Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
A definition of "sandbox" and why it's better?
IronZ
Member Posts: 107
Hi all, I'm looking for your definitions of a sandbox mmo and why they are so much better than the linear games that hog the market. NO.... I'm not being a smartarse, I'm serious. I have played many games over the years but didn't get into MMO's until CoH. One game I'm playing ATM is GTA 4 (not MMO, I know). This is what I consider a "sandbox" type of game. You don't HAVE to follow the mission chains, but it does lead to more content. Sometimes I just perch on a rooftop with my sac-o-weapons and open up. It's fun for a bit but I always go back to doing the missions, lol. Why would a sandbox MMO be so much better than what we get now? I'm not into PvPing or raiding over and over, but I do enjoy good storylines and a game that can be "followed", if you will. I'm just looking for your opinions on the subject.
Thanks,
Z
Comments
Some people prefer sandbox games and some prefer linear games. Personally, I like either one, so long as it's interesting and done well.
The reason why some players are complaining about the lack of sandbox games is that there are a lot of successful linear games, but not similarly successful sandbox games. The reason for this is that it's harder to do a sandbox game well.
Too often, the mantra of "you can do anything" degenerates into "there's nothing to do". This is partially because some players are idiots, and prefer to skip everything that they possibly can. If they can't completely skip it, they'll try to use various exploits such as a larger than intended group size or bringing much high levels to slaughter everything while they tag along. If a sandbox game lets you skip just about everything, then many players will skip just about everything, and run out of content very, very quickly. A linear game forces you to play through one area before going on to the next.
But it's also because a sandbox game intends for players to skip much of the content. Sometimes players have to make choices that will say, I'll do this part of the content, and accept that I'll be forever shut out from that part. If progressing along one line gives access to new content along that line, and a player could independently progress in a different direction but didn't want to when he started, he likely still won't want to months later. If a sandbox game encourages a player to only do 20% of the content, while a linear game pushes him to do 100% of it, it's much harder for a sandbox game to keep up and still provide adequate content.
What players really want is a game where they can pick and choose what they want to do, skipping things as they like, but still have essentially infinite content that they do want to do. And players also want that content to be polished and not repetitive, which is easier to do if there's less content than if there's more. A player's preference on the "sandbox" versus "linear" dichotomy is really a question of whether the player is more averse to "have to do things I don't like" or "not enough content".
The defination of a sandbox is insanely simple: The ability to Advance/play/whatever in as many core ways as possible, AND not have a deferred/junky/lesser amount of fun because you choose that path.
In the simplest form a sandbox will be a game that offers indepth: combat, crafting, questing, guild territory control, RvR control, questing, and raiding. However all these aspects would be balanced so that they truely interact with each other and rely on each other, also one aspect of the game wouldn't be greater than another aspect.
____________________
You could also argue that even something like darkfall isn't a very good sandbox if you approach it right: Static city locations, with static building setups, too much focus on combat aspects, recipe based crafting that doesn't let the players truely affect the end stats in unique ways, and a few other things.
At the same time I wouldn't necessarily call someone stupid if they called WoW a sandbox since there are a few valid arguements. However since it all revolves soo much around combat and/or some other form of stat advancement I'd be against them.
____________________
However when most people say sandbox they're saying "A game that's exactly how I want
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
all in all most people right now would settle for calling something a sandbox that doesn't follow the "world of evergrind" stat and percent advancment only game mechanics.
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
as far as im concerned sandbox is a game where players arnt limited in what they can and cant do within the game world, obviously there will be sum restrictions as far as developin is concerned but the game should allow players to kill who they want, when they want even if their are consequences etc. Some people would argue it should be skill based as oppossed to class based but im not sure where i lie on that issue. Right now i think sandbox is better because it breaks up the relentless bombardment of the market with linear boring mmos.
Why is sandbox better it is as simple as this a good sandbox mmorpg can create it own missions make them more replayable than more linear mmorpg.
Although I wont go into better vs worse. Sandbox is just different. The "Best' style is a personal decision. Some like linear MMOs while others like free form sandbox.
Just my thoughts
Torrential: DAOC (Pendragon)
Awned: World of Warcraft (Lothar)
Torren: Warhammer Online (Praag)
Sandbox is great in theroy. Player made content so the players create the kind of things they want to do.
Problem is getting the players to do anything besides beat each other over the head with whatever happens to be laying around. Those that attempt to do other stuff find them selves getting beat over the head with whatever happens to be lying around making whatever new and creative thing they were trying to do impossible to create and so they give up.
Pretty soon everyone gets bored of beating each other over the head with whatever and instead of doing something about it they quit and yell at the devs for not building them a game right.
The lesser of two evils is still evil.
There is nothing more dangerous than a true believer.
My definition of Sandbox would be similar to real life. In real life, you do not have a pre-selected path (unless you believe in destiny). Meaning that if today you want to be a teacher and tomorrow a programmer, you can but these are choices that involves consequences. Same thing happens in a Sandbox. Though technically sandbox have less content than linear, it is,in my opinion, much more RP friendly than linear. Being able to do pretty much all you want (at least with very few restrictions), players are able to affect the whole game through their actions as a whole. No servers on a sandbox are the same. While one may be runned by some Elite Paladin who defends the players, another server may be runned by a dark guild who's only goal in life is to utterly crush living creatures.
I personally prefer Sandbox for the RP possibilities. In a sandbox, players RP without even knowing it so it doesn't break the whole "player-based story" feeling.
Here's the definition that I gave to other threads on sandbox:
1.) Dynamic world - where what you, the player, do matter and affect the world. May it be through the combat system, crafting system, or political system.
2.) Freedom in character design - which means you can choose your own play-style, and design your character as such. If you want, you can go from a combat character to non-combat character, or if you want, you can be just a crafter and have other supply you with materials and in return, you give them items which help on their own game play.
3.) Community-based game play - where most, if not all, systems focus on the ability of players coming together to build the game world, and these systems give players the abilities to creates an evolving world rather than just a game.
Others elements are associated with these core element and their designs are derived from the core. These are:
1.) seemless world with limited or no instance (dynamic world)
2.) full loot, open world pvp (dynamic world/community-based)
3.) player-based economic where most items are made by players, not by NPC drop loot. (dynamic world/community-based)
4.) skill-based rather than class/level based (freedom in character design)
5.) removing character level as power indicator (freedom in character design/community-based game play).
The reason why I prefer "sandbox" style games and think it is better because I am one of those who believe that games with the sandbox design can actually help push online gaming into the realm of virtual reality gaming (that is, you get to truly living in different "world" depending on what games you play. So you do not just play it, you live the game...)
Current MMO: FFXIV:ARR
Past MMO: Way too many (P2P and F2P)
Seems sandbox games have changed over the years, as to me GTA4 is NOT a sandbox game but a open-world game, games like SimCity or Second Life are more sandbox games, thought certain games do contain sandbox feature's, but that does not make them sandbox game in my opinion.
Same with most MMORPG's I have played as the ones I did like did have sandbox feature's but I can not consider them sandbox games, a example of a game I truly enjoyed was pre-cu SWG, again a open world MMORPG with sandbox feature's but it was NOT a sandbox game to me.
So I really would like to see more MMORPG's with more sandbox feature's, or more MMORPG's with a more open world approuche. But feel your example of what a sandbox game is not true at what I personaly feel a sandbox game should be.
And please for those reading keep in mind that my personal opinion is just that `my personal opinion` which to me is fact but does not have to be the same for others.
Seems sandbox games have changed over the years, as to me GTA4 is NOT a sandbox game but a open-world game, games like SimCity or Second Life are more sandbox games, thought certain games do contain sandbox feature's, but that does not make them sandbox game in my opinion.
Same with most MMORPG's I have played as the ones I did like did have sandbox feature's but I can not consider them sandbox games, a example of a game I truly enjoyed was pre-cu SWG, again a open world MMORPG with sandbox feature's but it was NOT a sandbox game to me.
So I really would like to see more MMORPG's with more sandbox feature's, or more MMORPG's with a more open world approuche. But feel your example of what a sandbox game is not true at what I personaly feel a sandbox game should be.
And please for those reading keep in mind that my personal opinion is just that `my personal opinion` which to me is fact but does not have to be the same for others.
Are we going to do this argument,In the beginning games had levels you had to go 1-2 after 1-1,you had to go 1-3 after 1-2.Then they started making games with no levels they where called sandboxes. Then people start to make games where awesome self sustaining virtual worlds which many people have begin to call as the definition as sandbox.All sandbox is a game no levels that you choose your path,many people have add on the living world on to the definition sandbox but all a sandbox is game with no levels a non linear game.Open world and full self sustaining virtual world are both sandboxes it is just the latter is an better sandbox.
If they hid the players and enemies levels on vanguard ffa server would people call vanguard a sandbox game?
I honestly believe there isn't a real sandbox game, much less MMO, out there.
I've had discussions with a few devs about why I feel this way. First and foremost, deaths don't mean anything. You die and come back. You might lose all your gear or xp, but you still come back. Even that hard earned piece of gear you pvp/pved for can be replaced. There really isn't a connection with the character. Many might argue this point but look at it this way. What would be harder: Deleting your gear or deleting your character? It seems a bit harsh BUT if games really want to imitate life, why not imitate it in the experience that everyone, regardless of faith/creed/region, faces eventually.
Another reason why I think sandbox MMOs don't exist are the narratives behind the toons. In console gaming, you can get away with a vague backstory about aliens invading and a super soldier who's bad ass saving lives. In an MMO, you can't. (Which is why I think AoC, LotRO, and SWG are a bit of a let down. All that backstory and they've managed to dumb it down ALOT imo). Take WoW for example. At it's launch, it had massive following simply because of the Warcraft games. Same as Warhammer. Now, the problems come in when everyone around you is a superduperbadass that ultimately kills the boss. Over and over again. To no effect of to the plot. In Everquest, there was a mob named Kerafyrm. He was an unkillable mob that spawned only once on every server. A few servers did manag to get him down, but as the lore goes, he left the planet to build his powers elsewhere. Which in turn influence the following expansions. That kind of dynamic lore is seldom seen.
But anyway, of the two types of MMOs, you can't compare them. It's like comparing Team Fortress 2 to Counterstrike. Both are shooters, but that's where the similarities are. I like both.
Yes GTA can be clasified as sandbox. Sandbox is not for everyone, someone preffer just to sit back and relax isntead of make a decisions very necessary for sandbox games... For me sandbox games rulez.
Where themepark games try to hide that they are copying WOW, games like Mortal Online and Darkfall make no attempt to hide their inspiration
______\m/_____
LordOfDarkDesire
I mostly agree with this definition, but I would add that in a sandbox game, the things you do in the game affect the game world.
Harvest wood for 72 hours straight? The forest of trees is now a cleared field full of stumps (but it'll grow back, naturally). Grind mobs in a dungeon somewhere nonstop for a long time? Mobs stop reappearing cause you're so damn genocidal (but some other mobs will find it and repopulate it eventually). Want to build a huge city? Go ahead (but someone else might want to burn it down!)! Want to have a hermit hut out in the middle of nowhere? No problem (but the local residents might not appreciate your presence)!
Etc.
A lot of people say that GTA is a sandbox game. I don't entirely agree.
I think that GTA is a non-linear game... but that is only one aspect of a true sandbox game. For example: in GTA you can choose to run around firing rockets at random cars that drive by your favorite haunt. You do this instead of being forced to proceed through missions in order to do anything. THAT is an example of non-linear gameplay.
An example of sandbox gameplay, however, would be the situation above... except that after you blow up a few cars, all the other cars in the entire freaking world start avoiding that spot because they would rather live than be rocketed.
Sandbox = freedom AND consequences, imo, not just freedom.
I had to reply to this thread, I remember writing something a while back about "sandbox" games that I think is relevent, so here it is...
"I think everyone is getting bogged down in a definitive definition of the phrase, "Sandbox MMORPG". While I agree a true Sandbox game would have no barriers, and no levels everyone would be able to do anything, hence the "game" Second Life. The only TRUE to the meaning of "Sandbox MMORPG" is Second Life. Eve isn't true to the meaning, but it is very close, the reason being is the progression of skills, that is the only thing holding back Eve from being a full meaning of "Sandbox MMORPG".
Now before I go any further I have to say that I used to be a bigger pencil and paper RPG'er back in the day. I played D&D, AD&D, Robotech, Rifts, Hero's...etc. These games were not even true Sandbox style games, yes you could go where you wanted, yes you could do what you wanted, but you were limited by your level and your skills. At some point you had to find a way to make experience to advance a skill, an example of this is in the Robotech RPG if you succesfully perform a skill you can get a % of a point into that skill. I forget the full wording in the book, but if you did backflips useing your gymnastics skill over and over your Backflip skill could max out at 98%. Either way you had to spend the time to get to that point. From that point on if you decided to go do a backflip then you were sure to succeed.
Now to cross this with a game that is not as adaptive as a Human powered brain GM is quite difficult, because a human GM can taylor quests to your character and your skill sets. Also they can adapt creatures so that you stand a chance if they made them to tough. A video game can't do this right now, and I really don't know when one will. Until that time we have to make due with what we can create to make a fun experience for everyone.
So the MMORPG is born, and in some cases they are based alot on the Linear progression of the Pencil and paper MMO like, WOW, and in some cases they are loosely based on the Linear progression like Eve, and in one case not based on any linear progression at all, Second Life. So where does that leave us for our Sandbox MMORPG's??
Well we have to take the best of all the worlds that we can, some games have tried this and failed, others have succeded but not to the finacial standing of WOW. Also we can't just look at End Game, that is just stupid because the whole point of an RPG is to live out a fictional life there is no real end to it. So to me the best mix of "Sandbox", "MMO", and "RPG" would be this. The freedom to go anywhere as a newb, that's right if I want to go into the heart of darkness I should be able to try, I probably shouldn't be able to get there but I could try. I should be able to design my character not based on templates but on my personal choice, so a skill system not a tree system not a feat syste and not a talent system, a skill system where I choose to be an axe weilder that can throw a fireball but not dodge anything. I should also be able to progress those skills, not over time but instead through my actions, like the classic RPG's of old, if I do something heroic I should gain experience that should be able to be distributed to my attributes and skills so that I can shape my characters strengths and weaknesses. I should be able to craft anything I want not by buying a recipe but by trial and Error, there should be bonuses I can randomly find by substituting Ceder wood for Ebony Wood while trying to creat a bow. I should be able to sell my wares freely and make a living selling them, and progress in my crafting by performing difficult but useful crafts. And finally I should be able to interact with hundreds if not thousands of people anytime I wish, I should not be pigeon holed into a private place to level, and quests or "GM" written RPG arcs should be in the game for anyone to complete, but should not be spoon fed to you. You should have to search these quests out.
I know I will get alot of Flak over this next part but I have to admit the best cross between games that would fit all of my personal thoughts on "Sandbox MMORPG" are the following...
Asheron's Call - Character system, you design your own character and pick your own skills and advance them with the experience you earn ie: change your attributes/skills to shape your character
Asheron's Call - World, No instancing you can go anywhere at any time, I will qualify this with another statement "Certain epic or extreme quests should be designed so that others can not steal the ending on you, like the Aerifall quest line, you have to fit certain requirements to get into the final dungeon."
Eve - Economy, I won't deny the Economy in Eve it is the best by far.
SWG - Player houseing - Amazing is all I can say
Eve - Crafting (with qualifier) - Although the crafting in Eve yeilds good items I am not sure how they are fully created but from what I understand it is pretty much a good system.
Asheron's Call - Experience system, as you gain experience through killing MOBS or doing quests that experience can be placed anywhere in your character see "Character system"
So there it is what I think a True "Sandbox MMORPG" is and what the closest thing to it that we will ever get should be, and still be fun."
I hope that helped in the discussion a bit.
I don't think people really want a true sandbox. They say they do, but as a poster said before after a while they get bored of beating people over the head and yell at the devs. I think people simply want a lot of choices and things to do. Basically a non linear game. Non linear does not mean sandbox either.
GTA4 (and the others) are often referred to as sandbox games, but in truth they are just non linear. There is a linear path one must eventually as in the storyline, but there are so many things people can do at any time. There is always going to be a linear aspect in a MMO whether it is a sandbox, non linear, or themepark. Linear in that people eventually reach a class level, or skill level. Even in skill based games, people level. If there are no levels at all, skill or class, then you do not have any progression, and a big thing of an MMO is progression. Developing one's character/ avatar into something.
People talk about players creating their own content in a sandbox. I just have to laugh because you can do that in any game. I've often gotten a bunch of people in a "themepark" game and we created our own content by raiding an opposing factions city without any benefit except it was fun.
If people want a game where the majority of the content is player created, they will be sorely disappointed. Eve is considered a sandbox. I don't think it really is. There are a lot of tools for people to do various things and you have a lot of options. You can only do so many things though.
Personally I am just looking for a non linear (ish) game that gives me a lot of options. It seems most games limits those options these days. I could do dozens of different things in daoc and could level various ways, ie grind, tasks, quests, solo grouped, killing other players. Then for things to do, had rvr, raids, farming, housing, customizing armor, crafting, taking keeps, relics, quite a few things more.
My point is sandbox is not better. I don't even think it is well thought out or even really exists. If you think about the term sandbox, it was a small box of sand that you were very limited in what you can do. The sand runs out and without tools to help you shape the sand like water, you're left with a short time of fun, then quickly bored and moving onto something else. Non linear is probably better because you can play it in a linear manner if you wish
Are we going to do this argument,In the beginning games had levels you had to go 1-2 after 1-1,you had to go 1-3 after 1-2.Then they started making games with no levels they where called sandboxes. Then people start to make games where awesome self sustaining virtual worlds which many people have begin to call as the definition as sandbox.All sandbox is a game no levels that you choose your path,many people have add on the living world on to the definition sandbox but all a sandbox is game with no levels a non linear game.Open world and full self sustaining virtual world are both sandboxes it is just the latter is an better sandbox.
If they hid the players and enemies levels on vanguard ffa server would people call vanguard a sandbox game?
Next time if you feel the need to reply to me make sure you READ + UNDERSTAND what it is I have said. As your reply does NOT make sense towards my post. All you had to do is read the last line of my post. It's highlighted now since you must have missed it.
Edit: sorry forgot to answer your question:
If they hid the players and enemies levels on vanguard ffa server would people call vanguard a sandbox game?
My personal answer is NO as I can not answer for the people, to me lvl's never had anything to do with a sandbox.
Thanks for all the input guys, I appreciate it!
Z
http://www.TheIronZ.com
I keep wondering, why do you need to label games to enjoy it? If you hate the icecream you are eating, will it taste better suddenly if it is called a sandbox cone?
Why not assess a game in terms of features? Why not list the aspects of games you enjoy then shop for games strong in those areas?
I come to realise that sandbox is a term mixed with hardcore on this forum, and used by some elitists trying to distinguish themselves from the other side: "carebears". They want to show that they cannot stand "dumped down" games, and that by virtue of playing a different game, they are superior. By starting a post like that, you are basically feeding these ppl. Luckily they are either too busy or sleeping, and so far, the flame war has not yet started.
We wouldn't need to label our favorite MMOs if developers didnt stray so far from the original intent of the genre.
Bastardize the genre and this is what happens.
Playing: Nothing
Looking forward to: Nothing
The originla intent of the genre is just a niche, small time concept. The ACTUAL intent is far closer to WOW because it has been the most succesful of every MMO idea yet. Intent means very little. The original intent ONLY appealed to computer geeks and D&D nerds. As budgets increased and demand increased the genre needed to adapt and it did. WOW appeals to basically everyone that plays videogames. The genre bent to the will of the gamers, because GAMERS are the ones that tell develepers what a game is SUPPOSED to play like, not the other way around. Developers don't tell US, the gamers, whats fun. We tell them!!! And the gamers spoke. As we've found out over the years, FUN sure ain't the original UO;)
Were games intended to only play like PONG, because I don't think those guys in the 70s really intended videgames to turn into exacftly what they are today? They had ideas, but games cater to the gamers. Only STUPID gamers cater to the developers. I don't care what a developer intends, unless its fun and early MMOs were NOT very fun. They were fun for a few, but that group can't support a genre. It can only support a small niche and not a very influential one either. MMOs aren't supposed to play like UO or EQ. They're supposed to play like whatever the players want them to play like and thats a lot closer to what we have today.
This is why free-for-all-pvp cant be a part of a successful sandbox game. There has to be limitations - either extremely hard consequenses for killing another player or consentual via guild/faction wars.
M M O S S I N C E |1998|
P L A Y I N G F A L L E N E A R T H
T I M E I N V E S T E D |uo|swg|wow|
B E T A T E S T E R |rz|gw|hz|tr|hgl|potbs|potc|gw|hz|wish|fe|wow|df|war|
I don't make up special definitions for sandbox in context of MMOs, just games in general. Which is any game in which you can diverge from the main story and still play the game. To have a sandbox pretty much requires an open world, which all MMOs have and why all MMOs are sandboxes, and this is mainly based on GTA.
The MMO games dubbed sandbox really only have skills in common, other than that they do not have much else other than they seem more community focused and rely on you liking the community and the activities they do to like the game. MMOs by and large are not that different, they all include arduous blocks of grind, contrived reasons to limit you from going everywhere and using anything and encourage a certain play style. So it is not that sandboxes embody freedom and "linear" games force you to do the story, all games force something on you.
Sandbox is just an elitist term people like to throw around to distance themselves from the more popular MMOs, like the term indie, it is to make people feel more intelligent and superior because the average gamers is too stupid to get their superior games. Thing is the term sandbox is so inconsistent it does not actually mean anything, it is more a buzz word that is popular in games right now, like gritty and realistic, something you list on the back of the game box to help make that 10 second sales pitch in a game store.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
A game that was linear, and at the same time like a sandbox, was Mass Effect, very good game.