "define to me the meaning of the word is". Mr. Clinton please keep in mind most people understand the meaning of what Sandbox is. This game has Sandbox features, but has done a horrible job implementing them early on to introduce and excite players to drudge through hours of mindless questing and poorly told stories.
Don't get me wrong ..... I love the concept and ideas behind this game. I have played it on the Russian servers before we got it in the US. I really want to like the game, but for a modern MMO in 2014 it fails to shine..... especially as a Sandbox.