"BTW, name me 1 single game where you can go ANYWHERE in the game area when you are low level, with no threat of being ganked by mobs. Just one please. Really."
I would, except in Fallen Earth it is not possible to go ANYWHERE and not be "ganked" by mobs.
If you mean, can someone stay on a road and get to higher level areas where they can get nothing done, most of those games offer that.
So, you actually take back what you said about "you move from hub 1 to hub 2", is that correct?
At least you admit that you are NOT bound to do that .
There are plenty of parallell options in FE in most level ranges, in terms of quest hubs.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
"Sandbox" in many people's mind must equal to: "no development". No it doesn't. And I have never seen anyone express this opinion ever. Development of a character needs to be visible. There need to be places/areas where you cannot go, as the mob are too tough and will kill you. You need to feel your character developing. Be it skills, traits, XP, levels, gear - technicality. It does not matter which way, but development needs to be and made to be felt. This is common in theme park games. There is nothing wrong with theme park games. But FE is not a sandbox. It is very similar to many other MMOs when it comes to it's content. Except it has less of it. And grouping is not encouraged at all except in PvP. It's a solo friendly theme park. And one of the easiest theme park MMOs I have ever played. Some people equate progressive gameplay (essence of all RPG's, but also true for FPS/RTS, basically for every types of games) with linearity. The mistake you are making is that you think because you can go off and do something worthless for a while, it makes the game non-linear. It's things like player driven content that drive sandbox play. This game has none of that. Truth is, you cannot have everything at the beginning. Nobody would be interested in such a game. Simple as that. Truth is, this is a theme park game. Which is fine. Simple as that. Nobody said people should have everything in the beginning. And sandbox MMOs don't work like that. DB
"BTW, name me 1 single game where you can go ANYWHERE in the game area when you are low level, with no threat of being ganked by mobs. Just one please. Really."
I would, except in Fallen Earth it is not possible to go ANYWHERE and not be "ganked" by mobs.
If you mean, can someone stay on a road and get to higher level areas where they can get nothing done, most of those games offer that.
So, you actually take back what you said about "you move from hub 1 to hub 2", is that correct?
At least you admit that you are NOT bound to do that .
There are plenty of parallell options in FE in most level ranges, in terms of quest hubs.
DB
What, are you crazy? Going to sector 3 when I'm level 1 is stupid, not sandboxy.
Doh Donnie, your argumentation is really getting worse every day.
And a claim FE is more non-linear than Vanguard is simply ridiculous. At worst for VG, they offer the same scale of freedom yet VG has still more non-linear features than FE. I can only guess that your claims came from the fact your only other mmo's were Lotro (where I saw you posting quite regularly before). And yes in compare to that, FE is less linear in terms of world design (there are no unpassable terrain, no hills, no invisible walls, no sudden zone transitions).
Okay, so I've read the entire thread. Whew, that took a while. Anyways, one game no one has mentioned that was a great sandbox game was Pre-NGE SWG.
Someone said that there wasn't any game where you had to find 100% of the materials and HAD to trade between players. Well SWG forced that. There was a limited amount of resources, which were gathered, and traded to others to craft items that they needed in the game. Nothing was really lootable, and everything you wore was crafted.
You could build houses, furniture, wear normal clothes, customize practically anything worn, listen and watch Entertainers, visit a Doctor, set up camp in the wilderness, go to any planet as a low skilled or high skilled character, and get something done. Cities were built, bases built and demolished. SWG was a sandbox game, FE is not. There was no quest progression, and the little bit of quests in the game weren't needed. Players created content by forming hunting parties, having a real player ran economy, built malls, hospitals, cantina's, and so on. There was a war going on, and where the fighting took place was up to the players.
I mean, I can go on and on here. There isn't an official definition of sandbox games either, we must all use past examples to compare current games to. There can't be a hybrid of sandbox and themepark, because as others have already said, every game would fit in that category.
FE requires you to do their quests, ALL of their quests that grant AP anyways. AP IS required to develop and customize your character. Since AP is required to develop your character, and quests grant AP, then quests are required to progress through the game. You have as much choice to skip quests in FE as you do in WoW. You can skip them and grind if you like, but progression will just take longer. In fact, you'll be missing out on some much needed AP if you skip quests in FE, whereas there's other alternative ways of getting XP in WoW.
SWG had a pure player driven economy, but all games that allow trading between players offers some sort of a player economy. Those with auction houses allow more trading than those without it. It doesn't matter if the stuff traded is looted or harvested, the fact is that people are trading goods. I didn't make it far enough in FE to experience the vendors. Everything I bought was player created and the mats for that stuff was harvested. However, this doesn't differ any from a game like WoW, where a player harvests materials from nodes, creates items, and then sells them on the AH. The only difference between the two games is that you can loot things that are worthwhile and use them or sell them for profit, whereas you must create almost everything in FE to use it. Either way, the act of harvesting, crafting, and then selling isn't much different, and the lack of any lootable options is actually a negative for me.
True. I keep reading obvious BS, saying I said "this and that" (like VG was more linear than FE -never said that. I actually said it has more restricted classes, which is true). Somehow I'm not surprised my argument has been distorted again....
If that's the way some folks "argue", there is no point to continue.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Doh Donnie, your argumentation is really getting worse every day. And a claim FE is more non-linear than Vanguard is simply ridiculous. At worst for VG, they offer the same scale of freedom yet VG has still more non-linear features than FE. I can only guess that your claims came from the fact your only other mmo's were Lotro (where I saw you posting quite regularly before). And yes in compare to that, FE is less linear in terms of world design (there are no unpassable terrain, no hills, no invisible walls, no sudden zone transitions).
At least you admitted that you don't even read my comments (including the one where I listed some of the MMO's I played). Fair enough, your posts make more sense to me now, however they are also proven to be totally worthless as well.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
"Sandbox" in many people's mind must equal to: "no development". No it doesn't. And I have never seen anyone express this opinion ever. It was a logical deduction from your posts so far. If it's not true, you are probably confused or cannot expess yourself clearly. Development of a character needs to be visible. There need to be places/areas where you cannot go, as the mob are too tough and will kill you. You need to feel your character developing. Be it skills, traits, XP, levels, gear - technicality. It does not matter which way, but development needs to be and made to be felt. This is common in theme park games. No, it is common in EVERY mmo, except for weird virtual places like Second life.There is nothing wrong with theme park games. But FE is not a sandbox. We already agreed on this. Your point is? It is very similar to many other MMOs when it comes to it's content. Except it has less of it. Doubtful, but even if true - where did this argument come from? I thought we are discussing linearity, not content value? Need a new horse to bash? And grouping is not encouraged at all except in PvP.Not true. Grouping is actually spontaneous as you get quest reward even if you only assist some else, not even need to group! Again, how did this point come from? Anything you think you can bash is a counter-argument to the original topic.. how? It's a solo friendly theme park.It's a solo friendly game, that has lots of freedom and some old methods too. And one of the easiest theme park MMOs I have ever played. Fully subjective, many folks complain how hard it is. Not an argument, since it's 100% subjective. Some people equate progressive gameplay (essence of all RPG's, but also true for FPS/RTS, basically for every types of games) with linearity. The mistake you are making is that you think because you can go off and do something worthless for a while, it makes the game non-linear. No. YOU did this mistake when you brough up EVE as a "full sandbox", partially because you can go anywhere anytime. I proved it's the same for FE, so now you're fighting your own argument It's things like player driven content that drive sandbox play. This game has none of that. Again, no. - you yourself listed 3 aspects that make a game sandboxy. I more or less agreed on the first (no player economy yet), disproved the second one (FE is not linear), and now you bring up the 3rd one as an argument for the already discussed second one. Is this how you argue? Truth is, you cannot have everything at the beginning. Nobody would be interested in such a game. Simple as that. Truth is, this is a theme park game. In your own terminology, certainly Which is fine. Simple as that. Nobody said people should have everything in the beginning. And sandbox MMOs don't work like that. Again, if we go by your own logic, a full MMO would be a completely empty game, with no items, only raw mats. Also, no quests, as player based content is the real content. Also, no level/skill progression, as lt forces you on a rail. Also, only 1 huge area that you can acces from day 1, otherwise you are restricted, so it's a theme park. I think I basically summarized all your points so far DB
Well, you have certainly no idea what I'm talking about.... that's fine, we don't design games.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Okay, so I've read the entire thread. Whew, that took a while. Anyways, one game no one has mentioned that was a great sandbox game was Pre-NGE SWG. Someone said that there wasn't any game where you had to find 100% of the materials and HAD to trade between players. Well SWG forced that. There was a limited amount of resources, which were gathered, and traded to others to craft items that they needed in the game. Nothing was really lootable, and everything you wore was crafted. You could build houses, furniture, wear normal clothes, customize practically anything worn, listen and watch Entertainers, visit a Doctor, set up camp in the wilderness, go to any planet as a low skilled or high skilled character, and get something done. Cities were built, bases built and demolished. SWG was a sandbox game, FE is not. There was no quest progression, and the little bit of quests in the game weren't needed. Players created content by forming hunting parties, having a real player ran economy, built malls, hospitals, cantina's, and so on. There was a war going on, and where the fighting took place was up to the players. I mean, I can go on and on here. There isn't an official definition of sandbox games either, we must all use past examples to compare current games to. There can't be a hybrid of sandbox and themepark, because as others have already said, every game would fit in that category. FE requires you to do their quests, ALL of their quests that grant AP anyways. AP IS required to develop and customize your character. Since AP is required to develop your character, and quests grant AP, then quests are required to progress through the game. You have as much choice to skip quests in FE as you do in WoW. You can skip them and grind if you like, but progression will just take longer. In fact, you'll be missing out on some much needed AP if you skip quests in FE, whereas there's other alternative ways of getting XP in WoW. SWG had a pure player driven economy, but all games that allow trading between players offers some sort of a player economy. Those with auction houses allow more trading than those without it. It doesn't matter if the stuff traded is looted or harvested, the fact is that people are trading goods. I didn't make it far enough in FE to experience the vendors. Everything I bought was player created and the mats for that stuff was harvested. However, this doesn't differ any from a game like WoW, where a player harvests materials from nodes, creates items, and then sells them on the AH. The only difference between the two games is that you can loot things that are worthwhile and use them or sell them for profit, whereas you must create almost everything in FE to use it. Either way, the act of harvesting, crafting, and then selling isn't much different, and the lack of any lootable options is actually a negative for me.
Finally, a post with some sense. It's an interesting aspect, about the economy. I kind of used both: to buy mats in AH and from vendors too. It always depended on the location and the urgency, as well as my cash
Economy still has a very long way to get sorted in FE, and I'm sure we will see some changes from dev's side too.
About the quest-AP necessity: this has also been discussed to death. Some people feel obliged to get absolutely everything, and they also feel that they somehow *must* have biggest-best-fastest character in the game: naturally, they will want to have all the AP available in the game, which, currently is only possible through question. I can completely understand that these people are not happy, as they feel that questing is this way "forced" to them.
On the other hand, some folks don't mind questing, or don't even care about having maxed AP. Population ingame will be selected by this criteria by some deal, which is natural. Can't have the cake and eat it too
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Your argument wasn't distorted, because you said no argument yet. And no, saying everything in FE is optional or that you can sell things on auction so its player driven economy is not an argument. Fact is, S2, S3 faction towns have vendors that sell 95% of all the stuff you need to gather. Their price does not meet player demand and is fixed. Hence, there is no player driven economy. 95% of the supply is not taking demand into any sort of consideration.
Fact is if you skip missions, you miss out 30% of your character progression.So it's like Lotro with cap level 60, where you could only grind up to level 42, and the rest you had to quest because grinding wouldnt give you any XP at all. Saying its optional is ridiculous. It's not an argument. Because obviously, everything is optional everywhere.
Re-read your post again when you listed a couple of games being more linear than FE which included Vanguard.
Alright then, let's refocus. What exactly is your question, and why are you asking it? Be precise.
Your first question, which started the thread, was whether or not FE was a sandbox game. Obviously, this question is hard to answer, since there's no official definition of sandbox and there are multiple unofficial definitions that vary enough to be controversial. This is where knowing the purpose of the question is needed. If the purpose of your question is to help you decide if the game allows enough choice to satisfy you, then you're asking the wrong questions.
True. I keep reading obvious BS, saying I said "this and that" (like VG was more linear than FE -never said that. I actually said it has more restricted classes, which is true). Somehow I'm not surprised my argument has been distorted again....
If that's the way some folks "argue", there is no point to continue.
DB
This is totally irrellevant to the OP, but I can't help but reply. You said that Vanguard has more restrictive classes than FE. However, what you don't recognize is that Vanguard offers many classes, which covers almost every playstyle. In FE, you assign AP and call what you've come up with a build. There's only so many viable builds in FE, that you can make, and still be able to successfully play the game. Those builds, could be renamed classes, and you'd have less than Vanguard offers. So regardless if Vanguard pigeon holes you into classes, Vanguard still offers more variety of playstyles than FE does.
Alright then, let's refocus. What exactly is your question, and why are you asking it? Be precise.
Your first question, which started the thread, was whether or not FE was a sandbox game. Obviously, this question is hard to answer, since there's no official definition of sandbox and there are multiple unofficial definitions that vary enough to be controversial. This is where knowing the purpose of the question is needed. If the purpose of your question is to help you decide if the game allows enough choice to satisfy you, then you're asking the wrong questions.
per nate: do rephrase my original question, does FE share more similarities with wow, or darkfall?
Your argument wasn't distorted, It was a couple of times, last one from you was saying I compared VG in terms of gameplay to FE, which I never did., a because you said no argument yet. Very mature... And no, saying everything in FE is optional (Distort #2: I never said that) or that you can sell things on auction so its player driven economy (selling things in auction IS player-driven economy, be strong...it's just not true for the whole game yet.) is not an argument. Fact is, S2, S3 faction towns have vendors that sell 95% of all the stuff you need to gather. (This is why it's only partially player-driven yet, and I have agreed on this many times. Maybe read my posts for a change.) Their price does not meet player demand and is fixed. (no, it's not. Only if everyone would always use the vendor for everything, and would not even gather. Argument is flawed.)Hence, there is no player driven economy. The economy as a whole is not, but there is already player influence. 95% of the supply is not taking demand into any sort of consideration. That's a guess, that might and might not be true. Fact is if you skip missions, you miss out 30% of your character progression (I heard that it's 20%, if you mean AP, but see my other comment on that) .So it's like Lotro with cap level 60, where you could only grind up to level 42, and the rest you had to quest because grinding wouldnt give you any XP at all. (ok, getting out of arguments, so need to bring up other games, got it. No, in Lotro you needed to kill anything between 200-350 of same level mobs per level to grind. Of course, it was boring. Nobody argues that LOTRO is a questers game though, so not sure what the point is. Saying its optional is ridiculous. Ridiculous, or not, it's true. It's not an argument. Nope, it's a fact, you're right. Because obviously, everything is optional everywhere. And that is exactly the point of every game! Optional to play, and optional to do everything or nothing. IF you feel compelled/obliged to have all the AP, it's your choice to quest grind. it's a question of mindset. Re-read your post again when you listed a couple of games being more linear than FE which included Vanguard.
Again, I only said VG has restricted classes, while FE has freeform class build.. maybe this time you get it Never mentioned gameplay comparison.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
True. I keep reading obvious BS, saying I said "this and that" (like VG was more linear than FE -never said that. I actually said it has more restricted classes, which is true). Somehow I'm not surprised my argument has been distorted again....
If that's the way some folks "argue", there is no point to continue.
DB
This is totally irrellevant to the OP, but I can't help but reply. You said that Vanguard has more restrictive classes than FE. However, what you don't recognize is that Vanguard offers many classes, which covers almost every playstyle. In FE, you assign AP and call what you've come up with a build. There's only so many viable builds in FE, that you can make, and still be able to successfully play the game. Those builds, could be renamed classes, and you'd have less than Vanguard offers. So regardless if Vanguard pigeon holes you into classes, Vanguard still offers more variety of playstyles than FE does.
Ok, I highlighted the 2 things in your text that classify the compulsive achiever gamer mindset, who can only imagine to have everything "maxed out". Don't get me wrong, I can fully understand that, and by no means would I say any kind of playing is better or worse - the point is, having alts in a game will in NO way make a single 1 character more freeform, if it has 1 or 2 restricted classes.
It is like saying: EVE crafting/mining is soo freeform, and offline skill learning is soo cool, I wish we had it in a fantasy game. Your reply above means would say: we can't, but for that, you can play WOW
Hope you get my point...
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
per nate: do rephrase my original question, does FE share more similarities with wow, or darkfall?
1) World Design:FE is closer to Darkfall. There are no barriers around, no sudden zone transition, there's a wasteland all around you and the only barrier are the radiation and huge cliffs around the gamezone area. Game world is huge and pretty much free and open.
2) Gameplay: FE is closer to WoW PvE server: You can't get ganked in FE. There are PvP areas but you can avoid them. PvP areas contain better harvesting nodes and if you capture the town, you spawn NPC's of your faction that give you missions for solid rewars. Apart from that, FE is a progression from level 1 to level cap. The game system promotes you to do missions instead of grind. Missions do precious AP rewards (AP = points you spend to improve skills - you can see them as talents in WoW). Darkfall gameplay is completely different.
3) Graphics: FE is closer to Darkfall. It's rather realistic, very minimalistic and mainly empty. There are a few instances in FE, but they have a reasonable use and doesn't really interfere with playing.
4) Crafting: None of the above. FE has crafting queue system. You just set up what you want to craft and you can do whatever you like. Majority of the items takes 1-15 minutes to make, but compicated things like vehicles can take days.
5) Character Building: In the middle. FE does not have classes, but have levels. Yuo improve your skills directly with APs. Unfortunately, skills are capped by your level - probably to avoid min-maxing, nevertheless it reduces the possible builds. When you click on a mob, you can see its power - same goes with other players in PvP zone.
6) Interaction with world: Closer to WoW. Everything outside of PvP areas is immovable, unmodable. You can't destroy anything, you can't kill mission NPCs or other players, you can't build and place anything. In PvP zones, you can capture a town that will spawn the NPCs of your faction as I already mentioned.
This is totally irrellevant to the OP, but I can't help but reply. You said that Vanguard has more restrictive classes than FE. However, what you don't recognize is that Vanguard offers many classes, which covers almost every playstyle. In FE, you assign AP and call what you've come up with a build. There's only so many viable builds in FE, that you can make, and still be able to successfully play the game. Those builds, could be renamed classes, and you'd have less than Vanguard offers. So regardless if Vanguard pigeon holes you into classes, Vanguard still offers more variety of playstyles than FE does.
Ok, I highlighted the 2 things in your text that classify the compulsive achiever gamer mindset, who can only imagine to have everything "maxed out". Don't get me wrong, I can fully understand that, and by no means would I say any kind of playing is better or worse - the point is, having alts in a game will in NO way make a single 1 character more freeform, if it has 1 or 2 restricted classes.
It is like saying: EVE crafting/mining is soo freeform, and offline skill learning is soo cool, I wish we had it in a fantasy game. Your reply above means would say: we can't, but for that, you can play WOW
Hope you get my point...
DB
Nonsense, nonsense. You said you played Vanguard but this post of yours doesn't show that.
In Vanguard you put points you get every 25% of your level to your attributes. Even as a sorcerer, you can max out your strength and try to melee things. Want to compare the amount of builds this way? You can gimp yourself in Vanguard just like you can in FE. We're talking about playable builds and combinations.
This is totally irrellevant to the OP, but I can't help but reply. You said that Vanguard has more restrictive classes than FE. However, what you don't recognize is that Vanguard offers many classes, which covers almost every playstyle. In FE, you assign AP and call what you've come up with a build. There's only so many viable builds in FE, that you can make, and still be able to successfully play the game. Those builds, could be renamed classes, and you'd have less than Vanguard offers. So regardless if Vanguard pigeon holes you into classes, Vanguard still offers more variety of playstyles than FE does.
Ok, I highlighted the 2 things in your text that classify the compulsive achiever gamer mindset, who can only imagine to have everything "maxed out". Don't get me wrong, I can fully understand that, and by no means would I say any kind of playing is better or worse - the point is, having alts in a game will in NO way make a single 1 character more freeform, if it has 1 or 2 restricted classes.
It is like saying: EVE crafting/mining is soo freeform, and offline skill learning is soo cool, I wish we had it in a fantasy game. Your reply above means would say: we can't, but for that, you can play WOW
Hope you get my point...
DB
Nonsense, nonsense. You said you played Vanguard but this post of yours doesn't show that.
In Vanguard you put points you get every 25% of your level to your attributes. Even as a sorcerer, you can max out your strength and try to melee things. Want to compare the amount of builds this way? You can gimp yourself in Vanguard just like you can in FE. We're talking about playable builds and combinations.
I only played VG for the first month, as it was completely void of players.... I just listed it as it's a game with fixed classes.
Can any class wear all kinds of armor, use every item in game, and learn every type of spell in VG (given it has the required attributes?)
DB
Edit: BTW: you will never understand me, as "gimped" is not even a term I comprehend. I did and would never care about my skill setup in WOW, never cared much about traits in LOTRO, and never planned my skills to learn in EVE. I do what I feel like to in a game, and this is why FE is nice for me at the moment.
As I said before, I have no issues for those looking for the "ultimate build" in every game - it's their fun. I'm just happy that there are still games where that's totally not necessary for having fun.
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
This is totally irrellevant to the OP, but I can't help but reply. You said that Vanguard has more restrictive classes than FE. However, what you don't recognize is that Vanguard offers many classes, which covers almost every playstyle. In FE, you assign AP and call what you've come up with a build. There's only so many viable builds in FE, that you can make, and still be able to successfully play the game. Those builds, could be renamed classes, and you'd have less than Vanguard offers. So regardless if Vanguard pigeon holes you into classes, Vanguard still offers more variety of playstyles than FE does.
Ok, I highlighted the 2 things in your text that classify the compulsive achiever gamer mindset, who can only imagine to have everything "maxed out". Don't get me wrong, I can fully understand that, and by no means would I say any kind of playing is better or worse - the point is, having alts in a game will in NO way make a single 1 character more freeform, if it has 1 or 2 restricted classes.
It is like saying: EVE crafting/mining is soo freeform, and offline skill learning is soo cool, I wish we had it in a fantasy game. Your reply above means would say: we can't, but for that, you can play WOW
Hope you get my point...
DB
Nonsense, nonsense. You said you played Vanguard but this post of yours doesn't show that.
In Vanguard you put points you get every 25% of your level to your attributes. Even as a sorcerer, you can max out your strength and try to melee things. Want to compare the amount of builds this way? You can gimp yourself in Vanguard just like you can in FE. We're talking about playable builds and combinations.
I only played VG for the first month, as it was completely void of players.... I just listed it as it's a game with fixed classes.
Can any class wear all kinds of armor, use every item in game, and learn every type of spell in VG (given it has the required attributes?)
DB
Actually, all the classes tend to wear different armor in Vanguard. In FE, everyone, no matter what build they are, wears the best armor with the best stats. Everyone in FE can use everything, but since 99% is less than optimal, you find everyone wearing the EXACT same thing in the endgame. Itemization is absolutely horrible in FE. It's one of the major drawbacks IMO.
And everyone has an OPTION to learn every "spell" in FE. But once they chose to go with a build, they are not going to learn ALL of the "spells". Just like a druid is not going to learn a spell that a sorcerer does.
Alright then, let's refocus. What exactly is your question, and why are you asking it? Be precise.
Your first question, which started the thread, was whether or not FE was a sandbox game. Obviously, this question is hard to answer, since there's no official definition of sandbox and there are multiple unofficial definitions that vary enough to be controversial. This is where knowing the purpose of the question is needed. If the purpose of your question is to help you decide if the game allows enough choice to satisfy you, then you're asking the wrong questions.
per nate: do rephrase my original question, does FE share more similarities with wow, or darkfall?
I have played WoW and done end-game. I have not played Darkfall, but have read up on it, because I REALLY wanted to play that game. So with that said, my information is as reliable as any first hand observation combined with second hand knowledge can be.
Character Progression - FE falls in the middle of these two games. FE allows you to pick and choose which skills to focus on, but requires you to spend AP to advance those skills. You get some AP naturally as you play the game (killing, gathering, crafting), but you also get AP from quests, so many people feel you HAVE to do all quests to ensure you have enough AP. This is especially a requirement for people who mess up their point allocations, and need more points to cover the mistakes. People CAN pick and choose which skills to put AP into, thus giving the illusion of freedom of choice, BUT you will gimp yourself if you don't plan ahead and choose proven builds. Builds are both suggested through a drop down menu on the skills page, such as CHOTA and Rifleman build, but are also player invented. If you compare the amount of different and viable builds, the game is more restrictive playstyle-wise, than WoW.
Adventuring- In WoW, the most viable way to progress is to adventure by way of quests and/or dungeons. PvP is a lesser, but possible alternative. Grinding is in no way a good way of adventuring, although it gives a completely non-linear feel to the game. In Darkfall, it sounds as though you're able to go where you want, but you may get ganked by higher skilled mobs. I really couldn't tell you. In FE, the best way to adventure is through quests, which there are many quest hubs all over the map. There's no one telling you which hub to to do first or to do all of one hub and none of the others. So you're given less direction concerning which quests should be done when, except for the level of the quest. There are more quests available than you need to level up, but many people were doing all of the quests out there, regardless if they were below their level, because they granted AP. However, the world is huge and you can travel for miles exploring the world as you see fit. Just remember that you will need to go back and do those quests if you want to maximize your AP, which in turn allows you to create a better or more varied build.
Crafting - You gather materials from nodes found throught the land, like in WoW, you then click on the recipe to make the item, and wait in "real time" as the item is made. Aside from the real time part, the game isn't much different than WoW in that department. Well, there is the fact that you make practically everything you wear and use, versus WoW, where you can craft everythign you use, use quest rewards, or what you loot from mobs and dungeons.
Any other questions? Something I missed? I only speak of what I know (or think I know). Otherwise I'll just tell you I don't know and why I don't know. I won't pretend to know something I don't.
Your argument wasn't distorted, It was a couple of times, last one from you was saying I compared VG in terms of gameplay to FE, which I never did., a because you said no argument yet. Very mature... And no, saying everything in FE is optional (Distort #2: I never said that) or that you can sell things on auction so its player driven economy (selling things in auction IS player-driven economy, be strong...it's just not true for the whole game yet.) is not an argument. Fact is, S2, S3 faction towns have vendors that sell 95% of all the stuff you need to gather. (This is why it's only partially player-driven yet, and I have agreed on this many times. Maybe read my posts for a change.) Their price does not meet player demand and is fixed. (no, it's not. Only if everyone would always use the vendor for everything, and would not even gather. Argument is flawed.)Hence, there is no player driven economy. The economy as a whole is not, but there is already player influence. 95% of the supply is not taking demand into any sort of consideration. That's a guess, that might and might not be true. Fact is if you skip missions, you miss out 30% of your character progression (I heard that it's 20%, if you mean AP, but see my other comment on that) .So it's like Lotro with cap level 60, where you could only grind up to level 42, and the rest you had to quest because grinding wouldnt give you any XP at all. (ok, getting out of arguments, so need to bring up other games, got it. No, in Lotro you needed to kill anything between 200-350 of same level mobs per level to grind. Of course, it was boring. Nobody argues that LOTRO is a questers game though, so not sure what the point is. Saying its optional is ridiculous. Ridiculous, or not, it's true. It's not an argument. Nope, it's a fact, you're right. Because obviously, everything is optional everywhere. And that is exactly the point of every game! Optional to play, and optional to do everything or nothing. IF you feel compelled/obliged to have all the AP, it's your choice to quest grind. it's a question of mindset. Re-read your post again when you listed a couple of games being more linear than FE which included Vanguard.
Again, I only said VG has restricted classes, while FE has freeform class build.. maybe this time you get it Never mentioned gameplay comparison.
DB
wow, you managed to contradict yourself again in the same post.
You never said everything in FE is optional, yet your last sentence said "And that is exactly the point of every game! Optional to play, and optional to do everything or nothing"
It is optional to level up in Lotro, you can stay level 1 and run around naked in Bree as I previously told you. Everything is optional everywhere. So if someone criticizes FE that getting AP's from missions makes it mission driven is valid. To tell him that "well its optional" is not a valid counter-argument. It's not argument at all.
When I compared the AP mission with Lotro. With AP missions you get 1180 APs, without around 820. Which means you lose these 30% from your power. In lotro, let's say cap level is 60. (1180 AP). You could only reach level 42 (820 AP) by grinding and the remaining 18 levels (360 AP) you only could get by questing. So it would force you if you want to enjoy the content you paid for to do quests, just like FE forces you to do missions - hence - character progression is MISSION DRIVEN.
You didn't say its not player driven economy. In fact, from the very early posts of yours you kept saying it is player based and I can quote you many times. Then when you realized, that the supply does not meet the demand in the game (because supply is infinite - represented by fixed vendors with fixed prices), it means its obviously not player driven, you suddently changed it to "partially player driven"
Actually, all the classes tend to wear different armor in Vanguard. In FE, everyone, no matter what build they are, wears the best armor with the best stats. Everyone in FE can use everything, but since 99% is less than optimal, you find everyone wearing the EXACT same thing in the endgame. Itemization is absolutely horrible in FE. It's one of the major drawbacks IMO.
And everyone has an OPTION to learn every "spell" in FE. But once they chose to go with a build, they are not going to learn ALL of the "spells". Just like a druid is not going to learn a spell that a sorcerer does.
Well, I could wear level 90 armor, but so far I am still wearing a level 45 one, with worse stats, because better armor gimps my coordination, which is an important skill. Still, it is MY decision , and not the game saying "samurai-only", for that armor.
I think we were discussing freedom here....
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Just so we can prove that FE is not a sandbox, not a hybrid, but a full fledge Theme park mmorpg like WoW and LotRO.
For starters.. If you remove the level progression (1 to 45) and give rewards like AP over experience for level progression. Now do we have a FE Full blown sandbox in FE? Do we need players to build cities to confirm this has sandbox elements?
I know as of right now, you cannot buy vehicles like motorcycles, dune buggies, and interceptors in the game in which they need to be crafted by players. And what about the upcoming camps / homes or gun turrets that need to be made by players.
Anyways this game reminds me of Anarchy Online and that too was a old debate about AO being a sort of Sandbox type mmo as well. (AO hase a huge world to explore, complexity in the gameplay a deep storyline and you can build your own cities).
I believe if anything that can be built by players or destroyed by players in a persisent gameworld, classifys some sort of sandbox type element. But this is strictly my opinion as well.
Comments
So, you actually take back what you said about "you move from hub 1 to hub 2", is that correct?
At least you admit that you are NOT bound to do that
.
There are plenty of parallell options in FE in most level ranges, in terms of quest hubs.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
So, you actually take back what you said about "you move from hub 1 to hub 2", is that correct?
At least you admit that you are NOT bound to do that
.
There are plenty of parallell options in FE in most level ranges, in terms of quest hubs.
DB
What, are you crazy? Going to sector 3 when I'm level 1 is stupid, not sandboxy.
Doh Donnie, your argumentation is really getting worse every day.
And a claim FE is more non-linear than Vanguard is simply ridiculous. At worst for VG, they offer the same scale of freedom yet VG has still more non-linear features than FE. I can only guess that your claims came from the fact your only other mmo's were Lotro (where I saw you posting quite regularly before). And yes in compare to that, FE is less linear in terms of world design (there are no unpassable terrain, no hills, no invisible walls, no sudden zone transitions).
REALITY CHECK
Okay, so I've read the entire thread. Whew, that took a while. Anyways, one game no one has mentioned that was a great sandbox game was Pre-NGE SWG.
Someone said that there wasn't any game where you had to find 100% of the materials and HAD to trade between players. Well SWG forced that. There was a limited amount of resources, which were gathered, and traded to others to craft items that they needed in the game. Nothing was really lootable, and everything you wore was crafted.
You could build houses, furniture, wear normal clothes, customize practically anything worn, listen and watch Entertainers, visit a Doctor, set up camp in the wilderness, go to any planet as a low skilled or high skilled character, and get something done. Cities were built, bases built and demolished. SWG was a sandbox game, FE is not. There was no quest progression, and the little bit of quests in the game weren't needed. Players created content by forming hunting parties, having a real player ran economy, built malls, hospitals, cantina's, and so on. There was a war going on, and where the fighting took place was up to the players.
I mean, I can go on and on here. There isn't an official definition of sandbox games either, we must all use past examples to compare current games to. There can't be a hybrid of sandbox and themepark, because as others have already said, every game would fit in that category.
FE requires you to do their quests, ALL of their quests that grant AP anyways. AP IS required to develop and customize your character. Since AP is required to develop your character, and quests grant AP, then quests are required to progress through the game. You have as much choice to skip quests in FE as you do in WoW. You can skip them and grind if you like, but progression will just take longer. In fact, you'll be missing out on some much needed AP if you skip quests in FE, whereas there's other alternative ways of getting XP in WoW.
SWG had a pure player driven economy, but all games that allow trading between players offers some sort of a player economy. Those with auction houses allow more trading than those without it. It doesn't matter if the stuff traded is looted or harvested, the fact is that people are trading goods. I didn't make it far enough in FE to experience the vendors. Everything I bought was player created and the mats for that stuff was harvested. However, this doesn't differ any from a game like WoW, where a player harvests materials from nodes, creates items, and then sells them on the AH. The only difference between the two games is that you can loot things that are worthwhile and use them or sell them for profit, whereas you must create almost everything in FE to use it. Either way, the act of harvesting, crafting, and then selling isn't much different, and the lack of any lootable options is actually a negative for me.
this thread absolutely sucks now. qqqqqqqqqqqqqqq
True. I keep reading obvious BS, saying I said "this and that" (like VG was more linear than FE -never said that. I actually said it has more restricted classes, which is true). Somehow I'm not surprised my argument has been distorted again....
If that's the way some folks "argue", there is no point to continue.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
At least you admitted that you don't even read my comments (including the one where I listed some of the MMO's I played). Fair enough, your posts make more sense to me now, however they are also proven to be totally worthless as well.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Well, you have certainly no idea what I'm talking about.... that's fine, we don't design games.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Finally, a post with some sense. It's an interesting aspect, about the economy. I kind of used both: to buy mats in AH and from vendors too. It always depended on the location and the urgency, as well as my cash
Economy still has a very long way to get sorted in FE, and I'm sure we will see some changes from dev's side too.
About the quest-AP necessity: this has also been discussed to death. Some people feel obliged to get absolutely everything, and they also feel that they somehow *must* have biggest-best-fastest character in the game: naturally, they will want to have all the AP available in the game, which, currently is only possible through question. I can completely understand that these people are not happy, as they feel that questing is this way "forced" to them.
On the other hand, some folks don't mind questing, or don't even care about having maxed AP. Population ingame will be selected by this criteria by some deal, which is natural. Can't have the cake and eat it too
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Your argument wasn't distorted, because you said no argument yet. And no, saying everything in FE is optional or that you can sell things on auction so its player driven economy is not an argument. Fact is, S2, S3 faction towns have vendors that sell 95% of all the stuff you need to gather. Their price does not meet player demand and is fixed. Hence, there is no player driven economy. 95% of the supply is not taking demand into any sort of consideration.
Fact is if you skip missions, you miss out 30% of your character progression.So it's like Lotro with cap level 60, where you could only grind up to level 42, and the rest you had to quest because grinding wouldnt give you any XP at all. Saying its optional is ridiculous. It's not an argument. Because obviously, everything is optional everywhere.
Re-read your post again when you listed a couple of games being more linear than FE which included Vanguard.
REALITY CHECK
Alright then, let's refocus. What exactly is your question, and why are you asking it? Be precise.
Your first question, which started the thread, was whether or not FE was a sandbox game. Obviously, this question is hard to answer, since there's no official definition of sandbox and there are multiple unofficial definitions that vary enough to be controversial. This is where knowing the purpose of the question is needed. If the purpose of your question is to help you decide if the game allows enough choice to satisfy you, then you're asking the wrong questions.
True. I keep reading obvious BS, saying I said "this and that" (like VG was more linear than FE -never said that. I actually said it has more restricted classes, which is true). Somehow I'm not surprised my argument has been distorted again....
If that's the way some folks "argue", there is no point to continue.
DB
This is totally irrellevant to the OP, but I can't help but reply. You said that Vanguard has more restrictive classes than FE. However, what you don't recognize is that Vanguard offers many classes, which covers almost every playstyle. In FE, you assign AP and call what you've come up with a build. There's only so many viable builds in FE, that you can make, and still be able to successfully play the game. Those builds, could be renamed classes, and you'd have less than Vanguard offers. So regardless if Vanguard pigeon holes you into classes, Vanguard still offers more variety of playstyles than FE does.
Alright then, let's refocus. What exactly is your question, and why are you asking it? Be precise.
Your first question, which started the thread, was whether or not FE was a sandbox game. Obviously, this question is hard to answer, since there's no official definition of sandbox and there are multiple unofficial definitions that vary enough to be controversial. This is where knowing the purpose of the question is needed. If the purpose of your question is to help you decide if the game allows enough choice to satisfy you, then you're asking the wrong questions.
per nate: do rephrase my original question, does FE share more similarities with wow, or darkfall?
Again, I only said VG has restricted classes, while FE has freeform class build.. maybe this time you get it
Never mentioned gameplay comparison.
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Again, I only said VG has restricted classes, while FE has freeform class build.. maybe this time you get it
Never mentioned gameplay comparison.
DB
Your signature is so ironic.
True. I keep reading obvious BS, saying I said "this and that" (like VG was more linear than FE -never said that. I actually said it has more restricted classes, which is true). Somehow I'm not surprised my argument has been distorted again....
If that's the way some folks "argue", there is no point to continue.
DB
This is totally irrellevant to the OP, but I can't help but reply. You said that Vanguard has more restrictive classes than FE. However, what you don't recognize is that Vanguard offers many classes, which covers almost every playstyle. In FE, you assign AP and call what you've come up with a build. There's only so many viable builds in FE, that you can make, and still be able to successfully play the game. Those builds, could be renamed classes, and you'd have less than Vanguard offers. So regardless if Vanguard pigeon holes you into classes, Vanguard still offers more variety of playstyles than FE does.
Ok, I highlighted the 2 things in your text that classify the compulsive achiever gamer mindset, who can only imagine to have everything "maxed out". Don't get me wrong, I can fully understand that, and by no means would I say any kind of playing is better or worse - the point is, having alts in a game will in NO way make a single 1 character more freeform, if it has 1 or 2 restricted classes.
It is like saying: EVE crafting/mining is soo freeform, and offline skill learning is soo cool, I wish we had it in a fantasy game. Your reply above means would say: we can't, but for that, you can play WOW
Hope you get my point...
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
1) World Design:FE is closer to Darkfall. There are no barriers around, no sudden zone transition, there's a wasteland all around you and the only barrier are the radiation and huge cliffs around the gamezone area. Game world is huge and pretty much free and open.
2) Gameplay: FE is closer to WoW PvE server: You can't get ganked in FE. There are PvP areas but you can avoid them. PvP areas contain better harvesting nodes and if you capture the town, you spawn NPC's of your faction that give you missions for solid rewars. Apart from that, FE is a progression from level 1 to level cap. The game system promotes you to do missions instead of grind. Missions do precious AP rewards (AP = points you spend to improve skills - you can see them as talents in WoW). Darkfall gameplay is completely different.
3) Graphics: FE is closer to Darkfall. It's rather realistic, very minimalistic and mainly empty. There are a few instances in FE, but they have a reasonable use and doesn't really interfere with playing.
4) Crafting: None of the above. FE has crafting queue system. You just set up what you want to craft and you can do whatever you like. Majority of the items takes 1-15 minutes to make, but compicated things like vehicles can take days.
5) Character Building: In the middle. FE does not have classes, but have levels. Yuo improve your skills directly with APs. Unfortunately, skills are capped by your level - probably to avoid min-maxing, nevertheless it reduces the possible builds. When you click on a mob, you can see its power - same goes with other players in PvP zone.
6) Interaction with world: Closer to WoW. Everything outside of PvP areas is immovable, unmodable. You can't destroy anything, you can't kill mission NPCs or other players, you can't build and place anything. In PvP zones, you can capture a town that will spawn the NPCs of your faction as I already mentioned.
What else do you wanna know?
REALITY CHECK
Ok, I highlighted the 2 things in your text that classify the compulsive achiever gamer mindset, who can only imagine to have everything "maxed out". Don't get me wrong, I can fully understand that, and by no means would I say any kind of playing is better or worse - the point is, having alts in a game will in NO way make a single 1 character more freeform, if it has 1 or 2 restricted classes.
It is like saying: EVE crafting/mining is soo freeform, and offline skill learning is soo cool, I wish we had it in a fantasy game. Your reply above means would say: we can't, but for that, you can play WOW
Hope you get my point...
DB
Nonsense, nonsense. You said you played Vanguard but this post of yours doesn't show that.
In Vanguard you put points you get every 25% of your level to your attributes. Even as a sorcerer, you can max out your strength and try to melee things. Want to compare the amount of builds this way? You can gimp yourself in Vanguard just like you can in FE. We're talking about playable builds and combinations.
REALITY CHECK
Ok, I highlighted the 2 things in your text that classify the compulsive achiever gamer mindset, who can only imagine to have everything "maxed out". Don't get me wrong, I can fully understand that, and by no means would I say any kind of playing is better or worse - the point is, having alts in a game will in NO way make a single 1 character more freeform, if it has 1 or 2 restricted classes.
It is like saying: EVE crafting/mining is soo freeform, and offline skill learning is soo cool, I wish we had it in a fantasy game. Your reply above means would say: we can't, but for that, you can play WOW
Hope you get my point...
DB
Nonsense, nonsense. You said you played Vanguard but this post of yours doesn't show that.
In Vanguard you put points you get every 25% of your level to your attributes. Even as a sorcerer, you can max out your strength and try to melee things. Want to compare the amount of builds this way? You can gimp yourself in Vanguard just like you can in FE. We're talking about playable builds and combinations.
I only played VG for the first month, as it was completely void of players.... I just listed it as it's a game with fixed classes.
Can any class wear all kinds of armor, use every item in game, and learn every type of spell in VG (given it has the required attributes?)
DB
Edit: BTW: you will never understand me, as "gimped" is not even a term I comprehend. I did and would never care about my skill setup in WOW, never cared much about traits in LOTRO, and never planned my skills to learn in EVE. I do what I feel like to in a game, and this is why FE is nice for me at the moment.
As I said before, I have no issues for those looking for the "ultimate build" in every game - it's their fun. I'm just happy that there are still games where that's totally not necessary for having fun.
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Ok, I highlighted the 2 things in your text that classify the compulsive achiever gamer mindset, who can only imagine to have everything "maxed out". Don't get me wrong, I can fully understand that, and by no means would I say any kind of playing is better or worse - the point is, having alts in a game will in NO way make a single 1 character more freeform, if it has 1 or 2 restricted classes.
It is like saying: EVE crafting/mining is soo freeform, and offline skill learning is soo cool, I wish we had it in a fantasy game. Your reply above means would say: we can't, but for that, you can play WOW
Hope you get my point...
DB
Nonsense, nonsense. You said you played Vanguard but this post of yours doesn't show that.
In Vanguard you put points you get every 25% of your level to your attributes. Even as a sorcerer, you can max out your strength and try to melee things. Want to compare the amount of builds this way? You can gimp yourself in Vanguard just like you can in FE. We're talking about playable builds and combinations.
I only played VG for the first month, as it was completely void of players.... I just listed it as it's a game with fixed classes.
Can any class wear all kinds of armor, use every item in game, and learn every type of spell in VG (given it has the required attributes?)
DB
Actually, all the classes tend to wear different armor in Vanguard. In FE, everyone, no matter what build they are, wears the best armor with the best stats. Everyone in FE can use everything, but since 99% is less than optimal, you find everyone wearing the EXACT same thing in the endgame. Itemization is absolutely horrible in FE. It's one of the major drawbacks IMO.
And everyone has an OPTION to learn every "spell" in FE. But once they chose to go with a build, they are not going to learn ALL of the "spells". Just like a druid is not going to learn a spell that a sorcerer does.
Alright then, let's refocus. What exactly is your question, and why are you asking it? Be precise.
Your first question, which started the thread, was whether or not FE was a sandbox game. Obviously, this question is hard to answer, since there's no official definition of sandbox and there are multiple unofficial definitions that vary enough to be controversial. This is where knowing the purpose of the question is needed. If the purpose of your question is to help you decide if the game allows enough choice to satisfy you, then you're asking the wrong questions.
per nate: do rephrase my original question, does FE share more similarities with wow, or darkfall?
I have played WoW and done end-game. I have not played Darkfall, but have read up on it, because I REALLY wanted to play that game. So with that said, my information is as reliable as any first hand observation combined with second hand knowledge can be.
Character Progression - FE falls in the middle of these two games. FE allows you to pick and choose which skills to focus on, but requires you to spend AP to advance those skills. You get some AP naturally as you play the game (killing, gathering, crafting), but you also get AP from quests, so many people feel you HAVE to do all quests to ensure you have enough AP. This is especially a requirement for people who mess up their point allocations, and need more points to cover the mistakes. People CAN pick and choose which skills to put AP into, thus giving the illusion of freedom of choice, BUT you will gimp yourself if you don't plan ahead and choose proven builds. Builds are both suggested through a drop down menu on the skills page, such as CHOTA and Rifleman build, but are also player invented. If you compare the amount of different and viable builds, the game is more restrictive playstyle-wise, than WoW.
Adventuring- In WoW, the most viable way to progress is to adventure by way of quests and/or dungeons. PvP is a lesser, but possible alternative. Grinding is in no way a good way of adventuring, although it gives a completely non-linear feel to the game. In Darkfall, it sounds as though you're able to go where you want, but you may get ganked by higher skilled mobs. I really couldn't tell you. In FE, the best way to adventure is through quests, which there are many quest hubs all over the map. There's no one telling you which hub to to do first or to do all of one hub and none of the others. So you're given less direction concerning which quests should be done when, except for the level of the quest. There are more quests available than you need to level up, but many people were doing all of the quests out there, regardless if they were below their level, because they granted AP. However, the world is huge and you can travel for miles exploring the world as you see fit. Just remember that you will need to go back and do those quests if you want to maximize your AP, which in turn allows you to create a better or more varied build.
Crafting - You gather materials from nodes found throught the land, like in WoW, you then click on the recipe to make the item, and wait in "real time" as the item is made. Aside from the real time part, the game isn't much different than WoW in that department. Well, there is the fact that you make practically everything you wear and use, versus WoW, where you can craft everythign you use, use quest rewards, or what you loot from mobs and dungeons.
Any other questions? Something I missed? I only speak of what I know (or think I know). Otherwise I'll just tell you I don't know and why I don't know. I won't pretend to know something I don't.
Again, I only said VG has restricted classes, while FE has freeform class build.. maybe this time you get it
Never mentioned gameplay comparison.
DB
wow, you managed to contradict yourself again in the same post.
You never said everything in FE is optional, yet your last sentence said "And that is exactly the point of every game! Optional to play, and optional to do everything or nothing"
It is optional to level up in Lotro, you can stay level 1 and run around naked in Bree as I previously told you. Everything is optional everywhere. So if someone criticizes FE that getting AP's from missions makes it mission driven is valid. To tell him that "well its optional" is not a valid counter-argument. It's not argument at all.
When I compared the AP mission with Lotro. With AP missions you get 1180 APs, without around 820. Which means you lose these 30% from your power. In lotro, let's say cap level is 60. (1180 AP). You could only reach level 42 (820 AP) by grinding and the remaining 18 levels (360 AP) you only could get by questing. So it would force you if you want to enjoy the content you paid for to do quests, just like FE forces you to do missions - hence - character progression is MISSION DRIVEN.
You didn't say its not player driven economy. In fact, from the very early posts of yours you kept saying it is player based and I can quote you many times. Then when you realized, that the supply does not meet the demand in the game (because supply is infinite - represented by fixed vendors with fixed prices), it means its obviously not player driven, you suddently changed it to "partially player driven"
REALITY CHECK
Well, I could wear level 90 armor, but so far I am still wearing a level 45 one, with worse stats, because better armor gimps my coordination, which is an important skill. Still, it is MY decision , and not the game saying "samurai-only", for that armor.
I think we were discussing freedom here....
DB
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
What a thread..
Just so we can prove that FE is not a sandbox, not a hybrid, but a full fledge Theme park mmorpg like WoW and LotRO.
For starters.. If you remove the level progression (1 to 45) and give rewards like AP over experience for level progression. Now do we have a FE Full blown sandbox in FE? Do we need players to build cities to confirm this has sandbox elements?
I know as of right now, you cannot buy vehicles like motorcycles, dune buggies, and interceptors in the game in which they need to be crafted by players. And what about the upcoming camps / homes or gun turrets that need to be made by players.
Anyways this game reminds me of Anarchy Online and that too was a old debate about AO being a sort of Sandbox type mmo as well. (AO hase a huge world to explore, complexity in the gameplay a deep storyline and you can build your own cities).
I believe if anything that can be built by players or destroyed by players in a persisent gameworld, classifys some sort of sandbox type element. But this is strictly my opinion as well.