I joined EQ2 around the time they launched PVP servers. I level locked and leveled to max almost exclusively on PVP and world exploration. Most would consider EQ2 to be a classic example of a themepark.
What's my point?
I've never played a sandbox that has differentiated itself from a themepark. I've never experienced a sandbox that was anything but a themepark without the rides. I'm sure that the true sandbox does exist but trading questing for housing or farming is not enough for me.
I won't tell anyone that their favorite game is not a sandbox but I will challenge them to share a sandbox experience that would not also be available in any themepark worth its salt.
I don't see why, themeparks and sandboxes just differs from eachother, one isn't better then the other. What makes a MMO better then another is how fun and well made the game is. That is kinda like you telling someone that they favorite band isn't really rock'n roll but metal, that doesn't make the band less good.
And sandboxes is more like a themepark without a map then without rides. It does not tell you what to do and allow more freedom but if it just is a big empty game where you run around and kill other players then it isn't a very good game.
A war between 2 factions/guilds/kingdoms or whatever your game have is a ride if you do it right; for instance taking tactical points, stealing supplies, spy behind enemy lines and so on can be fun and a war should be more then just randomly kill anyone not of your faction. But then is "kill 10 rat" quests not much of a ride either.
This is why I play games with no quests or optional questing (like AA).
I joined EQ2 around the time they launched PVP servers. I level locked and leveled to max almost exclusively on PVP and world exploration. Most would consider EQ2 to be a classic example of a themepark.
What's my point?
I've never played a sandbox that has differentiated itself from a themepark. I've never experienced a sandbox that was anything but a themepark without the rides. I'm sure that the true sandbox does exist but trading questing for housing or farming is not enough for me.
I won't tell anyone that their favorite game is not a sandbox but I will challenge them to share a sandbox experience that would not also be available in any themepark worth its salt.
Sure. In most sandboxes I've played I've built or taken part in building guilds from the ground up. Those guilds had an actual political objective, controlled sections of the map or assisted allied factions in controlling part of the map.
Those wars were not between two or three factions you pick when you start the game. It was actual players grouped together by loyalties to each other, ideologies etc. I've fought former allies and allied with former enemies. Seen betrayals and unexpected alliances ruining and saving people at the last minute.
We'd fight actual wars. Not kill stealing or "accept my duel request coward" wars where the winner is whoever doesn't get bored of killing each other first. Wars where people actually lose things. Gear, resources, territory etc.
I've built bases up from the ground and conquered those held by my enemy. I've become famous on my server loved by my allies and hated by my enemies. People I had never met came to for my help because of the reknown I had built. Had fighters considerably better than me tell them that while I might not remember it, I was the one who trained them to fight as a newb. I've controlled the largest chunk of territory of any group on the map. Built the largest group in a game starting just from myself. Brought groups that thought they were so powerful nobody could stop them to their knees.
And no this wasn't the scripted storyline telling me "You are the chosen one", "You've defeated the evil overlord, the world is saved!" This was me creating my own storyline where the actors are the other players of the game and the end outcome wasn't known to anyone until we created it.
Could you have done those things in EQ2? While I realize some of those things are possible in a themepark, the general feeling of being a major player in the community and your actions actually mattering are nothing I've experienced to anywhere near the same level in games like WoW, EQ2, and SWTOR.
You can't make a trailer like this or even this about a WoW clone.
Actually a lot of that you can do in EQ2 actually, just not the pvp part. You can build a base from the ground up. It is possible (though I doubt anyone would) to develop a lot of reknown for something. I have helped train people and seen them become better than me as well. The pvp stuff, nope can't do that.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Well yeah. Like I said. A lot of the individual elements but not the whole package. Sure you can build a base in EQ2 but it's mainly decorative with a few vendors and stuff scattered around it. In Darkfall, EVE, Wurm's epic server etc. your base is your home. Like you live and operate out of this base. The area around your base really matters. For instance when our alliance owned Seelie in Darkfall it was a remote detached island where our newbs could train up almost free of random gankers. Some of the more central places we lived in had major / profitable spawns that we basically controlled because of their proximity to our HQ. And you can lose your home. Someone can come in and take it from you.
While that might sound bad the end result is you care so much more deeply about everything happening because it has such a massive affect on how you experience the game. Not just that, but what you do also affects everyone else's game experience. Go run a dungeon in EQ2. Nobody cares unless they were there running it with you. Nobody even cares about your PvP battles because they have no lasting effect. Take a city in Darkfall, Wurm, or Mortal or blow up a POS/Citadel in EVE. Claim sovereignty over some space. See who cares about that.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Well yeah. Like I said. A lot of the individual elements but not the whole package. Sure you can build a base in EQ2 but it's mainly decorative with a few vendors and stuff scattered around it. In Darkfall, EVE, Wurm's epic server etc. your base is your home. Like you live and operate out of this base. The area around your base really matters. For instance when our alliance owned Seelie in Darkfall it was a remote detached island where our newbs could train up almost free of random gankers. Some of the more central places we lived in had major / profitable spawns that we basically controlled because of their proximity to our HQ. And you can lose your home. Someone can come in and take it from you.
While that might sound bad the end result is you care so much more deeply about everything happening because it has such a massive affect on how you experience the game. Not just that, but what you do also affects everyone else's game experience. Go run a dungeon in EQ2. Nobody cares unless they were there running it with you. Nobody even cares about your PvP battles because they have no lasting effect. Take a city in Darkfall, Wurm, or Mortal or blow up a POS/Citadel in EVE. Claim sovereignty over some space. See who cares about that.
Everything that you mention is perfectly viable in a themepark. There are public dungeons in EQ2, people cared when you denied them entry. There's no reason why a themepark couldn't allow for transfer of property ownership when conditions are met. Some themeparks already allow for this although I don't think I've seen one that does it with player built bases.
What you guys are defending as "sandbox" is simply a lack of hand holding. Less player protection. Less permanency. Less guaranteed ownership of material objects. I agree that this makes for a wild ride, but this does not make a game a sandbox. It just makes it a game with less rules.
I propose that themeparks and sandboxes are one in the same. Some games just enforce more rules than others.
Well yeah. Like I said. A lot of the individual elements but not the whole package. Sure you can build a base in EQ2 but it's mainly decorative with a few vendors and stuff scattered around it. In Darkfall, EVE, Wurm's epic server etc. your base is your home. Like you live and operate out of this base. The area around your base really matters. For instance when our alliance owned Seelie in Darkfall it was a remote detached island where our newbs could train up almost free of random gankers. Some of the more central places we lived in had major / profitable spawns that we basically controlled because of their proximity to our HQ. And you can lose your home. Someone can come in and take it from you.
While that might sound bad the end result is you care so much more deeply about everything happening because it has such a massive affect on how you experience the game. Not just that, but what you do also affects everyone else's game experience. Go run a dungeon in EQ2. Nobody cares unless they were there running it with you. Nobody even cares about your PvP battles because they have no lasting effect. Take a city in Darkfall, Wurm, or Mortal or blow up a POS/Citadel in EVE. Claim sovereignty over some space. See who cares about that.
Everything that you mention is perfectly viable in a themepark. There are public dungeons in EQ2, people cared when you denied them entry. There's no reason why a themepark couldn't allow for transfer of property ownership when conditions are met. Some themeparks already allow for this although I don't think I've seen one that does it with player built bases.
What you guys are defending as "sandbox" is simply a lack of hand holding. Less player protection. Less permanency. Less guaranteed ownership of material objects. I agree that this makes for a wild ride, but this does not make a game a sandbox. It just makes it a game with less rules.
I propose that themeparks and sandboxes are one in the same. Some games just enforce more rules than others.
Yes, a common mistake people make when trying to define what makes a sandbox style game is to list the features of one.
As you pointed out most features people list either have been or could be included in a theme park style game.
Generally speaking sand boxes for me provide little direction or guidance on what a player must do.
The more options there are towards progression that are not mandatory, the more sandbox like a game is.
You have to play a game like EVE to understand what it feels like. When the tutorials end many a player finds themselves thinking, now what to do next?
Many times in my 9 year EVE career I've found myself asking this question, and rarely was their any guidance or encouragement from the game's design.
The answer was always, whatever I want to do.
Many players get lost by this freedom, and incorrectly say EVE has nothing to do. They are so wrong.
In addition to the many available built in tools the game provides, the meta gaming opportunities and their impact from the game's design are extraordinary.
Even the simple act of running your mouth off in game or in the forums has little consequence in most theme parks outside of perhaps the risk of moderation.
In EVE it can mean a fleet at your doorstep or never ending harassment so you are best advised to chose your words and actions with care.
The best way I can describe a sandbox style game is, you'll know when your in one and you'll understand the difference.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I propose that themeparks and sandboxes are one in the same. Some games just enforce more rules than others.
To a certain extent I have to second this.
I've played Eve, everyone's go-to example of a 'sandbox', fairly extensively, frankly it's a whole lot more like WoW, everyone's go-to example of a 'themepark', than the bulk of Eve's playerbase would ever like to admit. Far more alike than not, certainly different only in degree and not kind.
I do think there are games that truly qualify as 'sandboxes', but I think a fundamental aspect of them has to be the ability to create things not pre-conceieved and defined by the devs. Second Life, Minecraft, and a few other games allow for that possibility, but none are really MMOs, or even necessarily games (as opposed to simulations) in the strictest sense. The ability to create whatever you can imagine, as opposed to a set of ships/guns/swords/whatever that are conceived of and controlled by the devs, is more than a tad problematic in a multiplayer environment where some vague sense of balance is a near universal demand.
For reasons that escape me, full-loot FFA PvP has become synonymous with
'sandbox' in many people's minds, and really its presence or absense is
often about the only major distinguishing feature between MMOs commonly
labeled as 'sandbox' versus those, often disparagingly, referred to as
'themeparks'. This makes little sense to me. Why the focus on minor differences in what and where you can destroy, when it is the ability to create whatever you can imagine that defines the potential of a real-world sandbox?
I propose that themeparks and sandboxes are one in the same. Some games just enforce more rules than others.
To a certain extent I have to second this.
I've played Eve, everyone's go-to example of a 'sandbox', fairly extensively, frankly it's a whole lot more like WoW, everyone's go-to example of a 'themepark', than the bulk of Eve's playerbase would ever like to admit. Far more alike than not, certainly different only in degree and not kind.
I do think there are games that truly qualify as 'sandboxes', but I think a fundamental aspect of them has to be the ability to create things not pre-conceieved and defined by the devs. Second Life, Minecraft, and a few other games allow for that possibility, but none are really MMOs, or even necessarily games (as opposed to simulations) in the strictest sense. The ability to create whatever you can imagine, as opposed to a set of ships/guns/swords/whatever that are conceived of and controlled by the devs, is more than a tad problematic in a multiplayer environment where some vague sense of balance is a near universal demand.
For reasons that escape me, full-loot FFA PvP has become synonymous with
'sandbox' in many people's minds, and really its presence or absense is
often about the only major distinguishing feature between MMOs commonly
labeled as 'sandbox' versus those, often disparagingly, referred to as
'themeparks'. This makes little sense to me. Why the focus on minor differences in what and where you can destroy, when it is the ability to create whatever you can imagine that defines the potential of a real-world sandbox?
WURM ONLINE
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
For reasons that escape me, full-loot FFA PvP has become synonymous with
'sandbox' in many people's minds, and really its presence or absense is
often about the only major distinguishing feature between MMOs commonly
labeled as 'sandbox' versus those, often disparagingly, referred to as
'themeparks'. This makes little sense to me. Why the focus on minor differences in what and where you can destroy, when it is the ability to create whatever you can imagine that defines the potential of a real-world sandbox?
Any type of MMO at all with too much focus on PvP is not all that great. As a mainly sandbox mmo player it upsets me a little bit to be honest that some people seem to label sandboxes as being PvP focused, many people who do this probably have never played a true sandbox mmo. But hey since most modern sandbox mmos want to be PvP focused they kind of deserved that label.
The things that make PvP fun for me are the features that surround it to make it fun. PvP is only a contributor to the world, everything is connected only the entire universe is the main focus.
The acronym MMORPG use to mean Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
As I've said in another topic Themepark vs. Sandbox is a range. It's not like, this game is 100% Themepark and this game is 100% Sandbox and there is no inbetween.
It's more like this:
100% Themepark Games
Original Super Mario Bros: You followed a set path of progression from start to finish. The most major deviations from that path were things like running on top of the map or going through a tube. Deviations too minor to really be considered freedom in any meaningful capacity.
99-75% Themepark Games / 1-25% Sandbox Games
Games like Zelda OoT or pre-housing WoW. There is a general set path you are supposed to follow but along the way there are many side things to do like fishing, exploration, etc. While might be able go off and do your own thing completely it's very inefficient and not really what the game is designed for. The general focus on the game still is on progressing from point A (Kokiri village / Level 1) to Point B (Defeating Ganon / Max level and "end game" raiding and arenas)
75-60% Themepark Games - 25-40% Sandbox Games
LoTRO, Guild Wars etc. There is still a general set progression but the level of things to do in the rest of the world is increased. Features like player housing or guild halls encourage players to go out and build their own things and exploration / just experiencing the world seems to be a bit more of a major focus. Again going off and doing your own thing 100% is not really efficient but the game is designed to be a bit more friendly to those kinds of players. It's basically about having more distractions and more things to do on your way from A to B.
60-40% Themepark - 40-60% Sandbox Games
ArcheAge, Pirates of the Burning Sea etc. Progression from A to B seems to take a back seat to the many other things to do in the world. It's still there and still kind of pushing you along in a general direction but after a few dozen hours of play you reach B and you are set loose on the world to do whatever it is you really want to do.
40-25% Themepark Games - 60-75%Sandbox Games
EVE, Darkfall, Mortal Online. There is no set path and progression from A to B collapses pretty much the moment the tutorial is over. From that point on your game experience is mostly about your own choices. some major areas of the world cannot be changed and what you can do to the world is set within strict limits. For instance there are only certain areas the players can build a city and set layouts those cities have to follow.
25-1% Themepark Games - 75-99% Sandbox Games
Wurm Online. The world itself is shaped by the players down to the very landscape. A to B progression is completely abandoned in every form. There is no end-game, just the game itself. Few if any areas the players don't have control over exist such as a single starting town on each Wurm server. You can build almost anywhere you want unless it's over the top of another deeded settlement.
100% Sandbox
Minecraft. The only limitations are what is possible within the realm of the game itself, and the game intentionally sets you up with the tools needed to change just about anything you will see in the game world. There's not even a tutorial, just grab your tools and go.
The rules are not clearly defined and everything I just wrote is debatable but there is a difference. I strongly disagree with the idea that both a sandbox and a theme park are one and the same. They are polar opposites, and the total anti-thesis of each other as much as damage and healing are not the same thing just because one character can do some of both.
So basically when I use the term "Sandbox" what I am actually saying is "A game that is more of a sandbox than it is a themepark" and when I say "Themepark" what I actually mean is "A game that is more of a themepark than a sandbox."
Kind of like how everyone is kind of good and kind of evil or kind of conservative and kind of liberal but you might refer to someone as good or evil or a conservative or liberal if you feel they lean more strongly one direction than the other. And everyone will have slightly different criteria on how those labels should be applied.
No. They are mutually exclusive. 100% Themepark means the content is completely fed to you and you only have one viable path you can take. 100% Sandbox means you have utter freedom and no clear path to take.
Even if you say, took a linear progression model and put it into a sandbox game as an option to follow, for instance say you took the entire game of Ocarina of Time and dropped it straight into a Minecraft like world as a place you could go. Or maybe had an arcade sitting somewhere in the world you can play Super Mario Bros. on. The fact it's a choice means the game is still a sandbox.
If you were to start the game with linear progression and end it as a sandbox, then it's a hybrid and falls somewhere in-between.
Most people just want to come in and play and sandboxes would take too much time to learn, craft, etc.. Sandboxes take too much time to develop, also, and they only appeal to a small market of players, the 'so-called 'hardcore' players. If you want to make money, a sandbox game will not make it, any more. Only one is truly surviving and that is EVE but really only hardcore players need apply there (and Yes, I have tried it).
MMO's need to appeal to a wide base of players to survive and sandboxes are NOT IT.
And yet the truest sandbox game on the market (Minecraft) is also one of the most popular. It throws you straight into the world with no tutorial and just expects you to learn it. And people freaking love it.
What makes you think sticking a Massively infront of a Multiplayer Online Sandbox necessarily means people won't be interested?
"Well the one's that have been do so far have failed." Sure. But all of human history and progress is based on taking a new approach to things and doing them better than they've ever been done before.
Dark And Light, Age Of Wushu 2 and Peria Chronicles
BD - right - AFK constantly - crap game play too (played it). Age of Wushu - no thanks - same to me a BDO. ArcheAge - Pay to Win game.
None of those up and coming you mention interest me in the least.
All you should have written was "I will not play a game that costs money."
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
There is a permanent separate thread for discussion of what is a sandbox (SB), I'm not linking to it, it can be found. I wish y'all would discuss what it is you want to do in a sandbox. To determine what is missing from so many failed sandboxes.
I came up with this list of basic shared systems PvE and PvP combat, looting, harvesting, crafting, and trading. If you know of a SB where these systems are done poorly or not at all, then discuss that. Better still. If y'all can think of a system not listed, that you feel should be listed, and can adequately describe said system please do.
For example intrigue and diplomacy don't describe a system. To a programmer and a game designer diplomacy is a fetch quest. King A says bring me X and I will be a Friend to your King B. "X" can be 10 rats, 10 Billion Gold, or 10 Golden Fleeces. One MMO, to remain nameless, had a mini-card-game to simulate negotiation. That collectable trading card (CTC) system can take a lot of writing to support and flesh it out. And it may go underutilized or ignored entirely.
Intrigue to me just means lying. This can be added to a quest dialog, and controlled by attributes. But lying to an NPC is just not as fun as lying to a player. No developer should want to support a system to lie to other players. Maybe a plot twist reveals that NPCs were lying. But Developer supported systems of lying have no place in game combat, looting, harvesting, crafting, and trade.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Sandboxers believe their actions are their own but in all cases are the response for whatever burst their bubble. Where in themepark "story" dictates the course in sandbox "others" dictate the course. You can resist but you will be stomped since if it's an MMO sandbox the name of the game is ganking primarily.
The only pure sandbox experience can be in singleplayer as soon as there are interactions you for sure won't be left alone with your sandcastle.
Sandboxers believe their actions are their own but in all cases are the response for whatever burst their bubble. Where in themepark "story" dictates the course in sandbox "others" dictate the course. You can resist but you will be stomped since if it's an MMO sandbox the name of the game is ganking primarily.
The only pure sandbox experience can be in singleplayer as soon as there are interactions you for sure won't be left alone with your sandcastle.
I think its like this a sandboxer asks why cant I move this trash can. a themeparker never even considers it.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Sandboxers believe their actions are their own but in all cases are the response for whatever burst their bubble. Where in themepark "story" dictates the course in sandbox "others" dictate the course. You can resist but you will be stomped since if it's an MMO sandbox the name of the game is ganking primarily.
The only pure sandbox experience can be in singleplayer as soon as there are interactions you for sure won't be left alone with your sandcastle.
In my first sandbox environment people stomped on my friends. Then I went out and fought them and they stomped me. Then I went out and fought them again and they stomped me less hard. Then I went out and fought them again and some of their weaker players were getting stomped by me. Then I went out and fought them again and the majority of them were getting stomped by me. Ok so it actually took more than four fights to reach that point but you get the idea.
Then people saw me fighting back and rallied around me. Next thing I know I am seen as the main driving force behind an alliance greater than the people who were previously seen as unstoppable.
You pretend like you are helpless. Only if you cower in a fetal position and say "No, please! Don't hurt me!" In a sandbox you can take charge, fight back, become a major actor in the events transpiring. In some cases even be the one with the greatest say in how the story unfolds.
You apparently make the choice to be helpless, and that's why there is no sand in your sandbox.
Comments
And sandboxes is more like a themepark without a map then without rides. It does not tell you what to do and allow more freedom but if it just is a big empty game where you run around and kill other players then it isn't a very good game.
A war between 2 factions/guilds/kingdoms or whatever your game have is a ride if you do it right; for instance taking tactical points, stealing supplies, spy behind enemy lines and so on can be fun and a war should be more then just randomly kill anyone not of your faction. But then is "kill 10 rat" quests not much of a ride either.
Those wars were not between two or three factions you pick when you start the game. It was actual players grouped together by loyalties to each other, ideologies etc. I've fought former allies and allied with former enemies. Seen betrayals and unexpected alliances ruining and saving people at the last minute.
We'd fight actual wars. Not kill stealing or "accept my duel request coward" wars where the winner is whoever doesn't get bored of killing each other first. Wars where people actually lose things. Gear, resources, territory etc.
I've built bases up from the ground and conquered those held by my enemy. I've become famous on my server loved by my allies and hated by my enemies. People I had never met came to for my help because of the reknown I had built. Had fighters considerably better than me tell them that while I might not remember it, I was the one who trained them to fight as a newb. I've controlled the largest chunk of territory of any group on the map. Built the largest group in a game starting just from myself. Brought groups that thought they were so powerful nobody could stop them to their knees.
And no this wasn't the scripted storyline telling me "You are the chosen one", "You've defeated the evil overlord, the world is saved!" This was me creating my own storyline where the actors are the other players of the game and the end outcome wasn't known to anyone until we created it.
Could you have done those things in EQ2? While I realize some of those things are possible in a themepark, the general feeling of being a major player in the community and your actions actually mattering are nothing I've experienced to anywhere near the same level in games like WoW, EQ2, and SWTOR.
You can't make a trailer like this or even this about a WoW clone.
While that might sound bad the end result is you care so much more deeply about everything happening because it has such a massive affect on how you experience the game. Not just that, but what you do also affects everyone else's game experience. Go run a dungeon in EQ2. Nobody cares unless they were there running it with you. Nobody even cares about your PvP battles because they have no lasting effect. Take a city in Darkfall, Wurm, or Mortal or blow up a POS/Citadel in EVE. Claim sovereignty over some space. See who cares about that.
Same goes for any other MMO, insignificant minorities.
No point making such games.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Everything that you mention is perfectly viable in a themepark. There are public dungeons in EQ2, people cared when you denied them entry. There's no reason why a themepark couldn't allow for transfer of property ownership when conditions are met. Some themeparks already allow for this although I don't think I've seen one that does it with player built bases.
What you guys are defending as "sandbox" is simply a lack of hand holding. Less player protection. Less permanency. Less guaranteed ownership of material objects. I agree that this makes for a wild ride, but this does not make a game a sandbox. It just makes it a game with less rules.
I propose that themeparks and sandboxes are one in the same. Some games just enforce more rules than others.
Those who understand that statement understand, those who dont should not try to think about it
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
As you pointed out most features people list either have been or could be included in a theme park style game.
Generally speaking sand boxes for me provide little direction or guidance on what a player must do.
The more options there are towards progression that are not mandatory, the more sandbox like a game is.
You have to play a game like EVE to understand what it feels like. When the tutorials end many a player finds themselves thinking, now what to do next?
Many times in my 9 year EVE career I've found myself asking this question, and rarely was their any guidance or encouragement from the game's design.
The answer was always, whatever I want to do.
Many players get lost by this freedom, and incorrectly say EVE has nothing to do. They are so wrong.
In addition to the many available built in tools the game provides, the meta gaming opportunities and their impact from the game's design are extraordinary.
Even the simple act of running your mouth off in game or in the forums has little consequence in most theme parks outside of perhaps the risk of moderation.
In EVE it can mean a fleet at your doorstep or never ending harassment so you are best advised to chose your words and actions with care.
The best way I can describe a sandbox style game is, you'll know when your in one and you'll understand the difference.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I've played Eve, everyone's go-to example of a 'sandbox', fairly extensively, frankly it's a whole lot more like WoW, everyone's go-to example of a 'themepark', than the bulk of Eve's playerbase would ever like to admit. Far more alike than not, certainly different only in degree and not kind.
I do think there are games that truly qualify as 'sandboxes', but I think a fundamental aspect of them has to be the ability to create things not pre-conceieved and defined by the devs. Second Life, Minecraft, and a few other games allow for that possibility, but none are really MMOs, or even necessarily games (as opposed to simulations) in the strictest sense. The ability to create whatever you can imagine, as opposed to a set of ships/guns/swords/whatever that are conceived of and controlled by the devs, is more than a tad problematic in a multiplayer environment where some vague sense of balance is a near universal demand.
For reasons that escape me, full-loot FFA PvP has become synonymous with 'sandbox' in many people's minds, and really its presence or absense is often about the only major distinguishing feature between MMOs commonly labeled as 'sandbox' versus those, often disparagingly, referred to as 'themeparks'. This makes little sense to me. Why the focus on minor differences in what and where you can destroy, when it is the ability to create whatever you can imagine that defines the potential of a real-world sandbox?
WURM ONLINE
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
The things that make PvP fun for me are the features that surround it to make it fun. PvP is only a contributor to the world, everything is connected only the entire universe is the main focus.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
It's more like this:
100% Themepark Games
Original Super Mario Bros: You followed a set path of progression from start to finish. The most major deviations from that path were things like running on top of the map or going through a tube. Deviations too minor to really be considered freedom in any meaningful capacity.
99-75% Themepark Games / 1-25% Sandbox Games
Games like Zelda OoT or pre-housing WoW. There is a general set path you are supposed to follow but along the way there are many side things to do like fishing, exploration, etc. While might be able go off and do your own thing completely it's very inefficient and not really what the game is designed for. The general focus on the game still is on progressing from point A (Kokiri village / Level 1) to Point B (Defeating Ganon / Max level and "end game" raiding and arenas)
75-60% Themepark Games - 25-40% Sandbox Games
LoTRO, Guild Wars etc. There is still a general set progression but the level of things to do in the rest of the world is increased. Features like player housing or guild halls encourage players to go out and build their own things and exploration / just experiencing the world seems to be a bit more of a major focus. Again going off and doing your own thing 100% is not really efficient but the game is designed to be a bit more friendly to those kinds of players. It's basically about having more distractions and more things to do on your way from A to B.
60-40% Themepark - 40-60% Sandbox Games
ArcheAge, Pirates of the Burning Sea etc. Progression from A to B seems to take a back seat to the many other things to do in the world. It's still there and still kind of pushing you along in a general direction but after a few dozen hours of play you reach B and you are set loose on the world to do whatever it is you really want to do.
40-25% Themepark Games - 60-75%Sandbox Games
EVE, Darkfall, Mortal Online. There is no set path and progression from A to B collapses pretty much the moment the tutorial is over. From that point on your game experience is mostly about your own choices. some major areas of the world cannot be changed and what you can do to the world is set within strict limits. For instance there are only certain areas the players can build a city and set layouts those cities have to follow.
25-1% Themepark Games - 75-99% Sandbox Games
Wurm Online. The world itself is shaped by the players down to the very landscape. A to B progression is completely abandoned in every form. There is no end-game, just the game itself. Few if any areas the players don't have control over exist such as a single starting town on each Wurm server. You can build almost anywhere you want unless it's over the top of another deeded settlement.
100% Sandbox
Minecraft. The only limitations are what is possible within the realm of the game itself, and the game intentionally sets you up with the tools needed to change just about anything you will see in the game world. There's not even a tutorial, just grab your tools and go.
The rules are not clearly defined and everything I just wrote is debatable but there is a difference. I strongly disagree with the idea that both a sandbox and a theme park are one and the same. They are polar opposites, and the total anti-thesis of each other as much as damage and healing are not the same thing just because one character can do some of both.
Kind of like how everyone is kind of good and kind of evil or kind of conservative and kind of liberal but you might refer to someone as good or evil or a conservative or liberal if you feel they lean more strongly one direction than the other. And everyone will have slightly different criteria on how those labels should be applied.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
Even if you say, took a linear progression model and put it into a sandbox game as an option to follow, for instance say you took the entire game of Ocarina of Time and dropped it straight into a Minecraft like world as a place you could go. Or maybe had an arcade sitting somewhere in the world you can play Super Mario Bros. on. The fact it's a choice means the game is still a sandbox.
If you were to start the game with linear progression and end it as a sandbox, then it's a hybrid and falls somewhere in-between.
BD - right - AFK constantly - crap game play too (played it). Age of Wushu - no thanks - same to me a BDO. ArcheAge - Pay to Win game.
None of those up and coming you mention interest me in the least.
What makes you think sticking a Massively infront of a Multiplayer Online Sandbox necessarily means people won't be interested?
"Well the one's that have been do so far have failed." Sure. But all of human history and progress is based on taking a new approach to things and doing them better than they've ever been done before.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
I came up with this list of basic shared systems PvE and PvP combat, looting, harvesting, crafting, and trading. If you know of a SB where these systems are done poorly or not at all, then discuss that. Better still. If y'all can think of a system not listed, that you feel should be listed, and can adequately describe said system please do.
For example intrigue and diplomacy don't describe a system. To a programmer and a game designer diplomacy is a fetch quest. King A says bring me X and I will be a Friend to your King B. "X" can be 10 rats, 10 Billion Gold, or 10 Golden Fleeces. One MMO, to remain nameless, had a mini-card-game to simulate negotiation. That collectable trading card (CTC) system can take a lot of writing to support and flesh it out. And it may go underutilized or ignored entirely.
Intrigue to me just means lying. This can be added to a quest dialog, and controlled by attributes. But lying to an NPC is just not as fun as lying to a player. No developer should want to support a system to lie to other players. Maybe a plot twist reveals that NPCs were lying. But Developer supported systems of lying have no place in game combat, looting, harvesting, crafting, and trade.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
The only pure sandbox experience can be in singleplayer as soon as there are interactions you for sure won't be left alone with your sandcastle.
a sandboxer asks why cant I move this trash can.
a themeparker never even considers it.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Then people saw me fighting back and rallied around me. Next thing I know I am seen as the main driving force behind an alliance greater than the people who were previously seen as unstoppable.
You pretend like you are helpless. Only if you cower in a fetal position and say "No, please! Don't hurt me!" In a sandbox you can take charge, fight back, become a major actor in the events transpiring. In some cases even be the one with the greatest say in how the story unfolds.
You apparently make the choice to be helpless, and that's why there is no sand in your sandbox.