Sandbox - A sandbox is a game where the developers give players the tools to create their own objects, characters, surroundings, etc. with no limitations (other than the limitations within the game). Just like a sandbox, players are set free to create their own content, story, direction, entertainment, etc.
Theme Park - A theme park is a game where the developers create all the content, direction, characters, attractions, etc. for a player. Characters follow a defined progression starting from point A to point B. Everything is pre-planned, timed and pre-determined, etc.
To make this all easier to understand.
Think of an actual Sandbox. What can you do with it? Virtually anything you can imagine/want. You can play in the sand and make up whatever you want.
Now think of an actual Theme Park (i.e. Disneyland). What can you do with it? You can ride the rides and see the attractions.
That pretty much explains it in a nutshell.
You do realize you can't do anything in a game it's not programmed to allow. You can only ride the rides and see the attractions in any game.
Yes, that is why I stated "within the game's limitations". Obviously in a Medieval setting sandbox, I may not be able to create a futuristic space ship. But I may be able to create a build a castle or city anywhere I please to do with whatever I want (set up taxes, rent out homes, start a bank to hold players gold, etc).
The thing that separates the two types, is that I am creating the content for players, rather than the developers.
No you're playing out the content the developers designed. Everything you're doing is in the code. Unless you can alter the code itself you're not creating anything. The difference in your viewpoint not in anything about the game. You feel free doing the things you want to do and restricted when you can not.
I think you are confusing content with design/code? I mean, I get what you are saying. But its not entirely applicable to differentiate the two types. Aye, the developers create the code, to allow the players to create the content. The developers don't create the content, they create the means for the players to build/destory the content and alter it to their liking.
In a Theme Park, you merely "ride the rides". In a Sandbox, you "create the rides". Essentially.
Anyway, I'm out for the day. Take care all and have a good day!
The guy who invented the terms 'sandbox' and 'theme park' defined them this way: A theme park is where your character is literally on rails like a train, think of Mario Brothers or Donkey Kong, you can only move left or right. A sandbox is _any_ MMO, even in the most basic of MMOs you can move in X and Y and sometimes Z axis.
So old school video games like Pac Man are theme park. Runescape, EQ1, WoW etc are sandbox.
The meaning and usage of many words changes with time and more importantly when applied to specific things.
The fact of the matter is 'sandbox' and 'themepark' mean quite different things when used within the mmo genre by the mmo playerbase. Look at any mmo centric forum/blog/website/publication and you will see this to hold true.
WoW is not a sandbox mmo in terms of the widely held use (and acceptance) of the word.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
And mining is boring. I swear I think that's a game mechanic in every Sandbox game. Why can't you hire helpers or build mining robots or summon demons or something?
You could in swg (automated harvestors), and it was by far the best resource collection system I've ever played. It's also why I absolutely abhor wow's individual node harvesting system (although that is by no means unique to wow).
The great thing about SWG mining was that you really didn't mine, you explored. You'd travel all around the world scanning every now and then to find the most concentrated spots, get to those spots and place your harvestors, leave, and come back a few days later to reap the rewards.
It was a truly amazing system that actually made harvesting materials a lot of fun. It also got everyone involved, although you'd be able to use better harvestors as you built harvesting skill. But everyone else could setup some medium harvestors around their house, mine what was there, and then drop it into the economy to benefit the crafters.
It's a system that has yet to be matched by any mmo out there.
SW:ToR
i am not sure, if the SWTOR system will match to SWG when it comes to gathering. if the hero himself has to explore and scan potential spots by himself and then mark this spot on the map of his gathering-companion, then it would be very similar. placing an harvester or sending a companion, who cares? but the difference i see so far is this explore & scan first part. perhaps i got not the full information on the SWTOR gathering system.
however, what i saw in one of these videos was: the hero was cleaning the mobs in the area, while he points to his companion, where to gather behind him. if this is superior in terms of quality and output compared to simply send the companion alone, i call it an improvement over the wow-system.
so even if we look to gathering, which seems to be one of the easier gamemechanics, there is not just black&white. between sandbox (open, flexibel, complex, dynamic) and theme-park (linear, rigid, simple, static) are tons of variations and mixtures of both systems.
The guy who invented the terms 'sandbox' and 'theme park' defined them this way: A theme park is where your character is literally on rails like a train, think of Mario Brothers or Donkey Kong, you can only move left or right. A sandbox is _any_ MMO, even in the most basic of MMOs you can move in X and Y and sometimes Z axis.
So old school video games like Pac Man are theme park. Runescape, EQ1, WoW etc are sandbox.
The meaning and usage of many words changes with time and more importantly when applied to specific things.
The fact of the matter is 'sandbox' and 'themepark' mean quite different things when used within the mmo genre by the mmo playerbase. Look at any mmo centric forum/blog/website/publication and you will see this to hold true.
WoW is not a sandbox mmo in terms of the widely held use (and acceptance) of the word.
But the terms sandbox and theme park mean different things to different people. They are not good definitions. If we have a conversation and you say you play a sandbox, I'll be thinking one thing while you'll be thinking another.
We should come up with better terms that have clearer meaning.
I was wondering if there was a definite definition (as if there was any other kind) for the Sandbox MMO, or if it was more of a broader term with sub-definitions.
Is there a definition that everyone generally agrees with, or does everybody have a different view of what a sandbox should be?
Sometimes I hear that it should be an MMO without boundaries, meaning you aren't pushed into a certain activity or pushed into a chain of activities in a specific order. Sometimes I hear that Sandbox means the game supports player created content, etc.
I just wanted some clarification, or at the very least, some opinions.
My own personel defination of a sandbox MMO is: When you create you character, can you then run at whatever direction you want, and still play the game? You dont need to do something first.
The guy who invented the terms 'sandbox' and 'theme park' defined them this way: A theme park is where your character is literally on rails like a train, think of Mario Brothers or Donkey Kong, you can only move left or right. A sandbox is _any_ MMO, even in the most basic of MMOs you can move in X and Y and sometimes Z axis.
So old school video games like Pac Man are theme park. Runescape, EQ1, WoW etc are sandbox.
The meaning and usage of many words changes with time and more importantly when applied to specific things.
The fact of the matter is 'sandbox' and 'themepark' mean quite different things when used within the mmo genre by the mmo playerbase. Look at any mmo centric forum/blog/website/publication and you will see this to hold true.
WoW is not a sandbox mmo in terms of the widely held use (and acceptance) of the word.
But the terms sandbox and theme park mean different things to different people. They are not good definitions. If we have a conversation and you say you play a sandbox, I'll be thinking one thing while you'll be thinking another.
We should come up with better terms that have clearer meaning.
Sandbox= dynamic world
themepark= persistent world
To the caterpillar it is the end of the world, to the master, it is a butterfly.
regarding the word "persistent". someone said, that a sandbox is dynamic, so it cant be persistent.
i am not a native english-speaker, but i know IT-english and in IT "persistent" is used in a different manner: persistent means, that an object or service will always exist in the main memory loaded (aside form server-down). it is the opposite of "instanced", where an area just exists as long as somebody is in this area and it is needed. look at your operating system. some services are persistent. you cant get them out of your RAM. others are just loaded temporary if needed. somtimes even more than one instance of the same service.
actually sanboxes have been very often open persistent worlds without instances or very low dedicated usage of them. but persistent does not mean, that this zone and the content cant change or be dynamic. it just means, thats this hyghly flexible, changable and dynamic persistent zone is always up and running. as long as the server runs.
afaik the opposite of dynamic is static. and this is what theme-parks are, last but not least a static series of predefined elements. could be complex and highly mashed and such, but at the end not-dynamic.
Well I figured I would throw in my 2 cents on this.
Sandbox is a fully open world where nothing is guiding you but your own free will. Thrill to seek out new areas find treasures. That does not mean there cant be full range of NPC factions along the way. But usually things you do might just make it riskier or easier to adventure the areas they influence. Everquest 1 is a good example of this.
Theme Park is a game like guildwars or maybe STOR where the story pushes you from place to place. Ever advancing the story as you go. I honestly feel that this term has been overused though. The reason for this is because I find most game are actually hybrid games.
Hybrid games are games that mix the elements. Take WOW for instance. Yes you have quests that push you to adventure. But in all honesty there are really SOO many different areas you can quest in you really still get to choose your own adventure and where you adventure to. The bonus is that there are quests still involved. Alot of people call Vanguard a Sandbox, but in all honesty it really is alot like WOW with quests that drive specific areas of the world. The world is just so vast that people claim it is a sandbox when really it is a hybrid of the 2. As are most games these days.
True open Sandboxes are super rare. but the same can be said for True Theme Park, most games fall in the mix as a hybrid.
But the terms sandbox and theme park mean different things to different people. They are not good definitions. If we have a conversation and you say you play a sandbox, I'll be thinking one thing while you'll be thinking another.
We should come up with better terms that have clearer meaning.
Actually the vast majority of mmo gamers have just about the same definition for the words 'sandbox' and 'themepark' in terms of mmo's, very little neads 'cearing up' so to speak.
Look through any thread on the subject (including this one), the majority share the same definition, you get one or two who deviate from that but any term like this will have some amount of ambiguity (and you cannot take into account fanbois who refuse to hear that their precious game is a themepark) regardless of the common consensus.
If you asked people to list themepark mmos and sandbox mmos, the majority would churn out the same list.
WoW/LoTRO/STO/WAR and the like are widely accepted as themeparks. DF/EVE/UO and the like are held to be sandboxes. Not everyone will agree on that matter, but the majority will.
There is little need to come up with better terms or new definitions for the simple reason that most already agree on the general principles.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Actually the vast majority of mmo gamers have just about the same definition for the words 'sandbox' and 'themepark' in terms of mmo's, very little neads 'cearing up' so to speak.
Look through any thread on the subject (including this one), the majority share the same definition, you get one or two who deviate from that but any term like this will have some amount of ambiguity (and you cannot take into account fanbois who refuse to hear that their precious game is a themepark) regardless of the common consensus.
There is little need to come up with better terms or new definitions for the simple reason that most already agree on the general principles.
Actually, it seems there is a bit of disparity on the definitions. Everyone has their pet definition. And as others have mentioned, the term sandbox originally applied to non-mmos. Therefore, 99% of the mmo players use a definition that is specialized to mmos, and not the original definition as it was used. Theres a disparity right from the get go. Now most people won't like the original definition becaues it doesn't support their pet cause.
Actually, it seems there is a bit of disparity on the definitions. Everyone has their pet definition. And as others have mentioned, the term sandbox originally applied to non-mmos. Therefore, 99% of the mmo players use a definition that is specialized to mmos, and not the original definition as it was used. Theres a disparity right from the get go. Now most people won't like the original definition becaues it doesn't support their pet cause.
99% use the definition specific to mmo's because that's the point. I fail to see exactly what is wrong with that given people are talking about, mmo's. There is no 'disparity' in a term evolving or being applied within a specific subset to mean a specific thing. That it was originally used with single player offline games in mind means little in the context of how it is used now.
Whilst there will always be some ambiguity in terms like this (as is the norm) it is pretty clear that a 'sandbox mmo' is one which offers a vast amount of freedom, highly player/community centric dynamics and game world which is itself dynamic and subject to 'control' to a significant extent by the games player community.
I am not sure quite what you mean by 'pet cause', the simple fact of the matter is that some mmos are seen as sandboxes by the community at large, some are not. That inn general the greater amount of the community sees it in such away is more than enough to lend significance to the terminology.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Actually, it seems there is a bit of disparity on the definitions. Everyone has their pet definition. And as others have mentioned, the term sandbox originally applied to non-mmos. Therefore, 99% of the mmo players use a definition that is specialized to mmos, and not the original definition as it was used. Theres a disparity right from the get go. Now most people won't like the original definition becaues it doesn't support their pet cause.
Of course you are right.
The only definition FREE of prejudgement against other games is of course that one of Wikipedia.
A video game with nonlinear gameplay (sandbox style) presents players with challenges that can be completed in a number of different sequences. Whereas a more linear game will confront a player with a fixed sequence of challenges, a less linear game will allow greater player freedom. For example, a nonlinear game may permit multiple sequences to finish the game, a choice between paths to victory, or optional side-quests and subplots. Some games feature both linear and nonlinear elements, and some games offer a sandbox mode that allows players to explore an open world game environment independently from the game's main objectives.
A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox,[1][2][3][4] and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game.[5] A common consequence (intentional or unintentional) of open-ended gameplay is emergent gameplay.[4]
It is the only defintion where ALL games get a fair chance of being treated on an equal basis.
Some posters in this thread want to EXCLUDE titles from this definition just because they want to trash talk.
Fact remains: EVERY MMORPG in this definition can be included as having a sandbox designed gameplay. There is NO right way to play Wow, Lotrro, War or any other MMORPG.
In the traditional NEUTRAL definition of game design they are ALL sandboxes (btw I play WOW to gather PvP titles I am not even interested much in the PVE part of the game and some others may play any MMORPG in ANY way they would want).
The only definition FREE of prejudgement against other games is of course that one of Wikipedia.
A video game with nonlinear gameplay (sandbox style) presents players with challenges that can be completed in a number of different sequences. Whereas a more linear game will confront a player with a fixed sequence of challenges, a less linear game will allow greater player freedom. For example, a nonlinear game may permit multiple sequences to finish the game, a choice between paths to victory, or optional side-quests and subplots. Some games feature both linear and nonlinear elements, and some games offer a sandbox mode that allows players to explore an open world game environment independently from the game's main objectives.
A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox,[1][2][3][4] and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game.[5] A common consequence (intentional or unintentional) of open-ended gameplay is emergent gameplay.[4]
It is the only defintion where ALL games get a fair chance of being treated on an equal basis.
Some posters in this thread want to EXCLUDE titles from this definition just because they want to trash talk.
Fact remains: EVERY MMORPG in this definition can be included as having a sandbox designed gameplay. There is NO right way to play Wow, Lotrro, War or any other MMORPG.
In the traditional NEUTRAL definition of game design they are ALL sandboxes (btw I play WOW to gather PvP titles I am not even interested much in the PVE part of the game and some others may play any MMORPG in ANY way they would want).
So WOW is now a sandbox, eh? I think I've seen it all on this site.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
The only definition FREE of prejudgement against other games is of course that one of Wikipedia.
A video game with nonlinear gameplay (sandbox style) presents players with challenges that can be completed in a number of different sequences. Whereas a more linear game will confront a player with a fixed sequence of challenges, a less linear game will allow greater player freedom. For example, a nonlinear game may permit multiple sequences to finish the game, a choice between paths to victory, or optional side-quests and subplots. Some games feature both linear and nonlinear elements, and some games offer a sandbox mode that allows players to explore an open world game environment independently from the game's main objectives.
A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox,[1][2][3][4] and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game.[5] A common consequence (intentional or unintentional) of open-ended gameplay is emergent gameplay.[4]
It is the only defintion where ALL games get a fair chance of being treated on an equal basis.
Some posters in this thread want to EXCLUDE titles from this definition just because they want to trash talk.
Fact remains: EVERY MMORPG in this definition can be included as having a sandbox designed gameplay. There is NO right way to play Wow, Lotrro, War or any other MMORPG.
In the traditional NEUTRAL definition of game design they are ALL sandboxes (btw I play WOW to gather PvP titles I am not even interested much in the PVE part of the game and some others may play any MMORPG in ANY way they would want).
So WOW is now a sandbox, eh? I think I've seen it all on this site.
Aye, can't work out if he's trolling or not, especially using wiki so much..
@Arnstrong there are two key concepts to grasp here. First of all there is a clear difference between a sandbox game and a sandbox mmo, the latter having a rather large common consensus within the mmo community. As a game, should you compare WoW to Pong then yes it has sandbox attributes, but within the genre of mmo's it is not considered a sandbox mmo. Secondly the people who say WoW is a themepark (you know probably 90% or so of the mmo playerbase) are not saying it sucks, they are simply saying it is a themepark.
If you are so sure that the widely held belief is that WoW is a sandbox mmorpg why don't you make a thread with a poll in it?
PS, wikipedia again...really?
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
So WOW is now a sandbox, eh? I think I've seen it all on this site.
WoW has always been a sandbox. The problem is the terms you're using are so vauge they can mean anything. Not only that but no one agrees what they are. How many times has someone posted, in all seriousness, that EVE isn't a sandbox? Hundreds of times.
WoW is a sandbox? Cool so I can pvp against whomever I wan't wherever I want in that game then? I can learn any skill, use any item and take on any role without being pigeon holed into a class? I can make a lasting and meaningful effect on a dynamic gameworld?
Strange that this information isn't on the WoW website as i'd have signed up straight away.
Compare WoW and the like to their peers, not to single player games and then (as the majority seem to) you may see why people don't consider it a sandbox mmo.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
So WOW is now a sandbox, eh? I think I've seen it all on this site.
WoW has always been a sandbox. The problem is the terms you're using are so vauge they can mean anything. Not only that but no one agrees what they are. How many times has someone posted, in all seriousness, that EVE isn't a sandbox? Hundreds of times.
WoW is a sandbox? Cool so I can pvp against whomever I wan't wherever I want in that game then? I can learn any skill, use any item and take on any role without being pigeon holed into a class? I can make a lasting and meaningful effect on a dynamic gameworld?
Strange that this information isn't on the WoW website as i'd have signed up straight away.
This place is getting nuttier by the minute. Calling WOW a sandbox basically destroys the term's relevance in the most dramatic fashion possible.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
So WOW is now a sandbox, eh? I think I've seen it all on this site.
WoW has always been a sandbox. The problem is the terms you're using are so vauge they can mean anything. Not only that but no one agrees what they are. How many times has someone posted, in all seriousness, that EVE isn't a sandbox? Hundreds of times.
WoW is a sandbox? Cool so I can pvp against whomever I wan't wherever I want in that game then? I can learn any skill, use any item and take on any role without being pigeon holed into a class? I can make a lasting and meaningful effect on a dynamic gameworld?
Strange that this information isn't on the WoW website as i'd have signed up straight away.
Compare WoW and the like to their peers, not to single player games and then (as the majority seem to) you may see why people don't consider it a sandbox mmo.
WoW isn't a sandbox, but on a PvP server you can indeed initiate PvP combat against anyone of the opposite faction at any time you want. WoW has become the best example of Not Sandbox...it's why they have so many subscribers.
On an unrelated note, AoC should have had a whole bunch of sandbox mechanics built in. :-(
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
To me the problem comes in when you compare different games that are fairly close. Everyone recognizes that games like Eve, Ryzom and Istara are far more sandboxy than WoW.
However many people say EQ was more sandboxy than WoW. Here is where I disagree. Everything I did in EQ I can do in WoW, and WoW gives me more options for developing my character. So to me WoW is more Sandboxy than EQ, but neither are as sandboxy as the previous three I mention.
Sandbox is a continuum with Mario brothers on the one side and Second life on the other. The more freedom a person has to do something the more sandboxy it is.
Venge Sunsoar
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
To me the problem comes in when you compare different games that are fairly close. Everyone recognizes that games like Eve, Ryzom and Istara are far more sandboxy than WoW.
However many people say EQ was more sandboxy than WoW. Here is where I disagree. Everything I did in EQ I can do in WoW, and WoW gives me more options for developing my character. So to me WoW is more Sandboxy than EQ, but neither are as sandboxy as the previous three I mention.
Sandbox is a continuum with Mario brothers on the one side and Second life on the other. The more freedom a person has to do something the more sandboxy it is.
Venge Sunsoar
EQ never been more or less of a sandbox game than Wow. Both games still tells you how o do things and the moreoptions of Wow does not make it more or less of a sandbox, just like EQs more classes doesn't either.
Vanguard however have some sandbox things in it and is a lot closer than EQ and Wow even if it is still a themepark game.
But people saying EQ have sandbox features are just wrong, like with Wow. The freedom to do as someone tells you really isn't any freedom at all, even if you have a few more options like in Wow. They are just both very far from sandboxes.
There is nothing wrong with sandboxes or themeparks however, they are just different, not worse. A good game is a good game no matter what kind it is.
WoW has always been a sandbox. The problem is the terms you're using are so vauge they can mean anything. Not only that but no one agrees what they are. How many times has someone posted, in all seriousness, that EVE isn't a sandbox? Hundreds of times.
WoW is a sandbox? Cool so I can pvp against whomever I wan't wherever I want in that game then? I can learn any skill, use any item and take on any role without being pigeon holed into a class? I can make a lasting and meaningful effect on a dynamic gameworld?
Strange that this information isn't on the WoW website as i'd have signed up straight away.
Compare WoW and the like to their peers, not to single player games and then (as the majority seem to) you may see why people don't consider it a sandbox mmo.
Yes you can PvP anywhere in WOW. Just as if this PvP thing defines "sandbox".
Yes I can take roles in that world and do complete different things than something it was designed for. Role play for example and stay at level 1 (by shutting experience off).
There was even this guy who traversed the complete world and all continents while being a level 1.
-----
Now turn it around: while I can built me a helicopter to fly around that 3D world and planets in WOW ... can I roam freely in EVE on a planet and walk ?
Can I craft ANYTHING in EVE that's not related to my cockpit chair and spaceship, like boots for your avatar and a fishing stick to go fishing ?
Can I make a flying carpet or a great laser pistol for my walking Avatar on the planets in EVE ...?
That's not very fair ? Well then I just turned the tric you use against your game you play....
See how EASY it is to EXCLUDE any game from being a "real" sandbox".
And like I said the wikipedia definition is a GREAT NEUTRAL definition for defining video games as sandboxes without trying to trash talk ANY individual games.
It's very neutral, it is very general and this definition can be applied to ANY video game production (from Donkey Kong to Second Life).
Any MMORPG is a sandbox game. Period. The PLAYER decides how he plays and there is NO perfect liniair way to "win".
That's a BIG difference: you adapt your views to trash talk games. While the real definition tries to define neutral categories in ALL video gaming... from a PLAYER's view.
Yes you can PvP anywhere in WOW. Just as if this PvP thing defines "sandbox".
Yes I can take roles in that world and do complete different things than something it was designed for. Role play for example and stay at level 1 (by shutting experience off).
There was even this guy who traversed the complete world and all continents while being a level 1.
-----
Now turn it around: while I can built me a helicopter to fly around that 3D world and planets in WOW ... can I roam freely in EVE on a planet and walk ?
Can I craft ANYTHING in EVE that's not related to my cockpit chair and spaceship, like boots for your avatar and a fishing stick to go fishing ?
Can I make a flying carpet or a great laser pistol for my walking Avatar on the planets in EVE ...?
That's not very fair ? Well then I just turned the tric you use against your game you play....
See how EASY it is to EXCLUDE any game from being a "real" sandbox".
And like I said the wikipedia definition is a GREAT NEUTRAL definition for defining video games as sandboxes without trying to trash talk ANY individual games.
It's very neutral, it is very general and this definition can be applied to ANY video game production (from Donkey Kong to Second Life).
Any MMORPG is a sandbox game. Period. The PLAYER decides how he plays and there is NO perfect liniair way to "win".
That's a BIG difference: you adapt your views to trash talk games. While the real definition tries to define neutral categories in ALL video gaming... from a PLAYER's view.
There's nothing wrong with liking themepark MMOs, man. You are passionate about arguably the best example so far in history. But honestly, enough with the reaching.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Yes you can PvP anywhere in WOW. Just as if this PvP thing defines "sandbox".
Yes I can take roles in that world and do complete different things than something it was designed for. Role play for example and stay at level 1 (by shutting experience off).
There was even this guy who traversed the complete world and all continents while being a level 1.
-----
Now turn it around: while I can built me a helicopter to fly around that 3D world and planets in WOW ... can I roam freely in EVE on a planet and walk ?
Can I craft ANYTHING in EVE that's not related to my cockpit chair and spaceship, like boots for your avatar and a fishing stick to go fishing ?
Can I make a flying carpet or a great laser pistol for my walking Avatar on the planets in EVE ...?
That's not very fair ? Well then I just turned the tric you use against your game you play....
See how EASY it is to EXCLUDE any game from being a "real" sandbox".
And like I said the wikipedia definition is a GREAT NEUTRAL definition for defining video games as sandboxes without trying to trash talk ANY individual games.
It's very neutral, it is very general and this definition can be applied to ANY video game production (from Donkey Kong to Second Life).
Any MMORPG is a sandbox game. Period. The PLAYER decides how he plays and there is NO perfect liniair way to "win".
That's a BIG difference: you adapt your views to trash talk games. While the real definition tries to define neutral categories in ALL video gaming... from a PLAYER's view.
So your checklist for a sandbox mmo is:
Moving about.
Restricting yourself to level 1.
Roleplaying (but not actually doing the thing ig you are RPing).
Crafting boots.
Helicopters and walking, WALKING 4EVER!!11!!!
Your source of neutral (lulz) knowledge is a wikipedia (seriously lol) page about sanboxes which is mainly on about single player games.
You also think a pvp server with RvR is somehow the same as ffa pvp.
Given that level of argument I can't see how anyone can disagree with you...
There was me thinking it was about open ended character development, an unrestricted and dynamic game world which can be altered dramatically by user defined and created roles which have real consequence and meaning. Man how wrong was I, it's really all just down to walking about and magic carpets, well I never.
Nevermind eh, I'm off to play Championship Manager in sandbox mode by only playing leftfooted players and not having a goalie whilst RPing as a geordie.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Arnstrong i'm with you man, sandbox and thempark are two sides of the same scale, they aren't mutualy exclusive, and thy are highly subjective.
Some idiots just want to pigeon hole everything with a label to make things easier for them to understand
THEMEPARK IS FOR NUB DUUUUUUURRRR
Personally, I judge how sandboxy something is by how much choice you have in how you play the game (or illusion of choice),
The fact is, MMORPGS have one goal, to progress, there are no ending credits, If progress to you is getting as much money as possible, or gearing up to experience that raid, getting to that next level, or maxing out that crafting skill or filling up your friends list, or finish a quest for that uber sword, or finding out more about the lore and exploring, then thats fine, there all forms of progress. and thus, MMORPGS will always be closer to the sandbox side of the scale than themepark.
Arnstrong i'm with you man, sandbox and thempark are two sides of the same scale, they aren't mutualy exclusive, and thy are highly subjective.
Some idiots just want to pigeon hole everything with a label to make things easier for them to understand
THEMEPARK IS FOR NUB DUUUUUUURRRR
Personally, I judge how sandboxy something is by how much choice you have in how you play the game (or illusion of choice),
The fact is, MMORPGS have one goal, to progress, there are no ending credits, If progress to you is getting as much money as possible, or gearing up to experience that raid, getting to that next level, or maxing out that crafting skill or filling up your friends list, or finish a quest for that uber sword, or finding out more about the lore and exploring, then thats fine, there all forms of progress. and thus, MMORPGS will always be closer to the sandbox side of the scale than themepark.
I know that the Wikipedia definition of a sandbox is a general neutral definition considering all video games, without resorting to exclude or include games within the ... >PLAYERS's choice.
All the guys who can't live with this defintion only TALK about why this or that MMORPG would be or not be included.
While all this definition does is looking at what a player can do in a free to roam world or sandbox MMO.
A sandbox game has no clearly defined path and there is no clear "win" button. Every player can find those elements he likes most and has freedom of targetting his own goals.
SO , I am NOT saying anything: I state that the Wikipedia is a neutral definition you people can't counter. Because it doesn't express a value, it expresses a market as a whole with the player (and his freedom) as a player's choice.
Personally, I find the whole sandbox vs. themepark distinction rather misleading. These are just some artifical categories... quite likely coined for use with other games than MMOs. Yet people love to put things into categories - god knows why...
The most popular argument seems to be that "sandbox game does not restrict the player so much". Well bad news - every game does that one way or another. They have to in order to ensure lasting appeal. You wouldn't play a game for very long if it 'gave everything out' within first week after installing it. WoW has levels. EVE has real time based training. It's different but in the end it serves the same purpose - to feed you with content slowly so you don't get bored of it too quickly and so you have always something to look forward to.
This 'content stratification' may also be done in a different way. But it's there anyway. WoW keeps you from venturing into "too high" areas by giving a level difference a huge significance in combat. But you can still go there most of the time. EVE allows you to fly anywhere and fight anything right away but prevents you from using most of the equipment. You will wait pretty long before you can fly (and competently operate) that marauder... definitely at least as long as it takes an average player to reach level 80 in WoW.
See? It's there, the restrictions *are* there and always will be because it is the very progression that makes any game appealing for longer than a week.
Or let us have a look at character builds - classes vs. classless design. At first, it seems that classless design is so much better. However, any classless game I know still forces you to rather narrowly defined builds in order to be effective. And to me it makes little difference whether you have classes, i.e. predefined skillsets and builds and some kind of talents to diversify it a bit among players OR to have classless design but only limited amount of viable builds. To use WoW/EVE comparison again - by the time you have maxed out both hybrid turrets and missiles in EVE, you could have leveled up both warrior and a mage in WoW...
To sum it up, every MMO out there has certain rules, certain mechanics, certain technical and design limitations. What they ALL have in common is slow progression, repetitiveness and that your experience depends largely on who you play with.
Longer you play any partiular game, more restricted you feel by its particular limitations because you realize how much better the game *could* theoretically be (read: what YOU would like it to offer)...
Bottom line? Try it and if you happen to like it, then play it. And don't bother whether some call it a 'themepark' or a 'sandbox'. Who cares?
Comments
I think you are confusing content with design/code? I mean, I get what you are saying. But its not entirely applicable to differentiate the two types. Aye, the developers create the code, to allow the players to create the content. The developers don't create the content, they create the means for the players to build/destory the content and alter it to their liking.
In a Theme Park, you merely "ride the rides". In a Sandbox, you "create the rides". Essentially.
Anyway, I'm out for the day. Take care all and have a good day!
The meaning and usage of many words changes with time and more importantly when applied to specific things.
The fact of the matter is 'sandbox' and 'themepark' mean quite different things when used within the mmo genre by the mmo playerbase. Look at any mmo centric forum/blog/website/publication and you will see this to hold true.
WoW is not a sandbox mmo in terms of the widely held use (and acceptance) of the word.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
i am not sure, if the SWTOR system will match to SWG when it comes to gathering. if the hero himself has to explore and scan potential spots by himself and then mark this spot on the map of his gathering-companion, then it would be very similar. placing an harvester or sending a companion, who cares? but the difference i see so far is this explore & scan first part. perhaps i got not the full information on the SWTOR gathering system.
however, what i saw in one of these videos was: the hero was cleaning the mobs in the area, while he points to his companion, where to gather behind him. if this is superior in terms of quality and output compared to simply send the companion alone, i call it an improvement over the wow-system.
so even if we look to gathering, which seems to be one of the easier gamemechanics, there is not just black&white. between sandbox (open, flexibel, complex, dynamic) and theme-park (linear, rigid, simple, static) are tons of variations and mixtures of both systems.
played: Everquest I (6 years), EVE (3 years)
months: EQII, Vanguard, Siedler Online, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2
weeks: WoW, Shaiya, Darkfall, Florensia, Entropia, Aion, Lotro, Fallen Earth, Uncharted Waters
days: DDO, RoM, FFXIV, STO, Atlantica, PotBS, Maestia, WAR, AoC, Gods&Heroes, Cultures, RIFT, Forsaken World, Allodds
But the terms sandbox and theme park mean different things to different people. They are not good definitions. If we have a conversation and you say you play a sandbox, I'll be thinking one thing while you'll be thinking another.
We should come up with better terms that have clearer meaning.
My own personel defination of a sandbox MMO is: When you create you character, can you then run at whatever direction you want, and still play the game? You dont need to do something first.
Sandbox= dynamic world
themepark= persistent world
To the caterpillar it is the end of the world, to the master, it is a butterfly.
regarding the word "persistent". someone said, that a sandbox is dynamic, so it cant be persistent.
i am not a native english-speaker, but i know IT-english and in IT "persistent" is used in a different manner: persistent means, that an object or service will always exist in the main memory loaded (aside form server-down). it is the opposite of "instanced", where an area just exists as long as somebody is in this area and it is needed. look at your operating system. some services are persistent. you cant get them out of your RAM. others are just loaded temporary if needed. somtimes even more than one instance of the same service.
actually sanboxes have been very often open persistent worlds without instances or very low dedicated usage of them. but persistent does not mean, that this zone and the content cant change or be dynamic. it just means, thats this hyghly flexible, changable and dynamic persistent zone is always up and running. as long as the server runs.
afaik the opposite of dynamic is static. and this is what theme-parks are, last but not least a static series of predefined elements. could be complex and highly mashed and such, but at the end not-dynamic.
played: Everquest I (6 years), EVE (3 years)
months: EQII, Vanguard, Siedler Online, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2
weeks: WoW, Shaiya, Darkfall, Florensia, Entropia, Aion, Lotro, Fallen Earth, Uncharted Waters
days: DDO, RoM, FFXIV, STO, Atlantica, PotBS, Maestia, WAR, AoC, Gods&Heroes, Cultures, RIFT, Forsaken World, Allodds
Well I figured I would throw in my 2 cents on this.
Sandbox is a fully open world where nothing is guiding you but your own free will. Thrill to seek out new areas find treasures. That does not mean there cant be full range of NPC factions along the way. But usually things you do might just make it riskier or easier to adventure the areas they influence. Everquest 1 is a good example of this.
Theme Park is a game like guildwars or maybe STOR where the story pushes you from place to place. Ever advancing the story as you go. I honestly feel that this term has been overused though. The reason for this is because I find most game are actually hybrid games.
Hybrid games are games that mix the elements. Take WOW for instance. Yes you have quests that push you to adventure. But in all honesty there are really SOO many different areas you can quest in you really still get to choose your own adventure and where you adventure to. The bonus is that there are quests still involved. Alot of people call Vanguard a Sandbox, but in all honesty it really is alot like WOW with quests that drive specific areas of the world. The world is just so vast that people claim it is a sandbox when really it is a hybrid of the 2. As are most games these days.
True open Sandboxes are super rare. but the same can be said for True Theme Park, most games fall in the mix as a hybrid.
Actually the vast majority of mmo gamers have just about the same definition for the words 'sandbox' and 'themepark' in terms of mmo's, very little neads 'cearing up' so to speak.
Look through any thread on the subject (including this one), the majority share the same definition, you get one or two who deviate from that but any term like this will have some amount of ambiguity (and you cannot take into account fanbois who refuse to hear that their precious game is a themepark) regardless of the common consensus.
If you asked people to list themepark mmos and sandbox mmos, the majority would churn out the same list.
WoW/LoTRO/STO/WAR and the like are widely accepted as themeparks. DF/EVE/UO and the like are held to be sandboxes. Not everyone will agree on that matter, but the majority will.
There is little need to come up with better terms or new definitions for the simple reason that most already agree on the general principles.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Actually, it seems there is a bit of disparity on the definitions. Everyone has their pet definition. And as others have mentioned, the term sandbox originally applied to non-mmos. Therefore, 99% of the mmo players use a definition that is specialized to mmos, and not the original definition as it was used. Theres a disparity right from the get go. Now most people won't like the original definition becaues it doesn't support their pet cause.
99% use the definition specific to mmo's because that's the point. I fail to see exactly what is wrong with that given people are talking about, mmo's. There is no 'disparity' in a term evolving or being applied within a specific subset to mean a specific thing. That it was originally used with single player offline games in mind means little in the context of how it is used now.
Whilst there will always be some ambiguity in terms like this (as is the norm) it is pretty clear that a 'sandbox mmo' is one which offers a vast amount of freedom, highly player/community centric dynamics and game world which is itself dynamic and subject to 'control' to a significant extent by the games player community.
I am not sure quite what you mean by 'pet cause', the simple fact of the matter is that some mmos are seen as sandboxes by the community at large, some are not. That inn general the greater amount of the community sees it in such away is more than enough to lend significance to the terminology.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Of course you are right.
The only definition FREE of prejudgement against other games is of course that one of Wikipedia.
A video game with nonlinear gameplay (sandbox style) presents players with challenges that can be completed in a number of different sequences. Whereas a more linear game will confront a player with a fixed sequence of challenges, a less linear game will allow greater player freedom. For example, a nonlinear game may permit multiple sequences to finish the game, a choice between paths to victory, or optional side-quests and subplots. Some games feature both linear and nonlinear elements, and some games offer a sandbox mode that allows players to explore an open world game environment independently from the game's main objectives.
The genre began in the 8-bit era with games like The Legend of Zelda (1986), Elite (1984), Mercenary (1985), and Cholo (1986). More recent examples are The Elder Scrolls series (1994 to present), the Grand Theft Auto series (1997 to present), the Fallout series (1997 to present), and the Banjo-Kazooie series (1998 to present).
A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox,[1][2][3][4] and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game.[5] A common consequence (intentional or unintentional) of open-ended gameplay is emergent gameplay.[4]
It is the only defintion where ALL games get a fair chance of being treated on an equal basis.
Some posters in this thread want to EXCLUDE titles from this definition just because they want to trash talk.
Fact remains: EVERY MMORPG in this definition can be included as having a sandbox designed gameplay. There is NO right way to play Wow, Lotrro, War or any other MMORPG.
In the traditional NEUTRAL definition of game design they are ALL sandboxes (btw I play WOW to gather PvP titles I am not even interested much in the PVE part of the game and some others may play any MMORPG in ANY way they would want).
So WOW is now a sandbox, eh? I think I've seen it all on this site.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Aye, can't work out if he's trolling or not, especially using wiki so much..
@Arnstrong there are two key concepts to grasp here. First of all there is a clear difference between a sandbox game and a sandbox mmo, the latter having a rather large common consensus within the mmo community. As a game, should you compare WoW to Pong then yes it has sandbox attributes, but within the genre of mmo's it is not considered a sandbox mmo. Secondly the people who say WoW is a themepark (you know probably 90% or so of the mmo playerbase) are not saying it sucks, they are simply saying it is a themepark.
If you are so sure that the widely held belief is that WoW is a sandbox mmorpg why don't you make a thread with a poll in it?
PS, wikipedia again...really?
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
WoW is a sandbox? Cool so I can pvp against whomever I wan't wherever I want in that game then? I can learn any skill, use any item and take on any role without being pigeon holed into a class? I can make a lasting and meaningful effect on a dynamic gameworld?
Strange that this information isn't on the WoW website as i'd have signed up straight away.
Compare WoW and the like to their peers, not to single player games and then (as the majority seem to) you may see why people don't consider it a sandbox mmo.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
This place is getting nuttier by the minute. Calling WOW a sandbox basically destroys the term's relevance in the most dramatic fashion possible.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
WoW isn't a sandbox, but on a PvP server you can indeed initiate PvP combat against anyone of the opposite faction at any time you want. WoW has become the best example of Not Sandbox...it's why they have so many subscribers.
On an unrelated note, AoC should have had a whole bunch of sandbox mechanics built in. :-(
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
To me the problem comes in when you compare different games that are fairly close. Everyone recognizes that games like Eve, Ryzom and Istara are far more sandboxy than WoW.
However many people say EQ was more sandboxy than WoW. Here is where I disagree. Everything I did in EQ I can do in WoW, and WoW gives me more options for developing my character. So to me WoW is more Sandboxy than EQ, but neither are as sandboxy as the previous three I mention.
Sandbox is a continuum with Mario brothers on the one side and Second life on the other. The more freedom a person has to do something the more sandboxy it is.
Venge Sunsoar
EQ never been more or less of a sandbox game than Wow. Both games still tells you how o do things and the moreoptions of Wow does not make it more or less of a sandbox, just like EQs more classes doesn't either.
Vanguard however have some sandbox things in it and is a lot closer than EQ and Wow even if it is still a themepark game.
But people saying EQ have sandbox features are just wrong, like with Wow. The freedom to do as someone tells you really isn't any freedom at all, even if you have a few more options like in Wow. They are just both very far from sandboxes.
There is nothing wrong with sandboxes or themeparks however, they are just different, not worse. A good game is a good game no matter what kind it is.
Yes you can PvP anywhere in WOW. Just as if this PvP thing defines "sandbox".
Yes I can take roles in that world and do complete different things than something it was designed for. Role play for example and stay at level 1 (by shutting experience off).
There was even this guy who traversed the complete world and all continents while being a level 1.
-----
Now turn it around: while I can built me a helicopter to fly around that 3D world and planets in WOW ... can I roam freely in EVE on a planet and walk ?
Can I craft ANYTHING in EVE that's not related to my cockpit chair and spaceship, like boots for your avatar and a fishing stick to go fishing ?
Can I make a flying carpet or a great laser pistol for my walking Avatar on the planets in EVE ...?
That's not very fair ? Well then I just turned the tric you use against your game you play....
See how EASY it is to EXCLUDE any game from being a "real" sandbox".
And like I said the wikipedia definition is a GREAT NEUTRAL definition for defining video games as sandboxes without trying to trash talk ANY individual games.
It's very neutral, it is very general and this definition can be applied to ANY video game production (from Donkey Kong to Second Life).
Any MMORPG is a sandbox game. Period. The PLAYER decides how he plays and there is NO perfect liniair way to "win".
That's a BIG difference: you adapt your views to trash talk games. While the real definition tries to define neutral categories in ALL video gaming... from a PLAYER's view.
There's nothing wrong with liking themepark MMOs, man. You are passionate about arguably the best example so far in history. But honestly, enough with the reaching.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
So your checklist for a sandbox mmo is:
Moving about.
Restricting yourself to level 1.
Roleplaying (but not actually doing the thing ig you are RPing).
Crafting boots.
Helicopters and walking, WALKING 4EVER!!11!!!
Your source of neutral (lulz) knowledge is a wikipedia (seriously lol) page about sanboxes which is mainly on about single player games.
You also think a pvp server with RvR is somehow the same as ffa pvp.
Given that level of argument I can't see how anyone can disagree with you...
There was me thinking it was about open ended character development, an unrestricted and dynamic game world which can be altered dramatically by user defined and created roles which have real consequence and meaning. Man how wrong was I, it's really all just down to walking about and magic carpets, well I never.
Nevermind eh, I'm off to play Championship Manager in sandbox mode by only playing leftfooted players and not having a goalie whilst RPing as a geordie.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Arnstrong i'm with you man, sandbox and thempark are two sides of the same scale, they aren't mutualy exclusive, and thy are highly subjective.
Some idiots just want to pigeon hole everything with a label to make things easier for them to understand
THEMEPARK IS FOR NUB DUUUUUUURRRR
Personally, I judge how sandboxy something is by how much choice you have in how you play the game (or illusion of choice),
The fact is, MMORPGS have one goal, to progress, there are no ending credits, If progress to you is getting as much money as possible, or gearing up to experience that raid, getting to that next level, or maxing out that crafting skill or filling up your friends list, or finish a quest for that uber sword, or finding out more about the lore and exploring, then thats fine, there all forms of progress. and thus, MMORPGS will always be closer to the sandbox side of the scale than themepark.
Themepark <---------------------------------------CO-STO---WAR--WoW-----------EvE-DF-MO--> Sandbox
Something like this.
Disclaimer: Scale is based on my opinion only.
You don't have to be "with" me or "against" me.
I know that the Wikipedia definition of a sandbox is a general neutral definition considering all video games, without resorting to exclude or include games within the ... >PLAYERS's choice.
All the guys who can't live with this defintion only TALK about why this or that MMORPG would be or not be included.
While all this definition does is looking at what a player can do in a free to roam world or sandbox MMO.
A sandbox game has no clearly defined path and there is no clear "win" button. Every player can find those elements he likes most and has freedom of targetting his own goals.
SO , I am NOT saying anything: I state that the Wikipedia is a neutral definition you people can't counter. Because it doesn't express a value, it expresses a market as a whole with the player (and his freedom) as a player's choice.
Personally, I find the whole sandbox vs. themepark distinction rather misleading. These are just some artifical categories... quite likely coined for use with other games than MMOs. Yet people love to put things into categories - god knows why...
The most popular argument seems to be that "sandbox game does not restrict the player so much". Well bad news - every game does that one way or another. They have to in order to ensure lasting appeal. You wouldn't play a game for very long if it 'gave everything out' within first week after installing it. WoW has levels. EVE has real time based training. It's different but in the end it serves the same purpose - to feed you with content slowly so you don't get bored of it too quickly and so you have always something to look forward to.
This 'content stratification' may also be done in a different way. But it's there anyway. WoW keeps you from venturing into "too high" areas by giving a level difference a huge significance in combat. But you can still go there most of the time. EVE allows you to fly anywhere and fight anything right away but prevents you from using most of the equipment. You will wait pretty long before you can fly (and competently operate) that marauder... definitely at least as long as it takes an average player to reach level 80 in WoW.
See? It's there, the restrictions *are* there and always will be because it is the very progression that makes any game appealing for longer than a week.
Or let us have a look at character builds - classes vs. classless design. At first, it seems that classless design is so much better. However, any classless game I know still forces you to rather narrowly defined builds in order to be effective. And to me it makes little difference whether you have classes, i.e. predefined skillsets and builds and some kind of talents to diversify it a bit among players OR to have classless design but only limited amount of viable builds. To use WoW/EVE comparison again - by the time you have maxed out both hybrid turrets and missiles in EVE, you could have leveled up both warrior and a mage in WoW...
To sum it up, every MMO out there has certain rules, certain mechanics, certain technical and design limitations. What they ALL have in common is slow progression, repetitiveness and that your experience depends largely on who you play with.
Longer you play any partiular game, more restricted you feel by its particular limitations because you realize how much better the game *could* theoretically be (read: what YOU would like it to offer)...
Bottom line? Try it and if you happen to like it, then play it. And don't bother whether some call it a 'themepark' or a 'sandbox'. Who cares?