You ask a question based on opinion, did you do this knowing that no one is going to post anything that is going to change your mind or your personal views so you can rebut them and feel superior? Does this type of question help you to feel better about yourself and justify your "not sugar coated" opinion.
AoC is better than any single player RPG I have played in a while. 1-20 is better and the rest is good as well. Would also say FFXI but some see it as a sandbox hybrid. EQ2 is deeper than any single player RPG out there.
I felt the same way. Plus I don't understand how you can compare an MMORPG story to a SPRPG story. Never in a SPRPG have I laughed later with friends on vent about 'Damn, we almost wiped on that boss, but mooky jumped off a bridge into the water, and snuck back and rezzed us.'
(Mod Edit)
Your post I was responding to compared Co-Op RPGs and SP RPGs. But it ended with asking [quote] [i]Originally posted by Z3R01[/i] [ so please point me in the direction of that tp thats superior to sp rpgs.... please.[/color] [/quote]
Difference between MMORPG and CO-OP RPG and social interaction? Maybe not much.
Between SPRPGs with vent? Well we were not in the same virtual world together at the same time so big difference.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
I haven't come across a single sandbox I would consider worth while,
To a certain extent it is the basic stuff that plagues most MMOS, bad combat, long boring grinds etc.
But specifically sandboxes I find the most boring. A lot of the time they are filled with the most mundane boring crap you can think of, but unlike other games instead of getting a little mention as a side activity it is a center piece of a game. I don't think you can ever make economic gameplay fun, gardening, crafting or whatever mundane thing the game has in it. Putting such a focus on this kind of gameplay can at best be a vestigial addition and at worst a parasite on the devs time causing the good parts, the adventure, to suffer.
The thing is the world in sandoxes are not immersive to me at all either even though sandboxes are supose to be living breathing worlds, if anything sandboxes have some of the most dead worlds I can think of. Immersion is all about the human element, making NPCs have histories and personalities and making their lives intertwine in some way to show that the world is alive. The fact that you have a working economy or political system doesn't mean much to me.
Even when there are good ideas in a sandbox game they are usually made to be very unfun. Want a house, sure, but you have to stick build it for hours and when you get it it will just be a shack.
Another issue is quality of content. Player interaction can only produce certain kinds of content and lets be honest it is pretty shallow. Even dynamic content can only do so much. If you have any interest in more involving stories and characters with personalities that drive the story then you are going to have script something.
It isn't that themeparks are great in this sense either, but they are the only games that come remotely close.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
But specifically sandboxes I find the most boring. A lot of the time they are filled with the most mundane boring crap you can think of, but unlike other games instead of getting a little mention as a side activity it is a center piece of a game. I don't think you can ever make economic gameplay fun, gardening, crafting or whatever mundane thing the game has in it. Putting such a focus on this kind of gameplay can at best be a vestigial addition and at worst a parasite on the devs time causing the good parts, the adventure, to suffer.
To each his own.
I for one had the best gaming times of my life in Wurm doing mundane things like digging, mining, gardening... basically all the things you swear you couldn't base a game off of.
Well... you can.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4 Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
Originally posted by GTwander Originally posted by Cactus-Man
But specifically sandboxes I find the most boring. A lot of the time they are filled with the most mundane boring crap you can think of, but unlike other games instead of getting a little mention as a side activity it is a center piece of a game. I don't think you can ever make economic gameplay fun, gardening, crafting or whatever mundane thing the game has in it. Putting such a focus on this kind of gameplay can at best be a vestigial addition and at worst a parasite on the devs time causing the good parts, the adventure, to suffer.
To each his own. I for one had the best gaming times of my life in Wurm doing mundane things like digging, mining, gardening... basically all the things you swear you couldn't base a game off of. Well... you can.
Ah yes Wurm. My friends and I had a lot of fun when the test servers first opened up and we got lost in the wilderness and started a little settlement, harassed by bears and trolls, and eventually was steamrolled by the horde. It was a lot of fun.
Sent me an email if you want me to mail you some pizza rolls.
The thing is the world in sandoxes are not immersive to me at all either even though sandboxes are supose to be living breathing worlds, if anything sandboxes have some of the most dead worlds I can think of. Immersion is all about the human element, making NPCs have histories and personalities and making their lives intertwine in some way to show that the world is alive. The fact that you have a working economy or political system doesn't mean much to me.
So to you the "human element" is about NPCs with entertaining backstories rather than the economic and political manouverings of other players?
Personally, I find the unpredictability of events in a more sandbox-style environment to be much more interesting. But that's just me.
Sandbox games were fantastic when having a few thousand people on a server was an accomplishment(UO days). Now no company can realistically make a sandbox. You ever try playing in a sandbox full of kids? Everyone is fighting over the tools and no one has room to move around and check our other areas of the box. So, instead of trying to pack 100 different sand moving tools into this box they decide to let everyone share a few small tools so the sand doesn't get thrown everywhere. I love sandbox games. But they are a thing of the past until technology takes another leap.
Look at some of the games compared in this thread. The only differences are shown above. A lot of people here call games such as Eve or Darkfall, 'sandboxes', when infact they offer less character development and gameplay than some 'themepark games'.
'Sandbox' is a dumb attempt to classify types of MMO's. The only games that allow creation are ones that allow coding, i.e. second life. Everything else is not 'player freedom' and is just part of the gameplay. I've played everything from UO to EQ to SB to DF etc. While those games have different objectives, they are very much the same at the core minus a few tweaks. I am posting this as this argument always seems to show it's head in the past year or two in the age-old attempt of 'my game is better than your game because..."
So now mmorpg.com is the authority on defining sandbox vs. themepark? No offense to the mmorpg folks, but that is laughable.
Sandbox just means you can decide among different activities what you want to do while playing a game. Most non-MMO games out there run you through a specific path, you save your progress along the way, but when you log back in you must continue right back where you left off. In most MMOs, however, you can either do quests, kill things in various parts of the world without a quest but to gain exp/loot, craft items, harvest items, socialize/politicize with friends/guildmates, choose new skills/respec and try out your new abilities, choose your class, etc. That is plenty of different activities, and I don't know of any MMO that can be considered entirely "themepark" other than the MMO having a small part of the game being themepark, e.g., questlines. And even among those, only the 'career' or "class specific" quest lines are the ones you may be forced to do to develop your character, which is a small fraction of overall time spent in the game and in most cases is one of the most entertaining parts of the game anyway.
The thing is the world in sandoxes are not immersive to me at all either even though sandboxes are supose to be living breathing worlds, if anything sandboxes have some of the most dead worlds I can think of. Immersion is all about the human element, making NPCs have histories and personalities and making their lives intertwine in some way to show that the world is alive. The fact that you have a working economy or political system doesn't mean much to me.
So to you the "human element" is about NPCs with entertaining backstories rather than the economic and political manouverings of other players?
Personally, I find the unpredictability of events in a more sandbox-style environment to be much more interesting. But that's just me.
Maybe if people roleplayed all the time, but they don't. Otherwise you just have a bunch of flat characters with no personality. In sandboxes most of the interaction is between players, but I want interaction between characters. Since players will not or sometimes cannot develope characters with personality, I have to get the story fix from scripted content.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
It's not just you. Sandbox games like UO, SWG, and maybe even Ryzom were/are famed for their community because they focused on the sandbox instead of the ffa pvp. All these new 'sandboxes' like Darkfall and Mortal are really ffa gankfests meant to give a home to the wandering douches who forgot they should be playing Call of Duty instead of mmos.
Recently Yahtzee did a review on Red Dead Redemption where he said that many of the things one can do in the game can pretty much be done for their own sake.
His point was that he was the type of person who wanted some "game" in his game.
I think a similar feeling probably pervades the themepark crowd over the sandbox crowd.
There are people who would like to play a game and there are people who would like to experience a world. The unfortunate thing about the "world" idea is that it can devolve into the drudgery of actual life.
Yeah, sandboxes devolve into drudgery specifically because they are weak as games. A well-design game constantly offers you interesting decisions, and frequently varies those decisions in order to keep things interesting.
I think sandbox type games could be fun if they can escape the "I scripted this activity in 30 minutes" feel of so many of their systems.
My opinion on sandboxes is a lot like my opinion on F2P vs. P2P actually:
Most F2P games suck, but it's not F2P which inherently makes them suck.
Most sandboxes suck, but it's not being a sandbox which inherently makes them suck.
In both cases, a well-designed game is going to be fun regardless. A F2P could have a well-balanced and interesting Shop (and zero Pay2Perform items). A Sandbox could be filled with interesting activities which are all genuinely fun on their own (like a few of the Red Dead Redemption activities. Also I feel that Haven & Hearth, ATITD, and Puzzle Pirates each have sandbox-like gameplay where the activities are fairly engaging.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Since the big majority lack imagination and artistic skills they end up doing this instead
So we the unimaginative peoples let the professionals do what they can do best and we take the ride. If donne properly it can be a hell of a ride.
i love this post so much
and OP, that is why Themepark games most of the time do much better than sandbox games, people want to story, they want quests they want to have a goal set for them so they can acomplish them and then feel like they did something... and since its in the form of a quest that anyone can have, everyone can acomplish something
in a sandbox game there is limited space,
ill take eve as an example. there are only so many systems to be claimed. if you are not powerfull enough (or play 26 hours a day) your chances of claiming that system diminish, if you are not a good natural leader, your chances diminish and we keep going on with the attributes that will allow you to claim systems... this said, not everyone will have the oportunity to do so. and thats one of the features. some people will spend their whole eve gaming experience being cannon fodder and others will grow and be the leader of the leading alliance in the coalition of alliances owning, controling and leading 1/2 the map. thats what drives people away from sandboxes and into themeparks where everyone is the hero.
honestly i love sandboxes because i can set myself goals and i work towards them, its what i enjoy, but sometimes ill launch DDO and follow some quest line with some friends and enjoy the fact that i am the hero and i saved the princess from bowser (i think i got my games confused... but the point remains)
in short
Sandbox = life is a bitch and then you die
Theme park = you are unique, just like everyone else.
Sandbox = Big risk, Big reward, little risk little reward
Theme park = you do it you get it
i understand people that like to come home and just play a computer game and have fun alone
i also understand people that like to have a bigger challenge and have to think to play the game.
I like something between the sandbox and the guided tour.
The EQ-level of goal-oriented play is right for me. There were goals, but no directions on how to get there. The sheer amount of available items meant that there was always more than one way to get to your stat goals. And different people would set themselves different kinds of goals, yielding different kinds of fun-- some people played the market, some people dedicated themselves to maxing out crafting skills, some people only did group content, some people were raiders and everything they did was focused on making them more efficient at that. (Of course, even back in the good old days, there was plenty of "Ur doin it wrong" to go around. *eyeroll*)
I actually do want to try EVE again, as soon as I get my new computer settled in at my desk. It's more sandbox than I am used to, but if I can find people willing to put up with my bumbling around as a total noob, I will follow their lead.
Problem is that most sandbox games today are PVP oriented ( and hardcore pvp at that)
Almost like its a rule : "You like war ? You like causing grief to other people ? You like profiting on expense of others ?"
Than Sandbox is for you.
So the people that like working towards common PEACEFUL goal. People that want to relax and escape AGGRESION.
They recieve NO ENTRY sign - by all sandbox games today.
Until there is PVE sandbox game (and i am not saying it should have no PVP - but not all about pvp)
There will be no sandbox game that trully can appeal to most of the people.
I think in a sandbox there has to be that choice. This is my opinion. I am not a griefer or pirate. Actually in EVE I am a industrialist in 0,0 and in DF I craft mostly. But if I was to find a pve sandbox I think ultimately I would be disappointed because pve by its nature is a bunch of scripted events that the players have zero control over and most sandboxers see this as the opposite of player freedom. That said I think original early EQ might have been the closest thing to a pve sandbox and I am sure something like it will appear again.
As already mentioned above, give a try to Fallen Earth. Tho themepark with quests, but no one single direction, one can choose how and in which order to make them, if at all make quests.
Best thing in FE (and I can say most meaningful from all my seen MMOs) is it's crafting system which can take ya from zero to max w/out running any quests, levelling in craft equals levelling in questing or mob-killing.
Most loot from mob dropa at best medicrite lvl, all best items (be they weapons, armor, mounts, vehicles etc) are crafter made, they arn't stuüidly bound after ya once took it into hands. After makeing/buying new and better ya freely can five/sell old one.
And being crafter ya aren't limited to one (or 2-3) craftskills - ya can make yarself expert in ALL crafting spending a lot of time and resources. And that gives ya a lot of fun plus all kind of business games in auction halls, manipulating with prices etc.
What I am wondering is why are developers so keen on either going full sandbox or full "theme park". The fact is I do like some choice in a game, I like having many things to do and such. However I also like having some sense of direction in a game and the last thing I want to do is to be wandering around like a lost puppy thinking of something to do.
I'm just wondering why so many developers feel the need to go to the extremes. I also feel like the term "sandbox" is used as a cop-out by many developers and as a synonym for "no content".
imo it is what games like FFXIV and GW2 try to do, giving you some personal choices and a little influence on the enviornment, but still have quests (well events in GW2). dont know much about TERA but read their feature list and they give you some impact on the game aswell - get to think of an eve like game but with the fantasy/action settings, player driven economi and political system, not sure how much of "safe space" it would have if any on the PvP servers.
now how much impact on your character and game world do you need to have, before you can claim it to be a true sandboxed themepark. but all of those 3 games get me abit (properbly over) hyped, especially GW2.....think FFXIV will be my while waiting for GW2 game, to me sounds like GW2 and TERA just try to be more, and give a new MMO experience, where FFXIV try to stick to the roots, which may not be a bad thing either considering how popular FFXI have been.
and think the sandbox/themepark mix is really what get them the amount of hype those games got on this site
Problem is that most sandbox games today are PVP oriented ( and hardcore pvp at that)
Almost like its a rule : "You like war ? You like causing grief to other people ? You like profiting on expense of others ?"
Than Sandbox is for you.
So the people that like working towards common PEACEFUL goal. People that want to relax and escape AGGRESION.
They recieve NO ENTRY sign - by all sandbox games today.
Until there is PVE sandbox game (and i am not saying it should have no PVP - but not all about pvp)
There will be no sandbox game that trully can appeal to most of the people.
I agree.
The term sandbox is just a buzz-word. It is an idea without substance when it comes to PvE games. The only exception I can think of is Second Life.
People who promote the sandbox concept are usually just repeating the latest buzz-word with no concept of what a sandbox pve sandbox game would be like.
Some people think 'sandbox' means a lack of goals, but usually, it means more like a variety of goals to choose from. Rather than the game giving you one direction, the game gives you options. Instead of a levelgrind, with things like crafting and gathering tacked onto it, a sandbox gives the freedom to pursue different types of distinct goals. So sandbox games from UO to EVE to RDR do have directions to go in, it's just not funneled the way a linear game would be.
And just because someone prefers a sandbox, doesn't mean they'll like ALL sandbox games. Some sandbox fans can hate EVE, the same way some people prefer themeparks, but hate WoW. Not to mention that the term isn't black and white, but encompasses a lot of grey area. All MMOs, by their nature, are more sandbox-like than story driven adventure games, like Tomb Raider or Uncharted 2, but in the context of the MMO genre, some are more sandbox than others.
All that said, yeah, some people do prefer games that tell them exactly what to do. I can't believe how many console games just involve hitting X or O when the game tells you to, just to go from one cut-scene to the next. That would be the other end of the spectrum, which can be popular, but I personally hate.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
*Whew! There I have finally admitted it to myself. After several years of beleiving I would prefer sandbox playstyles and after playing a few (argueably, EVE Online and Ryzom) I realize that I simply dont like the lack of direction. I want and desire some direction. I like goals being presented and I feel like I have accomplished something when I attain them. Even though those goals were provided to me as opposed to me making them up for myself.
I have a great career, I work hard, and when I get home I want to play and have some fun with my favorite hobby (Gaming, MMOs in particular). Im simply not up for sitting there wondering what Im going to do next. I tried to like EVE, Im trying to like Ryzom, they are fine games, great ideas, but I get bored quickly without some predefined goals and tasks. I suppose many others feel this way and perhaps that makes me nothing but a cog in the wheel Maybe one day someone will come out with a game that incorporates sandbox elements and scripted elements in such a way that appeals to the masses but until then, Ill stick to themepark type games.
Thanks for listening.
Tricycle = most basic hand-holding MMO. Lots of linear direction; storyline heavily enforced.
Bike with training wheels = Most themepark MMO's (probably what you are describing that you like, I guess. Hey, I play them too.)
Bike without training wheels = Sandboxy MMO with harsher penalties for failure. Freedom and risk.
I've never played a true sandbox game such as UO, etc., but I do find the idea appealing.
I'm not overly fond of pure linear grinding theme park games either (and grind for gear raiding no thanks!). I'd honestly love a game where player actions mattered and could change the world, but I also want a game rich in lore, engaging characters (npc and player driven), decent combat mechanics, that also encourages exploration with skill based progression over grind-a-level.
Many of the components of EQ2 I like - the questing that makes sense, diety quests, etc. But I also enjoy pvp, not FFS gang-fest but true faction based pvp. I liked the feel of Warhammer's or AoC's factions that had diversity. If you're going to play an evil or bad race, let them be bad!
I have EvE ready to download (Steam's $1.99 sale this past week was irresistable), but it's really going to have to wow me to get me involved longterm. It sounds fun, but IDK, time is a premium, so we'll see.
As for playing a game to be entertained, I sure don't need a second job and really don't want every mundane task of RL to be included, but don't want instant gratification either.
Seems like many of us are waiting for that perfect game to still come along.
Hmm... Maybe a Sandbox type game that has multiple (optional) storylines and objectives is what the MMO world needs... Because it is hard to make a story for a game when you are on your own.
Playing: Ever quest 2 Played: MS,GW,EVE,LOTRO,WoW,Allods,Aion, CO,CoH,CoV,TQ Digital games, Darkfall,AoC,RS2. Liked: Dungeon fight online, GW, Darkfall and, Runescape. Waiting for: Link Realms(can't get my damn beta invite) KOTOR and, GW2
Hmm... Maybe a Sandbox type game that has multiple (optional) storylines and objectives is what the MMO world needs... Because it is hard to make a story for a game when you are on your own.
Sandbox games have what I call "subtle and silent stories".
Mortal Online has zero story, but miles of background lore that can be found out of game, and then be referenced through landmarks and object found in-game. You're not going to see any NPC text over it, but the presence of any kind of point-of-interest comes with it's own interpretable story there.
Lets use an example of the POI's in SWG. You could actually visit the Sarlacc and Uncle Owen's homestead, but there is no presence of story or even a plaque to commemorate anything really. There is just something to look at that makes you think. Most of us are well aware of the point of these areas, because we saw the films, but to an outsider (if one exists) these places mean nothing, and the meaning of it all is left to interpretation... and that's usually pretty strong imagery because the player puts the pieces together himself, he gets far more involved in it.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4 Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
Comments
You ask a question based on opinion, did you do this knowing that no one is going to post anything that is going to change your mind or your personal views so you can rebut them and feel superior? Does this type of question help you to feel better about yourself and justify your "not sugar coated" opinion.
Your post I was responding to compared Co-Op RPGs and SP RPGs. But it ended with asking [quote] [i]Originally posted by Z3R01[/i] [ so please point me in the direction of that tp thats superior to sp rpgs.... please.[/color] [/quote]
Difference between MMORPG and CO-OP RPG and social interaction? Maybe not much.
Between SPRPGs with vent? Well we were not in the same virtual world together at the same time so big difference.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
I haven't come across a single sandbox I would consider worth while,
To a certain extent it is the basic stuff that plagues most MMOS, bad combat, long boring grinds etc.
But specifically sandboxes I find the most boring. A lot of the time they are filled with the most mundane boring crap you can think of, but unlike other games instead of getting a little mention as a side activity it is a center piece of a game. I don't think you can ever make economic gameplay fun, gardening, crafting or whatever mundane thing the game has in it. Putting such a focus on this kind of gameplay can at best be a vestigial addition and at worst a parasite on the devs time causing the good parts, the adventure, to suffer.
The thing is the world in sandoxes are not immersive to me at all either even though sandboxes are supose to be living breathing worlds, if anything sandboxes have some of the most dead worlds I can think of. Immersion is all about the human element, making NPCs have histories and personalities and making their lives intertwine in some way to show that the world is alive. The fact that you have a working economy or political system doesn't mean much to me.
Even when there are good ideas in a sandbox game they are usually made to be very unfun. Want a house, sure, but you have to stick build it for hours and when you get it it will just be a shack.
Another issue is quality of content. Player interaction can only produce certain kinds of content and lets be honest it is pretty shallow. Even dynamic content can only do so much. If you have any interest in more involving stories and characters with personalities that drive the story then you are going to have script something.
It isn't that themeparks are great in this sense either, but they are the only games that come remotely close.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
To each his own.
I for one had the best gaming times of my life in Wurm doing mundane things like digging, mining, gardening... basically all the things you swear you couldn't base a game off of.
Well... you can.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
To each his own.
I for one had the best gaming times of my life in Wurm doing mundane things like digging, mining, gardening... basically all the things you swear you couldn't base a game off of.
Well... you can.
Ah yes Wurm. My friends and I had a lot of fun when the test servers first opened up and we got lost in the wilderness and started a little settlement, harassed by bears and trolls, and eventually was steamrolled by the horde. It was a lot of fun.
Sent me an email if you want me to mail you some pizza rolls.
So to you the "human element" is about NPCs with entertaining backstories rather than the economic and political manouverings of other players?
Personally, I find the unpredictability of events in a more sandbox-style environment to be much more interesting. But that's just me.
Sandbox games were fantastic when having a few thousand people on a server was an accomplishment(UO days). Now no company can realistically make a sandbox. You ever try playing in a sandbox full of kids? Everyone is fighting over the tools and no one has room to move around and check our other areas of the box. So, instead of trying to pack 100 different sand moving tools into this box they decide to let everyone share a few small tools so the sand doesn't get thrown everywhere. I love sandbox games. But they are a thing of the past until technology takes another leap.
So now mmorpg.com is the authority on defining sandbox vs. themepark? No offense to the mmorpg folks, but that is laughable.
Sandbox just means you can decide among different activities what you want to do while playing a game. Most non-MMO games out there run you through a specific path, you save your progress along the way, but when you log back in you must continue right back where you left off. In most MMOs, however, you can either do quests, kill things in various parts of the world without a quest but to gain exp/loot, craft items, harvest items, socialize/politicize with friends/guildmates, choose new skills/respec and try out your new abilities, choose your class, etc. That is plenty of different activities, and I don't know of any MMO that can be considered entirely "themepark" other than the MMO having a small part of the game being themepark, e.g., questlines. And even among those, only the 'career' or "class specific" quest lines are the ones you may be forced to do to develop your character, which is a small fraction of overall time spent in the game and in most cases is one of the most entertaining parts of the game anyway.
Maybe if people roleplayed all the time, but they don't. Otherwise you just have a bunch of flat characters with no personality. In sandboxes most of the interaction is between players, but I want interaction between characters. Since players will not or sometimes cannot develope characters with personality, I have to get the story fix from scripted content.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
Best post I have ever read on these forums
My Wife and brother both dislike sandbox games.
They tend to enjoy more story based linear games which is cool.
good luck in your next game.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
Yeah, sandboxes devolve into drudgery specifically because they are weak as games. A well-design game constantly offers you interesting decisions, and frequently varies those decisions in order to keep things interesting.
I think sandbox type games could be fun if they can escape the "I scripted this activity in 30 minutes" feel of so many of their systems.
My opinion on sandboxes is a lot like my opinion on F2P vs. P2P actually:
Most F2P games suck, but it's not F2P which inherently makes them suck.
Most sandboxes suck, but it's not being a sandbox which inherently makes them suck.
In both cases, a well-designed game is going to be fun regardless. A F2P could have a well-balanced and interesting Shop (and zero Pay2Perform items). A Sandbox could be filled with interesting activities which are all genuinely fun on their own (like a few of the Red Dead Redemption activities. Also I feel that Haven & Hearth, ATITD, and Puzzle Pirates each have sandbox-like gameplay where the activities are fairly engaging.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
i love this post so much
and OP, that is why Themepark games most of the time do much better than sandbox games, people want to story, they want quests they want to have a goal set for them so they can acomplish them and then feel like they did something... and since its in the form of a quest that anyone can have, everyone can acomplish something
in a sandbox game there is limited space,
ill take eve as an example. there are only so many systems to be claimed. if you are not powerfull enough (or play 26 hours a day) your chances of claiming that system diminish, if you are not a good natural leader, your chances diminish and we keep going on with the attributes that will allow you to claim systems... this said, not everyone will have the oportunity to do so. and thats one of the features. some people will spend their whole eve gaming experience being cannon fodder and others will grow and be the leader of the leading alliance in the coalition of alliances owning, controling and leading 1/2 the map. thats what drives people away from sandboxes and into themeparks where everyone is the hero.
honestly i love sandboxes because i can set myself goals and i work towards them, its what i enjoy, but sometimes ill launch DDO and follow some quest line with some friends and enjoy the fact that i am the hero and i saved the princess from bowser (i think i got my games confused... but the point remains)
in short
Sandbox = life is a bitch and then you die
Theme park = you are unique, just like everyone else.
Sandbox = Big risk, Big reward, little risk little reward
Theme park = you do it you get it
i understand people that like to come home and just play a computer game and have fun alone
i also understand people that like to have a bigger challenge and have to think to play the game.
I like something between the sandbox and the guided tour.
The EQ-level of goal-oriented play is right for me. There were goals, but no directions on how to get there. The sheer amount of available items meant that there was always more than one way to get to your stat goals. And different people would set themselves different kinds of goals, yielding different kinds of fun-- some people played the market, some people dedicated themselves to maxing out crafting skills, some people only did group content, some people were raiders and everything they did was focused on making them more efficient at that. (Of course, even back in the good old days, there was plenty of "Ur doin it wrong" to go around. *eyeroll*)
I actually do want to try EVE again, as soon as I get my new computer settled in at my desk. It's more sandbox than I am used to, but if I can find people willing to put up with my bumbling around as a total noob, I will follow their lead.
As already mentioned above, give a try to Fallen Earth. Tho themepark with quests, but no one single direction, one can choose how and in which order to make them, if at all make quests.
Best thing in FE (and I can say most meaningful from all my seen MMOs) is it's crafting system which can take ya from zero to max w/out running any quests, levelling in craft equals levelling in questing or mob-killing.
Most loot from mob dropa at best medicrite lvl, all best items (be they weapons, armor, mounts, vehicles etc) are crafter made, they arn't stuüidly bound after ya once took it into hands. After makeing/buying new and better ya freely can five/sell old one.
And being crafter ya aren't limited to one (or 2-3) craftskills - ya can make yarself expert in ALL crafting spending a lot of time and resources. And that gives ya a lot of fun plus all kind of business games in auction halls, manipulating with prices etc.
I love your avatar. You know what it's keying right? CQ CQ CQ ... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CQ_(call))
Real Keypunch Operators use grapeshot!
imo it is what games like FFXIV and GW2 try to do, giving you some personal choices and a little influence on the enviornment, but still have quests (well events in GW2). dont know much about TERA but read their feature list and they give you some impact on the game aswell - get to think of an eve like game but with the fantasy/action settings, player driven economi and political system, not sure how much of "safe space" it would have if any on the PvP servers.
now how much impact on your character and game world do you need to have, before you can claim it to be a true sandboxed themepark. but all of those 3 games get me abit (properbly over) hyped, especially GW2.....think FFXIV will be my while waiting for GW2 game, to me sounds like GW2 and TERA just try to be more, and give a new MMO experience, where FFXIV try to stick to the roots, which may not be a bad thing either considering how popular FFXI have been.
and think the sandbox/themepark mix is really what get them the amount of hype those games got on this site
I agree.
The term sandbox is just a buzz-word. It is an idea without substance when it comes to PvE games. The only exception I can think of is Second Life.
People who promote the sandbox concept are usually just repeating the latest buzz-word with no concept of what a sandbox pve sandbox game would be like.
Eve is a really bad example of Sandbox MMO. It's just a bad MMO unless you like looking at spreadsheets.
I've been playing Eve all night since im off of work the next week.
I haven't come in contact with one spreadsheet.
What I have done is bait a few newbs, play around with PI and clear a class 3 wormhole with my proteus.
When playing Eve one needs to actually click on the Eve icon not the MS office icon.
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
Some people think 'sandbox' means a lack of goals, but usually, it means more like a variety of goals to choose from. Rather than the game giving you one direction, the game gives you options. Instead of a levelgrind, with things like crafting and gathering tacked onto it, a sandbox gives the freedom to pursue different types of distinct goals. So sandbox games from UO to EVE to RDR do have directions to go in, it's just not funneled the way a linear game would be.
And just because someone prefers a sandbox, doesn't mean they'll like ALL sandbox games. Some sandbox fans can hate EVE, the same way some people prefer themeparks, but hate WoW. Not to mention that the term isn't black and white, but encompasses a lot of grey area. All MMOs, by their nature, are more sandbox-like than story driven adventure games, like Tomb Raider or Uncharted 2, but in the context of the MMO genre, some are more sandbox than others.
All that said, yeah, some people do prefer games that tell them exactly what to do. I can't believe how many console games just involve hitting X or O when the game tells you to, just to go from one cut-scene to the next. That would be the other end of the spectrum, which can be popular, but I personally hate.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Tricycle = most basic hand-holding MMO. Lots of linear direction; storyline heavily enforced.
Bike with training wheels = Most themepark MMO's (probably what you are describing that you like, I guess. Hey, I play them too.)
Bike without training wheels = Sandboxy MMO with harsher penalties for failure. Freedom and risk.
Motorcycle = PVP
Motorcycle without helmet = FFA PVP
I've never played a true sandbox game such as UO, etc., but I do find the idea appealing.
I'm not overly fond of pure linear grinding theme park games either (and grind for gear raiding no thanks!). I'd honestly love a game where player actions mattered and could change the world, but I also want a game rich in lore, engaging characters (npc and player driven), decent combat mechanics, that also encourages exploration with skill based progression over grind-a-level.
Many of the components of EQ2 I like - the questing that makes sense, diety quests, etc. But I also enjoy pvp, not FFS gang-fest but true faction based pvp. I liked the feel of Warhammer's or AoC's factions that had diversity. If you're going to play an evil or bad race, let them be bad!
I have EvE ready to download (Steam's $1.99 sale this past week was irresistable), but it's really going to have to wow me to get me involved longterm. It sounds fun, but IDK, time is a premium, so we'll see.
As for playing a game to be entertained, I sure don't need a second job and really don't want every mundane task of RL to be included, but don't want instant gratification either.
Seems like many of us are waiting for that perfect game to still come along.
Proud member of Hammerfist Clan Gaming Community.
Currently playing: RIFT, EQ2, WoW, LoTRO
Retired: Warhammer, AoC, EQ
Waiting: SWToR & GW2
Hmm... Maybe a Sandbox type game that has multiple (optional) storylines and objectives is what the MMO world needs... Because it is hard to make a story for a game when you are on your own.
Playing: Ever quest 2
Played: MS,GW,EVE,LOTRO,WoW,Allods,Aion, CO,CoH,CoV,TQ Digital games, Darkfall,AoC,RS2.
Liked: Dungeon fight online, GW, Darkfall and, Runescape.
Waiting for: Link Realms(can't get my damn beta invite) KOTOR and, GW2
Sandbox games have what I call "subtle and silent stories".
Mortal Online has zero story, but miles of background lore that can be found out of game, and then be referenced through landmarks and object found in-game. You're not going to see any NPC text over it, but the presence of any kind of point-of-interest comes with it's own interpretable story there.
Lets use an example of the POI's in SWG. You could actually visit the Sarlacc and Uncle Owen's homestead, but there is no presence of story or even a plaque to commemorate anything really. There is just something to look at that makes you think. Most of us are well aware of the point of these areas, because we saw the films, but to an outsider (if one exists) these places mean nothing, and the meaning of it all is left to interpretation... and that's usually pretty strong imagery because the player puts the pieces together himself, he gets far more involved in it.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture