Originally posted by Rusque Originally posted by GdemamiOriginally posted by RusqueEVE has no competition . . .
That is like saying that WoW has no competition...Both have competition, they are just simply the best at their themes.Please, do share. List for me all the rival options for a Space Sci-Fi MMO.
Star Trek Online? (does this even count?)
Vendetta Online (lol 20-30 people logged in at any given time, maybe 50 on weekends - real competition guys!)
Jumpgate Evocancelledlution
Elite Dangerous - a Z-axis shooter (aka completely different genre of game but w/e we can include it).
Just swimming in competition. So tough.
Elite:Dangerous isn't even an MMO, and I cant say I have heard of any of those others besides start trek.
So yea I would agree with you that EVE definately has a lot of "competitors"
I think it is because of human nature that makes people abuse freedom given to them to kill other people / gank, ruin other players' gaming experience, etc.
It is possible that when people move a little further in their evolution, this characteristic will disappear, but I would not bet on it. It seems that people are stuck with their crappy nature as it is probably important from the evolutionary point of view.
It is not the game's fault that players kill each other on sight when given the opportunity. Sad, right? The games could do a better job in implementing effective regulatory mechanisms though. Real world is also FFA PvP, but it has regulatory mechanisms in place (permadeath sentence, jail, permadeath in general making threat of retaliation a regulatory mechanism in itself, etc.).
I know it is not what you meant, but this point of view should not be completely ignored. People should stop blaming games and developers and realize what the true root cause is here.
The only thing that should ruin your gaming experience in a PvP game is being killed by a hacker. Dying to somebody higher level than you or getting attacked by multiple players should not ruin your experience in a PvP game.
If you have noticed pvp has been everywhere and it is simple to figure out why.These devs have no ability to create unique content nor do they have the budget or team to make quality content ,so they just flag players for pvp and call it a day.It takes about 2 minutes to go into the game menu and tick off players flagged for pvp,the devs can just tell one guy to do that while they sit around drinking coffee,discussing what bar they are going to celebrate at with all *the money.
CEO A ..So where we going Joe,what bar
President: Well idk my wife is expecting me home early she has dinner planned.
CEO Bah ,just tell her you have important business with the game design,you have to work late,tell her you have to flag players for pvp and takes a lot of effort.
President : Well idk ,you think she will believe that?
CEO:oh shit ya,she hangs out on forums right,they believe anything a developer tells them....:).
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Please, do share. List for me all the rival options for a Space Sci-Fi MMO.
Why? You listed them yourself, you are aware of them, you just deliberately deny/ignore them. Your choice, your false train of thought.
Ah okay, so you're trolling. Fair enough.
Technically white knighting. :P
Which I realized the moment he started calling other people's opinions baseless while presenting his own as absolute truth, combined with the claim of EVE having as much competition as WoW. (Which wouldn't even come close even if you combined every Sandbox ever made and declared them all as competition for EVE regardless of setting)
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
You could make the same thread but titled: "Sandbox = deep crafting system - why?"
Honestly, I think that would apply to even more games than PvP ganking.
They're just a few of those systems that developers see as tools to create a player society. Both building things and destroying things create rivalries and competition in the playerbase.
I do personally think there's room for sandboxes without PvP, without crafting, or with both however.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
As has been stated by many in this thread - There are lots of ways to handle item degradation while placing an importance on crafting without the need for full loot or forced PVP. They cost more time and money so we're stuck with every new sandbox being all about killing each other.
Ah, I see you're one of those types. Consider my baseless rumbling ended.
Besides, your precious EVE is hardly the parade horse for full loot PvP games, as it has safe zones where people can develop their characters/ships somewhat before entering the gank zones if I'm not mistaken*.
I imagine if it didn't have that, it would be ranked somewhere below DF (which probably IS the most successful MMO of that particular niche).
* Or even stay indefinitely if they're alright with progressing very slowly?
If someone tried to tell me WOW wasn't a shining example of PVE design due to the trait where lower-skill players are still given a lot of content they can accomplish (dungeons, LFR raids) then I would laugh and say that it's actually one of the reasons why WOW dominates the market.
Similarly, it seems stupid to criticize one of EVE's PVP rules, given that those rules are likely one of the reason it dominates its market.
In either case, creating rules which are too hardcore-tilted is going to result in a ton of players thinking your game is crap and leaving -- and a barren game isn't exactly a parade horse by any stretch, is it?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Originally posted by Iselin Because when you give people total freedom, they fight... way to go, human race!
Kids play in sandboxes for hours without fighting, so there's that. Our instinct is survival and community not killing one another as that is a threat to survival.
only if the sandbox is big enough and each has its own toys. if that's not the case, then there's screaming, tears and smashed sand castles ... I do have kids, I know :-)
Oh I have kids too - smashed sand castles happen but they are rebuilt sometimes together. What it doesn't lead to is killings. Cooperation among people is a lot more natural than killing - otherwise none of us would be here. My point remains - PvE sandbox games exist and are just as viable as PvP sandbox games.
Cooperation within families or extended families (tribes) is indeed pretty natural, although not absolutely so. The problems usually begin when an outsider or stranger tries to play in your sandbox.... or when a member of the tribe is having a bad day. That's where rules and laws or parents/child minders come in: to enforce civilized behaviour in situations where you may not instinctively feel like being civilized.
I'm not disagreeing with you that PVE sandboxes exist; they obviously do. But I think the fact that so many think that those are not "real" sandboxes is pretty telling.
A lot of people seem to equate sandbox with an absence of rules or laws. They think anarchy... and they feel that anything that the developer does to limit or prevent them from doing something they want to do invalidates the sandbox designation. Safe zones, designated PVP times or zones, no loot PVP or any other rules that prevent them from going postal whenever and wherever they feel like it is seen as "not sandbox."
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Originally posted by RusqueAh okay, so you're trolling. Fair enough.
You say there is no competition, yet you are still capable to assemble list of games that are competing with EVE, games that supposedly do not exist...and I am the troll here?
Just because your reasoning is invalid does not make one a troll, sorry.
Originally posted by Sojhin A sandbox without player conflict is a themepark or sandpark.
Simply wrong. There are PvE only sandbox games.
I would not call a PvE only game a sandbox.
A sandbox allows one person to take another's stuff. In this magical sandbox one can throw another into the sand and attempt to pile driver em when they are down. At the same time it has the option of bystanders deciding to pile on or avenge. Some can just ignore this conflict and hope it does not come at them while they go about making things with the sand but the threat is there all the same.
Remove the threat and you remove much of the creativity to have 'meaningful' play experiences. When you cannot influence another player what you have is really a game that is a player created sandpark but never a sandbox.
Looting someone has nothing to do with Sandbox play. Like a sandbox in RL, you can build, shape and create. Thats all you need to make a Sandbox MMO. The ability to build, shape and create in the game. From story to building a home or town. Sandbox char would be the freedom to build your own class, much freedom in skills. PvP in itself is not a sandbox feature unless you get to make your own PvP games, just like Landmark does.
Originally posted by vandal5627 sandbox = ghost town in 3 months = ftp ftw in 6 months = closed down in less than a year = why devs don't create a sandbox.
Replace sandbox with themepark and its correct.
This is exactly what is happening (since 10 years) with all themeparks, not sandboxes.
Originally posted by vandal5627 sandbox = ghost town in 3 months = ftp ftw in 6 months = closed down in less than a year = why devs don't create a sandbox.
Replace sandbox with themepark and its correct.
This is exactly what is happening (since 10 years) with all themeparks, not sandboxes.
Actually, its pretty much both. I can count the number of successful "sandbox" mmos on 1 hand thats missing fingers.
inb4 someone counts games no ones heard of as successful
Like a sandbox in RL, you can build, shape and create. Thats all you need to make a Sandbox MMO.
That's a narrow view. In RL you can knock down someone else's sand castle. Throw sand in their eyes. Kill them, take their stuff. Risk, loss, fear, conflict all make life exciting as they do in sandbox games.
Any sandbox games without conflict and competition between players would be dull and wouldn't work. I would find it hard to call something a game where everyone just builds things and goes around and a visits other peoples creations in peace.
Originally posted by vandal5627 sandbox = ghost town in 3 months = ftp ftw in 6 months = closed down in less than a year = why devs don't create a sandbox.
Replace sandbox with themepark and its correct.
This is exactly what is happening (since 10 years) with all themeparks, not sandboxes.
Actually, its pretty much both. I can count the number of successful "sandbox" mmos on 1 hand thats missing fingers.
inb4 someone counts games no ones heard of as successful
IMO pure Sandbox and pure Themepark MMOs are a flawed concept alone. I think the MMOs thats really going to do well is one that is a union of both. Themepark thats not over done (only where it shines as themepark does some things better) and the best of Sandbox that will be done in a way that themepark gamers will not know they are playing in a sandbox.
Like a sandbox in RL, you can build, shape and create. Thats all you need to make a Sandbox MMO.
That's a narrow view. In RL you can knock down someone else's sand castle. Throw sand in their eyes. Kill them, take their stuff. Risk, loss, fear, conflict all make life exciting as they do in sandbox games.
Any sandbox games without conflict and competition between players would be dull and wouldn't work. I would find it hard to call something a game where everyone just builds things and goes around and a visits other peoples creations in peace.
Then you have sandboxes where teachers and parents are watching and you get sent home if you are a jurk, sometimes you may never be permitted to go back to that sandbox. Rules have nothing to do with Sandbox. Only the ability to make content in that game and shape it.
Do people ever stop to ask themselves why carebears are playing a full open world PVP game in the first place? They try to make it seem like the second that one of these kinds of games releases that there will be hundreds or thousands of completely docile and brain dead defenseless children (who average probably around age 25-30) who suddenly buy the games against their will and are forced to install them on their computer and be online 15 hours a day and perpetually get ganked by the refuse of society. This is the picture that is painted, I just find it odd nobody actually considers how ridiculous the idea is.
You play one of these games with the knowledge of what can happen, those "carebears" are just PVPers who aren't very good. They would much rather be on the other side of the fence, in nearly all cases. You don't move to a warzone to farm cabbages.
Though there are some of us who enjoy the challenge and very much would like to grow cabbages in a hostile place and have to fend off anti social scum from our land. If you're not one of these kind of people, and take no enjoyment from being a character in a world where a lot of bad things can happen to you and around you, then play something safer that holds your hand and protects you.
I for one like the feeling of not being safe, because it's a game and I need that level of excitement and fear in them to make it worth my while to really get invested into an online world. Without it they don't feel like worlds, they feel like amusement parks. Those are fun, but if you lived at Disneyland your whole life, you'd get bored eventually.
It's been brought up plenty of times but it falls on deaf ears.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
Like a sandbox in RL, you can build, shape and create. Thats all you need to make a Sandbox MMO.
That's a narrow view. In RL you can knock down someone else's sand castle. Throw sand in their eyes. Kill them, take their stuff. Risk, loss, fear, conflict all make life exciting as they do in sandbox games.
Any sandbox games without conflict and competition between players would be dull and wouldn't work. I would find it hard to call something a game where everyone just builds things and goes around and a visits other peoples creations in peace.
Then you have sandboxes where teachers and parents are watching and you get sent home if you are a jurk, sometimes you may never be permitted to go back to that sandbox. Rules have nothing to do with Sandbox. Only the ability to make content in that game and shape it.
Making content is only half of the sandbox. Destruction is essential.
The whole point of sandbox games is freedom. Putting limits on a sandbox game would make it a sandpark. Simple as that
Originally posted by vandal5627 sandbox = ghost town in 3 months = ftp ftw in 6 months = closed down in less than a year = why devs don't create a sandbox.
Replace sandbox with themepark and its correct.
This is exactly what is happening (since 10 years) with all themeparks, not sandboxes.
Uhhh...I don't see many themeparks closing down. As a matter of fact, the majority are still running and very profitable. Also, it's not happening to sandboxes because a true sandbox game doesn't exist. It has to be mixed with themeparks to be viable.
The majority of people want direction. They want something to strive for. Not get thrown into a world and say hey, do your thing. It's not feasible. Devs are not stupid. They want to make money. If i was a dev, I wouldn't even think about making a true sandbox game. The money is not there. A sprinkle here and there is fine but a true sandbox? No way jose, aint happening.
Originally posted by vandal5627 sandbox = ghost town in 3 months = ftp ftw in 6 months = closed down in less than a year = why devs don't create a sandbox.
Replace sandbox with themepark and its correct.
This is exactly what is happening (since 10 years) with all themeparks, not sandboxes.
Actually, its pretty much both. I can count the number of successful "sandbox" mmos on 1 hand thats missing fingers.
inb4 someone counts games no ones heard of as successful
IMO pure Sandbox and pure Themepark MMOs are a flawed concept alone. I think the MMOs thats really going to do well is one that is a union of both. Themepark thats not over done (only where it shines as themepark does some things better) and the best of Sandbox that will be done in a way that themepark gamers will not know they are playing in a sandbox.
QFT
While I don't think a game can't survive as a PVE game alone (not themepark), an mmorpg that isn't fun before pvp still won't be fun with it. PvP alone will never sustain a virtual world. There has to be different types of players and thus, different types of progression.
Comments
Please, do share. List for me all the rival options for a Space Sci-Fi MMO.
Star Trek Online? (does this even count?)
Vendetta Online (lol 20-30 people logged in at any given time, maybe 50 on weekends - real competition guys!)
Jumpgate Evocancelledlution
Elite Dangerous - a Z-axis shooter (aka completely different genre of game but w/e we can include it).
Just swimming in competition. So tough.
Please, do share. List for me all the rival options for a Space Sci-Fi MMO.
Star Trek Online? (does this even count?)
Vendetta Online (lol 20-30 people logged in at any given time, maybe 50 on weekends - real competition guys!)
Jumpgate Evocancelledlution
Elite Dangerous - a Z-axis shooter (aka completely different genre of game but w/e we can include it).
Just swimming in competition. So tough.
Elite:Dangerous isn't even an MMO, and I cant say I have heard of any of those others besides start trek.
So yea I would agree with you that EVE definately has a lot of "competitors"
Waiting for:
The Repopulation
Albion Online
Why? You listed them yourself, you are aware of them, you just deliberately deny/ignore them. Your choice, your false train of thought.
The only thing that should ruin your gaming experience in a PvP game is being killed by a hacker. Dying to somebody higher level than you or getting attacked by multiple players should not ruin your experience in a PvP game.
I agree.
Ah okay, so you're trolling. Fair enough.
If you have noticed pvp has been everywhere and it is simple to figure out why.These devs have no ability to create unique content nor do they have the budget or team to make quality content ,so they just flag players for pvp and call it a day.It takes about 2 minutes to go into the game menu and tick off players flagged for pvp,the devs can just tell one guy to do that while they sit around drinking coffee,discussing what bar they are going to celebrate at with all *the money.
CEO A ..So where we going Joe,what bar
President: Well idk my wife is expecting me home early she has dinner planned.
CEO Bah ,just tell her you have important business with the game design,you have to work late,tell her you have to flag players for pvp and takes a lot of effort.
President : Well idk ,you think she will believe that?
CEO:oh shit ya,she hangs out on forums right,they believe anything a developer tells them....:).
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Technically white knighting. :P
Which I realized the moment he started calling other people's opinions baseless while presenting his own as absolute truth, combined with the claim of EVE having as much competition as WoW. (Which wouldn't even come close even if you combined every Sandbox ever made and declared them all as competition for EVE regardless of setting)
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
You could make the same thread but titled: "Sandbox = deep crafting system - why?"
Honestly, I think that would apply to even more games than PvP ganking.
They're just a few of those systems that developers see as tools to create a player society. Both building things and destroying things create rivalries and competition in the playerbase.
I do personally think there's room for sandboxes without PvP, without crafting, or with both however.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Reading the title poster again it seems once again written from the mindset of a pve 'purist' where sandbox pvp equates to 'gank.'
Here is what 'ganking' equates to for a person who is a pvp 'purist.'
* territory control
* diverting tactics to peel off enemies to deal with deaths in an area
* demoralizing one's enemies
* depleting the resources of foes if there is item decay
* honing skills by killing 'rabbits prior to lions,'
* forcing the 'lions' to response so you can hunt them
* all the unscripted things that can happen with pvp that can only happen when interacting with people and not mobs
If someone tried to tell me WOW wasn't a shining example of PVE design due to the trait where lower-skill players are still given a lot of content they can accomplish (dungeons, LFR raids) then I would laugh and say that it's actually one of the reasons why WOW dominates the market.
Similarly, it seems stupid to criticize one of EVE's PVP rules, given that those rules are likely one of the reason it dominates its market.
In either case, creating rules which are too hardcore-tilted is going to result in a ton of players thinking your game is crap and leaving -- and a barren game isn't exactly a parade horse by any stretch, is it?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Cooperation within families or extended families (tribes) is indeed pretty natural, although not absolutely so. The problems usually begin when an outsider or stranger tries to play in your sandbox.... or when a member of the tribe is having a bad day. That's where rules and laws or parents/child minders come in: to enforce civilized behaviour in situations where you may not instinctively feel like being civilized.
I'm not disagreeing with you that PVE sandboxes exist; they obviously do. But I think the fact that so many think that those are not "real" sandboxes is pretty telling.
A lot of people seem to equate sandbox with an absence of rules or laws. They think anarchy... and they feel that anything that the developer does to limit or prevent them from doing something they want to do invalidates the sandbox designation. Safe zones, designated PVP times or zones, no loot PVP or any other rules that prevent them from going postal whenever and wherever they feel like it is seen as "not sandbox."
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
You say there is no competition, yet you are still capable to assemble list of games that are competing with EVE, games that supposedly do not exist...and I am the troll here?
Just because your reasoning is invalid does not make one a troll, sorry.
Looting someone has nothing to do with Sandbox play. Like a sandbox in RL, you can build, shape and create. Thats all you need to make a Sandbox MMO. The ability to build, shape and create in the game. From story to building a home or town. Sandbox char would be the freedom to build your own class, much freedom in skills. PvP in itself is not a sandbox feature unless you get to make your own PvP games, just like Landmark does.
Replace sandbox with themepark and its correct.
This is exactly what is happening (since 10 years) with all themeparks, not sandboxes.
Actually, its pretty much both. I can count the number of successful "sandbox" mmos on 1 hand thats missing fingers.
inb4 someone counts games no ones heard of as successful
That's a narrow view. In RL you can knock down someone else's sand castle. Throw sand in their eyes. Kill them, take their stuff. Risk, loss, fear, conflict all make life exciting as they do in sandbox games.
Any sandbox games without conflict and competition between players would be dull and wouldn't work. I would find it hard to call something a game where everyone just builds things and goes around and a visits other peoples creations in peace.
IMO pure Sandbox and pure Themepark MMOs are a flawed concept alone. I think the MMOs thats really going to do well is one that is a union of both. Themepark thats not over done (only where it shines as themepark does some things better) and the best of Sandbox that will be done in a way that themepark gamers will not know they are playing in a sandbox.
Then you have sandboxes where teachers and parents are watching and you get sent home if you are a jurk, sometimes you may never be permitted to go back to that sandbox. Rules have nothing to do with Sandbox. Only the ability to make content in that game and shape it.
It's been brought up plenty of times but it falls on deaf ears.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
if sandbox you mean freedom
why this complain?
If game allowed you goig ganked
Why this cry?
if Game dont have safezone? and you know that
Why Complain?
Somes have fun do sandbox stuffs , others just want come and kill and loot and survive with less skilled players
5v1? how matter if its mean profit to group?
At momment you signup/buy sandbox game accepty in fact you going get ganked / grief (and grief its another stupid term)
if game allowed and you dont like
"ADAPT OR QUIT" (often used in entropia)
Making content is only half of the sandbox. Destruction is essential.
The whole point of sandbox games is freedom. Putting limits on a sandbox game would make it a sandpark. Simple as that
Uhhh...I don't see many themeparks closing down. As a matter of fact, the majority are still running and very profitable. Also, it's not happening to sandboxes because a true sandbox game doesn't exist. It has to be mixed with themeparks to be viable.
The majority of people want direction. They want something to strive for. Not get thrown into a world and say hey, do your thing. It's not feasible. Devs are not stupid. They want to make money. If i was a dev, I wouldn't even think about making a true sandbox game. The money is not there. A sprinkle here and there is fine but a true sandbox? No way jose, aint happening.
QFT
While I don't think a game can't survive as a PVE game alone (not themepark), an mmorpg that isn't fun before pvp still won't be fun with it. PvP alone will never sustain a virtual world. There has to be different types of players and thus, different types of progression.