Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Crappy indie developers are killing the sandbox genre?
bdew
Member UncommonPosts: 192
With every crappy, half-assed, buggy and barely playable sandbox game released by indie developers, the genre gets an even worse reputation and the chances of a good sandbox game ever being made by a real studio that can make a successful, good game are getting closer to 0 ...
Discuss.
Comments
I'm in agreement to some extent, the image conveyed by buggy games isn't good. Unfortunately, it it weren't for Indie devs I don't think there would be much of a sandbox genre.
Personally I'd like to see sanboxes extend themselves further than stripped down themepark worlds with FFA PVP and full loot tacked on. I think there needs to be more to do than making war and defending.
Agree. I don't think they're "killing" anything, as most things related to MMOs are quite hard to "kill", but they don't give sandboxes a good impression. With today's MMO population, sandboxes are already going to be a niche (possibly excluding EVE, as it's achieved 300k+ subscribers). Add low quality (whether it be graphics, optimization, general gameplay bugs, incomplete or underdeveloped features, etc.) to the mix and the outcome is often 50k subscribers or less.
However, I've noticed major MMO companies moving towards sandbox-themepark hybrids, because they recognize that many sandbox concepts DO work and ARE fun. Sandbox fans would do well to encourage this trend instead of shouting, "It's not a REAL sandbox! I want a REAL sandbox!" all the time, but that's their choice.
I agree that the indie companies aren't helping the genre... there aren't many sanbox games being made by "AAA" companies.
It seems the majority of folks want a themepark type game, or, rather, the AAA companies see that that is what folks want and continue making those instead.
Could be off. But it IS only an opinion. ;P
I agree with the OP 10000000%, after being let down by themeparks like AION and then STO, I played nothing BUT crappy indie sandboxes for over a year, and got so worn down my disapointment that i found RIFT a wonderfull change purely due to its polish, if no content.
In the end at least we still have EVE.
Surely the plethora of 'crappy' indie developers shows that there is still a market niche for such titles?
Even a simple MMO is a complex undertaking to develop, and people have to learn to develop this stuff somewhere.
DarkSpace Developer - Play DarkSpace - Play For Free!
Medusa Engine SDK - Free MMO Game Engine
Hampton Roads/East Coast Video Gamers Association
As Comnitus said, I think the most you can hope for from a high quality mmo is a themepark-sandbox mmo, like ArcheAge.
I think it's more that we are actually labelling those thing as sandboxes when they're really just incomplete games, lacking scripted themepark entertainment and devoid of tools to manage or manipulate the game world. Several of the games that have been mislabelled as sandboxes are simply 3D combat sims with a progression grind.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The "real studios" have had it within their power to create a sandbox game all this time.
You know what - they've chosen not to. They apparently don't think it's worth the risk to create a sandbox game for the players that like such games.
As far as the "real studios" are concerned, they've been too busy cranking out guaranteed great games, like AoC, WAR, FFXIV, STO, CO, Aion, and DCUO. Oh, wait....
The "real studios" are not a guarantee of a better game. In fact, the opposite has been true more often than not over the last several years.
The indie developers are the only ones keeping the sandbox genre alive. Discuss.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
I don't think they're killing anything except themselves, but they do make their fanbases bitter imo.
It just makes me sad tbh. I really do want to see more good and alternative productions coming out but some of these companies just act like arrogant fools.
Every time I see another indie firm putting out a mile-long feature list for a game, I think to myself: "Here we go again..."
They should learn to start small with original ideas and work upward from there: a game with a simple concept, simple graphics and design but great mechanics is where success for those guys lies imo. You don't go and promise heaven and Earth when your budget and experience is limited.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
It's the small indy-studios developing sandboxMMOs as the big AAA-studios are only interested in big numbers and fast cash, hence they only do themeparks, where there's big numbers guaranteed without investing alot of work.
So it's not the fault of the small indy-studios actually, and todays players don't want to support a game in the beginning anymore, if it's not totally polkished etc. Look at EvE Online and CCP... they had very slow two years in the beginning with only some 50k subs , but the players back then had enough steam to stick with CCP and turn EvE Online into a gem.
This isn't possible these days anymore and small indy-studios can't survive the first year(s) without subscribers and fail to deliver in the end as there's no money coming in to further develop the game.
There's only the big studios and the players to blame, but not the small indy-studios.
Very wrong i am 100 percent sure all these companys know people are getting bored with the same fantasy mmo in a diffrent package and that they know they can get alot more subscribers if they do it all diffrent but the amount of time/ people and recourses they need to stick into that isnt worth it for most of them.
QFT. Without Indie companies attempting something out of the box, we would have 414 Rifts. I also agree that many large studios don't want to get involved in a niche market. Risky investments usually don't payoff.
I feel as gamers, it is OUR fault. For every Xyson...there are 15 Rifts. Is that a fair comparison? Not really, but Sandbox games require players with a completely different attitude/outlook than themepark gamers. It's been said too many times already...if I had 100k to invest..should I purchase stock in EA, Blizzard, or some large studio? Or should I contact the guy that made Minecraft or the Swedish? guy that made Haven and Hearth and offer him the money?
As a sandbox player, I don't have ill will towards themepark players b/c that is what they want. I personally believe it will either be CCP with WoD or another Indie company that makes a surprise sandbox game that really impresses.
Until then we have our current crop of sandboxs or a whole plethora of themebox games. Supporting Indie companies is a noble act. I find sandbox players are more forgiving of crap b/c we don't have many choices..again...our fault.
It will take just one huge Sandbox game that will get a large studio to attempt them. Proving to them that there is money to be made and is sustainable..will be all it takes.
Playing: BF4/BF:Hardline, Subnautica 7 days to die
Hiatus: EvE
Waiting on: World of Darkness(sigh)
Interested in: better games in general
And there it is.
Sandboxes are harder to make, and their niche player base... small, fickle, and not really in agreement as to what "sandbox" is. Thus big, smart investors won't support a developer building one, therefore saying "crappy indie developers are killing the sanbox genre" is like saying that breathing while being trapped in a coalmine will kill you.
my best recommendation? Wait and see what CCP does.
The problem is that the playerbase is jaded. They have been tricked and cheated too many times to trust the developers. The devs have to prove themselves to the playerbase first in order to gain that trust. Just because an indy company can talk a good game, does not mean that anyone will actually give them support. Players want to be customers and not investors.
Just look at CCP. When they lost the trust of the players, they went to massive lengths to regain it. Part of the reason for their staying power is that they do not overpromise on stuff. Darkfall got slammed for only delivering a small fraction of what they were promising and they still have not regained most of that trust.
Could it be that the sandbox is a lie?
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
When a sandbox fails, is there going to be a case where the sandbox fanboys are going to say it wasn't a crappy game? They can always say that and point out if the game was good enough it would not fail.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
I agree with the premise that half-assed Indie sandboxes are destroying what hope we have.
I also believe its a misnomer to think that sandbox games are PvP focused and make up the bulk of the playerbase. UO not withstanding the most successful Sandboxes are the ones where PvE take the primary focus. Asherons Call and Eve both have PvP but its the PvE that make the game so much fun for what little mainstream support they do get. Darktide AC has always had a small playerbase and only 1 server where the White servers (PvE) have more population and 7 or 8 servers to DT's 1.
Even Mordred on DAoC was low pop. So the best that can be done is to have a brand name studio develop a PvE based sandbox.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
So, as a hobbyist, I should abandon all the prototype projects now because they will never size up to a AAA title like you desire?
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
They're actually keeping it alive.
The real culprit are the big companies using their resources to develop cash cows, rather than in-depth games. CCP is the only big company willing to make games they're passionate about.
Unfortunately, I agree. Games that have really dissappointed can be misleading as to why they were dispappointing. If a company worthy of a AAA title comes along and looks at some of the crappy half-assed work with some of the available sandboxes, they may confuse the low sub count to be indicative of the lack of interest for the genre. This, when the main reason is that they hired a person right out of school who had never programmed a game before and admits such....
Disclaimer: This is not a troll post and is not here to promote any negative energy. Although this may be a criticism, it is not meant to offend anyone. If a moderator feels the post is inappropriate, please remove it immediately before it is subject to consideration for a warning. Thank you.
With every crappy, half-assed, buggy and barely playable themepark game released by major developers, why would anyone think that major developers are the salvation for sandbox gaming?
With very few exceptions, the launch status of games from major developers hasn't been much different from those coming from indie devs.
The bigger difference, in my opinion, has been the type of game that each has had the guts to put out.
At launch, you can choose to play a rough themepark from a major developer (since that's the only type of game they choose to develop), or play a rough sandbox from an indie developer (since they are the only ones that will try).
Of the two, the only one that will eventually evolve into a polished sandbox will be the one from the indie. Obviously, the other will evolve into a more polished themepark.
If you want to play a sandbox, you have to go to the people with the balls to produce one.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
Between that and sandbox = ffa pvp sandbox games don't stand a chance.
Just a few thoughts:
Darktide is now AC1's most populated server.
UO got close to 200k subs, pre-tram.
EVE has over 300k subs.
Don't know much about mordred, but DAOC was clearly designed for FvFvF. And as far as I know, mordred was added well after the game was released, which would have quite a negative impact on attracting players there.
I don't know of any AAA FFA PVP sandboxes that have failed, yet there's plenty of failed AAA PVE/PVP-lite MMO's. So let's not turn this into a FFA vs PVE debate.
IMO the problem is with indi dev's make games that are empty and lifeless and then classifying them as sandbox. So on that note, I agree with OP.
What really bugs me is that all these indie developers seem to think that taking out quests and npcs and making the game ffa-pvp is making the game a sandbox.
Having quests and npcs doesn't make a game any less of a sandbox, it just adds another dimension of content for players to do. The only way it becomes less of a sandbox is when the developers force players to do quest lines and herd them into specific areas based on level/skill/gear.
On paper, ffa-pvp sounds like it be a great idea. Let the players have the freedom to attack who they want, when they want. What more freedom could you ask for? Well, apparantly, some people just don't like getting killed when their character has absolutely no chance. Eve realized this and did something about. They didn't always have low-sec and high-sec. Eve is unique amongst the more well-known "sandboxes" in that it has a targetting system and warns you when your actions might get you killed as well as by making it so that trying to pvp indiscrimantely has real, economic, consequences. The current batch of indie sandboxes have neither. Items are so easy to acquire and maintain in these games that it rarely matters if you loose a few pieces of armor and a sword. Chances are you'll have so many more in storage that's it's insignificant. The other thing is that it might just be necessary to make it so that some areas just can't be pvped in without mutual consent and then have items and resources balanced accordingly.
--------
"Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"
The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
Front: UNO Chemistry Club
Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions
I don't believe the devs are holding a meeting and saying they are going to add sandbox features to the. I believe they are adding features they think will fit their goals. It's the sandbox flag wavers who are trying way too hard and to call anything out as sandbox to get attention to their cause.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"