It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
well was reading something somebody said over in another forum regarding, you guessed it,,, TESO.
What came up, seem to be the standard sandbox TES fan hatred for the MMO which they call a WoW Clone.
Well I am not here to argue if its a WoW Clone or not. The point made was that these fans want the "Sand" in the MMO that the single player game has.
But when I stop and think about it, how much "Sand" do these games really have, "IF YOU WANTED TO BRING THAT SAND OVER TO THE MMO" in the forms of a Sandbox MMO?
Would a GTA MMO be Themepark or Sandbox? same question for a Saints Row MMO,,,
and the big name on this site,,, a The Elder Scrolls MMO...
Whats the "Sand" in these games to even bring to the MMO table that isnt already here in general across all MMO?
Exploring? Well not sure how Exploring is a sandbox feature, since you can do that in EQ, Vanguard, even WoW.
well you tell me.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Comments
Good question:
For me, the first thing I would say is, No character classes. If you use a sword you get better at a sword, if use you blacksmithing skill to make armor, the skill improves. If you want to cast spell and use a sword you can.
That is one of the things I love about the Elder scrolls games and esential to the Elder scroll expirience. You are not limited to a set path when it comes to skills.
SP sandbox and MMORPG sandbox aren't based on the same design framework. Comparing one in terms of the other only discloses just how different the two actually are.
The Second thing I would like is, more non-linear story telling.
Cataclysm 1-60 quests are a good example of taking something to an extreme. You get a quest from a quest giver, complete it then he sends you to the next quest giver in the line and so on. The quests are completly on rails and you can't stray from the path.
I want more side quests; I would even love it if the person giving the side quests did have a bit "!" over their head. You just had to talk to them and discover the quest
Some sandbox fanatics say there should be No quests, I don't mind quests, but don't make a bunch of quest hubs and no side quest that you can discover just from exploring.
Its different in a multiplayer game where it matters more if those "paths" are good or not. There's no one to mock your your build in a single player game. Elder Scrolls in particular is not very balanced. Since Morrowind, magic has been overpowered. Some might say it was overpowered in Morrowind too, but it had a huge drawback because your mana did not regenerate.
Elder Scrolls made to an MMO would be quite far from what people are used to in the single player games. Those who do not understand that will be disappointed badly.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Overall I have an issue to consider single player game a sandbox because I feel that without other players, the game is lacking enough required interaction and complexity.
Only single player game I have ever played and would qualify(if I had to) as sandbox is X3 as it is the only game where you can perform different "roles" and take different "paths" within the game world.
TES is not a sandbox by any means, nor is GTA. Can't speak for Saint Row.
I think your spot on with this observation about these open world single player games. A lot of people seem to mislabel them as sandboxes because of how open they are. However, they are just as themeparkish as most modern MMO's. The only difference is that a singleplayer game can scale the environment towards your level (primarily in the case of Skyrim), and allow the player to wander in any direction.
Argueably this can be achieved in any MMO if it were designed properly to support that model. But wandering anywhere, anytime and being equally matched does not equal a sandbox IMO.
I think for these singleplayer games to be converted into a sandbox they have to allow the player some form of controlling/creating content. I do not consider modding a sandbox feature, as that is outside of the scope of the actual game environment. The content manipulation should be within scope of the game in some way shape or form.
Now Minecraft single or multiplayer is without a shadow of a doubt a full fledged sandbox (in an almost literal sense at times). Hell you can go to a desert and dig up sand with your shovel and build a castle if you so please.
To be honest, I'm getting a little tired of that form of leveling. I would rather just be able to allocate my skills. For instance, I liked to use a bow every now and then; and when I did, I wanted it to be useful. But if I wanted it to be useful, I would have to use it a lot more than I really wanted to. It's kind of a pain in the ass if you want to be diverse in those games. I doubt TESO will have that system, and I honestly wouldn't mind if they dropped it for the next single-plyer game either, though I'm sure they won't. I'm a little curious how they are going to change up the series for TES 6. Though, I guess we'll probably have to wait until after another Fallout.
'Sandbox' single player games are generally mis-labelled - they are simply nonlinear and more open. People generally want this nonlinearity in combination with the 'sand' for their ideal mmo (on this forum atleast).
Non-linear does not = sandbox. You can have a linear/non-inear themepark, and a linear/non-linear sandbox.
Yes, it does...
All hail the Barn Owl! oh.. and the RED SQUIRREL!!!
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Okay if that is the case World of Warcraft would be a sandbox since it features non linear progression similar to GTA. GTA is non-linear but it still gates content based off your overall progress (the three islands). WoW gates your progress to certain areas depending on your overall progress and allows free roaming, and a variety of quests in a non linear fashion in the area you are realistically allowed in.
You got it right but somehow you cannot apply your conclusions correctly:
The openness and free roam does not make the game sandbox.
WOW is linear design - you progress to max lvl.
I really don't care. The question was, what kind of sand do I want in my MMO's. I am tired of classes. there will always be balance issues, so what, magic will get nerfed then everyone will become mele' then mele will get nerfed and so on...
Don't put me on rails. Don't force me down a path. let me decide who my character is.
I'm not saying WoW is a sandbox because I personnally do not believe that...
The guy I quoted claimed non-linear environments = sandbox, which my response is to compare GTA to WoW considering they have similar means of delivering content. Ultimately concluding that it is foolish to merely state non-linear = sandbox. Although I didn't plainly write that part out.
So called sandboxes like GTA are also linear progression in terms of content. It's just contained in a non-linear environment.
This is the trick in calling something a sandbox or not.. We each have our own diffinitions, or line in the sand where a themepark becomes a sandbox or vice versa.. For me a sandbox is the enviroment where my experience is dependant upon my actions.. Let me explain with an example.. I go to a local county fair to ride some rides in the midway, the fair has 4 rides.. The next day at work I discuss my experience on the rides with co-workers and they to ride the same 4 rides.. This is a themepark experience to me.. Why? Because I had a linear progression from ride 1-4 as did EVERYONE else that went to the local fair as well..
Lets assume you then go to a state fair, where the choices of rides are much increased.. The chances that co-workers had the same experience as me is starting to show.. This can further be a case if we now assume I go to Disney / Universal studio.. They are all entertainment parks with what one will call are linear rides.. BUT.. Due to the size and number or rides / entertainment, we all have unique experiences and history.. THIS is when a park stops being a linear themepark and becomes a sandbox in my eyes..
For me the sandbox experience is my perception of character progression and history.. Even EQ can be called a themepark to a point. BUT because it had over 10 starting zones, with numerous options of leveling zones.. My character grew up uniquely compared to other characters.. OPTIONS is the key thing to remember.. So where one draws the line on how many options is the difference.. Rather you call them options or choices, I want a spider web of enjoyment, not just a linear single line, which is what I feel most games released are.. Look at the last two games I tried Rift and SWTOR.. OMG.. Can that leveling zone choices be anymore limited then it is?
Actually they are both very different.
GTA is designed so that if a person is having fun running around the beach beating up fat ladies or driving around wrecklessly in a new stolen car every five minutes, they can do so, enjoying the activity and progressing, because the game is designed to support it.
Now, the average dipshit will say "Well, you can do that in WOW," but I can tell you're smarter than that, VT, so I'll explain the distinct difference here. A player has to actively work against the game mechanics to do that in WOW, as WOW is designed to diminish your returns in progression, loot and challenge in order to push you along into the next predetermined section.
Again, I'm glad I'm not talking to the average dipshit, because right now they'd be saying "But if WOW didn't do that, then players would just level to cap in the newb zone," and you and I both know THAT is the key difference - the more sandbox a game is, the less a dev gives a crap about where and how you progress... or even if you progress for that matter, as that is not the intent or design of that aspect of the game's content.
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
GTA, TES and Saints Row are Open World games. Not sandbox games.
What's sandbox? Go stare at Minecraft for a little while.
Yes open world is a feature in a lot of sandbox games, maybe it's even a must. But an open-classed, open-world game doesn't necessarily have the world-editing tools, i.e. personal construction and changing the landscape, that is a sandbox.
Can you imagine a real sandbox on the playground, which is usually set in these borders of wood, and the sand in the middle lets a kid draw and build anything they want into the sand?
This is a sandbox.
Those are the players, that's the changeable environment which the players can do anything they want with, and those wooden boards are the game setting.
The industry didn't get your memo.
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 industry" cannot agree on meaning of the term just like anyone on these boards.
At the end, usage isn't the as same definition.
The sand is the world that you interact with. You see it in a literal sense. The idea is that you can play the way you want to play. Anyway, when you say sandbox game, the majority of the world will say GTA or TES. That is society's accepted definition.
General understanding and exact definition are two different things. Does the industry have an exact definition, no. Would almost every single developer, publisher, journalist, producer, etc in the industry call GTA and Saint's Row sandboxes, YES.
We can be as obtuse, disingenuous and semantic about this as we want, but that doesn't really help further any level of meaningful discussion.
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
But it is. Llanguage is a form of communication by sound and in order to communicate the word has to represent something and be accepted by the people who use it. It can adapt different meanings, but those meaning have to be understood by those parties that use it.
Umm no... it doesnt. While there may be varying definitions of what a sandbox constitutes, if yours is simply that it be non-linear then its wrong.
A sandbox is pretty much exactly what it is described as - you (the player) can mold, manipulate, move, effect, etc the 'world' (sand) in a meaningful way, and the players are in control of the world as opposed to the world being in control of the players (or atleast the players are in as much control as possible in a game defined by rules and code).
This is usually represented in the forms of things like player-driven economies, player-housing, area control, open-ended worlds, land ownership, etc (although none of these are a requirement for it to be a sandbox, they are just some common game-specific sandbox features). Most sandboxes ARE also non-linear just because of the very nature of the game lending itself towards that style of gameplay better. But saying "non-linear = sandbox" is like saying "player-housing = sandbox".
The reason for the existance of this thread - and quite often the confusion - is that single-player games like GTA are commonly lumped into the 'sandbox' category because they are non-linear and have large open-ended worlds. They are generally more 'sandboxy' than other single-player games due to having common sandbox features, but they are not actual sandboxes just because they are non-linear.