Originally posted by Creatorzim How does a company make an endless sandbox MMO for PVE?
Randomly generated content,for example Roguelike dungeon for WoW.
endless dungeon,scoreboard for soloers 2man teams 5 mans etc.
-who went deepest
-fastest
-who got most expensive loot
etc.
And Thrall screams "XxSuperkillerxX" just entered dungeon lvl 105,all hail XxSuperkillerxX ! new record!
Team Bunnyjumpers just entered lvl 204 ,all hail Team Bunnyjumpers!
People don't like randomly generated dungeons (Procedural is the right word here). EQ had some procedurally generated dungeons add in one expansion. That didn't stop WoW from stomping all over them. The more I read about Sandbox the more I convinced its mostly about bitter vets blowing smoke up people rear ends..
"Emergent" gameplay consists mostly of players using exploits. Procedural generation leads to instances like they have in Diablo 3. It's just not going to work - maybe in 20 years someone will invent a sandbox game that most people find fun.
Most hilarious was that someone claimed that Landmark wasn't even a 'real' sandbox..<g>
Originally posted by sunandshadow *cough*horseshit*cough* Flip back a few posts to where I was just talking about how pvp, with or without full looting, doesn't destroy wealth. It has no effect whatever on inflation. Ironically, the single major thing that removes the most wealth from a game's economy is when a top-level player stops playing. Anyone really concerned about economic balance might logically prefer non-infinite games for this reason.Personally I think the concept of an MMO with a balanced economy is an illusion, not possible or even desirable in reality. In most MMOs the real bedrock of the economy is NPC sellback prices, not anything to do with player-player interaction.
Yeah it does destroy wealth, from that particular person and adds to the thieves wealth.... You cant pvp all the time if you lose your equipment, either from decay or getting looted, and you would have to farm OR buy equpment again contributing to the market and the economy.A balanced economy IS possible, just not in your current themepark game because of all the artificial limitations... You would also need localized banks, mails, auction house, etc. and regional resources so theres trade between regions. Oh and no fast travel so theres actual trade routes, all of this of course with open pvp everywhere and full loot. Now thats a game...
"Destroying wealth" is a term from economics; it's defined to mean that wealth is permanently lost from all of human society. If a thief steals a valuable object, that does not count as destruction of wealth because now the thief has the wealth. But if you eat a sandwich, or if you drop a vase and it breaks, those both count as destruction of wealth.
I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story. So PM me if you are starting one.
My problem with games today is that they are single line follow the bread crumb quest hub game.. It gulls me to no end that devs make these ultra-linear games that is nothing more then connect the dots.. However, I don't want pure sandbox either, cause it can lead to a dull lifeless world when the players are NOT creating the content.. I want to see a hybrid approach which I think they call it Sand Park now.. 50% of the game should be like a spider web of theme park events (NOT QUEST HUBS), so that the computer AI always has a list of chores players can be striving for such as "bounties" or dynamic events (better then what GW2 does)..
As for the Sandbox features, this should be PURE player economy with some default NPC options.. Sure I could buy a new chest armor that has AC 20 from the NPC vendor, but it will be inferior then any player made items.. The only thing I would have in the form of mob or boss drops would be mats or vendor trash that can be turned into coin or resources.. Maybe occasionally you might find a fine steel sword, or a quality bag that is tradable, and almost equal to player made items.. Also, for a player economy to thrive.. YOU must take goods OUT of the world at an allowable rate, for items coming INTO the game..
Sandbox games are easily abused by gamers, since the game rules are not stringent.
Example: like the Neverwinter foundry, where players create content like a set of quests and rules, with in game tools and visual parts, quite like a sandbox game. However, devious builders had created foundry contents that allow gamers with certain skills to KO 50 elites mobs at one go (In this case, its the Control Wizard's Shield spell, which can repel an unlimited number of mobs upon breaking the shield, into a chasm to instant kill them and get uber exp. Or is it Repel spell?). This had indirectly caused skills to be nerfed. (The Shield spell now only repels 5 mobs).
The possibility of the universe collapsing into a singularity is higher than the birth of a perfect MMORPG.
Why should *ANY* game be infinite when no other form of interactive entertainment is? Why isn't it a completely unrealistic expectation that any game on the planet should never end?
Why is it unrealistic to you? Are you thinking in content terms as in just quests?
To me Star Wars Galaxies is my example of infinite content, it was a virtual world set within the Star Wars Universe
Resource gathering/harvesting and setting up harvesters took me from planet to planet while we had certain starter area's/planets it always was meaningfull to go back to them mainly because as a crafter I needed all sorts of resources. And as a Master Crafter I didn't feel like crafting only cap level stuff cause plenty of players around on all levels in need of all sorts of items. I know this isn't excactly the gameplay the majority likes but I just want to explain why a game can have infinite gameplay it just depends on the person what is liked.
Anyway to make a long story short. Yes a MMORPG can have infinite gameplay when it's sandbox(ish) doesn't mean they all should have it and it certainly doesn't mean everyone would enjoy that type of game. For me it's very niche which I happen to like among many other type of games and genre's.
But anything gets boring if you do it enough. Moving product from planet to planet gets dull if that's all you do, it's the same today as it was yesterday, as it was last week and last month and last year. Crafting is only interesting if it's meaningful and there isn't a single MMO ever that I could consider it meaningful because what you make, everyone else is making too. I find nothing interesting about any of these things, such that I would stay with a particular game forever. SWG didn't have infinite gameplay, it had the ability to do the same things over and over and over and over again. It's the same hamster wheel as every other game, just with a little more choice in which wheel you run on.
That's why I'd rather play a game, have it end and then I can move on to a different game. No single game can possibly be all-encompassing. Everything gets boring, no matter what it is.
PvP isn't infinite. Humans are funny creatures they never think of themselves as limited or that they behave in patterns within systems.
You have a certain set of skills and those skills can only be used in a finite number of ways. Depending on the number of skills, that number can be quite large. But more important than the possibility of variation is optimization, not all skill are useful in each situation.
Find any pvp game and ask how to beat class x vs class y. Will you get the answer, "no one knows, the possibilities are infinite!"
No, you won't. You'll get specific counters and branching counters to those counters and how to follow-up to what your opponent will likely do next (if this ability, then do this, if that ability, then do that and so on). It's usually fairly limited in what will be used in response to any other skills.
There is a lot of variation in PvP and the combinations of what you can encounter are quite large as you scale the number of players, but never is it infinite, esp on smaller scales. And even if what you encounter can be quite large, your response will always be much much more limited and finite to a pretty small degree.
To me Star Wars Galaxies is my example of infinite content, it was a virtual world set within the Star Wars Universe
and what happened to that game? It got changed, and then closed down.
Having infinite content and fun are two different things. May be most people prefer quality (more fun) than quantity (infinite amount).
Personally i prefer to have a concentrated fun experiences like in Dishonored. All infinite content game gets boring to me sooner or later (yes, even D3 .. although it does last a while because of fun combat).
PvP isn't infinite. Humans are funny creatures they never think of themselves as limited or that they behave in patterns within systems.
You have a certain set of skills and those skills can only be used in a finite number of ways. Depending on the number of skills, that number can be quite large. But more important than the possibility of variation is optimization, not all skill are useful in each situation.
Find any pvp game and ask how to beat class x vs class y. Will you get the answer, "no one knows, the possibilities are infinite!"
No, you won't. You'll get specific counters and branching counters to those counters and how to follow-up to what your opponent will likely do next (if this ability, then do this, if that ability, then do that and so on). It's usually fairly limited in what will be used in response to any other skills.
There is a lot of variation in PvP and the combinations of what you can encounter are quite large as you scale the number of players, but never is it infinite, esp on smaller scales. And even if what you encounter can be quite large, your response will always be much much more limited and finite to a pretty small degree.
You're confusing things. No video game is "infinite". PVP however, tends to have more longevity.
This is because playign against other people is somethign that as existed since time immemorial. It's just like picking up a football or baskteball, going to the field and have good simple fun playinng with and against each other.
Shooters, MOBAS, RTS's, racers, even fighting games have the same psychology. Sure, many don't enjoy these types and that's fine. Buty there's a reason many devs and pubs are trying to force multiplayers into single players games that clearly don't need it, like TLOU. Because it adds longevity keep them interested/paying.
Playing against the AI without new stories, quests, mods, alterations to gameplay (again, mods) or whatever usually gets old. Why do yuo think raids and hard dungeons get lock downs?
I'm sure this topic has derailed somewhat over the course of the thread but I'll respond to OP:
It depends on what you mean by pve. The way you could have a pve sandbox would be in the form of a rich player-driven economy. Giving people a reason to go farm mobs that are otherwise relatively boring and not designed to be flashy or entertaining in their own right, which is how pve is in themeparks. UO, for example, gave you a reason to go farm lich lords, dragons, white wyrms, etc. And people did it.... for years. There was no big fancy boss fight with cool cinematics or anything of the sort, they just kind of stood there and had a relatively short leash range. But people liked it because the game had a rich crafting system, and farming mobs dropped mats you needed. And the game had a robust player economy for a number of reasons, so farming mobs for gold also gave you a reason to go out and pve.
But that being said, there's no doubt that pvp fits very nicely in sandbox games because pvp is an inherently sandbox-y feature. It's all about freedom and player-driven content. What better way to have that than the ability to war with people and fight them? It creates incredibly fun and interesting politics/grudges/rivalries that you don't really get anywhere else. Games like Darkfall have actual politics and intrigue and spies because of pvp-driven conflict between clans.
How can so many people comment and avoid the elephant in the room?
EQN & Landmark
Or maybe every single poster on this thread so far are just that oblivious or myopic? Its the top "in development" sandbox PvE MMORPG.
On the discussion however: Just because PvP has been a part of many successful sandbox games, doesn't mean that sandbox games CANNOT survive without PvP. Done properly, and with other types of interactions that have nothing to do with battling, sandbox games can also be very successful.
I am in the BETA and Landmark is not a sandbox game. It's a pretty, linear, crating driven Lego box. You need to follow the crafting "quests" exactly to "level up" your character. It's a Theme Park disguised as a crafting and building sandbox.
I agree, you have to look at game like Wurm Online non PVP server to see how a true sandbox game works without PVP.
IMO the future is sandpark/hybrid mmo's like ArcheAge or Age Of Wushu and Black Desert.
Themepark and sandbox features all under one roof.
Lack of sandbox is largely a developers move. Sandbox coexist with themepark very well. In fact themepark started as hard content in SWG. Its all up to how the developer design.
IMO the future is sandpark/hybrid mmo's like ArcheAge or Age Of Wushu and Black Desert.
nah .. IMO the future is online games with some MMO elements like Destiny and Division.
I think having around 7 posts for the last nigh on 7 years is enough dude... go take a break because that future you see isn't that of MMOs but that of SP/MP games (which will become more MMO-like without supplanting actual MMOs).
So a video got posted yesterday about how we should have more Sandbox MMOs. Im fine with that not a problem.
When he talked about it he talked about Eve, how its endless. Players will never run out of content. Amazing.
But this is PVP. How does a company make an endless sandbox MMO for PVE? He said the problem with theme park is that content is being processed faster than devs can create it. Well how would any company make a PVE game endless? Not all people want to do just PVP constantly. Most in fact.
The whole point of the video was that WoW destroyed the MMO community because everyone started making theme parks. and left Sandbox games to rot.
It just got me thinking. Sandbox rpgs today dont have anything special that makes them endless over a theme park RPG.
Few ways, pvp of course, but you don't want to go into that.
Other option might be item decay.
It did wonders in SWG, materials had to be harvested and every material spawned during a period and had different stats.
So every item eventually decayed and broke down after usage, so there was always a demand for new items and materials for everyone out there in the virtual world.
So that's a way to keep everyone busy and the economy rolling, even in a themepark.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
has anyone played wurmonline thats a sandbox right ? everything is player created even the land you choose to terraform and you can do that anywhere on a huge world
Originally posted by DocBrody a sandbox MMO can't be about PvE because then it's a themepark MMO, or a singleplayer RPG like Skyrim with real people locked out, and NPC doing the job
That's not even remotely true.
If "sandbox" is about choice and if there is a contingent of players who unilaterally don't like a particular choice (in this case pvp) and they all vote not to do it (or play a game that doesn't have it) then that doesn't suddenly mitigate all the power of the rest of the choices in the game.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Comments
Randomly generated content,for example Roguelike dungeon for WoW.
endless dungeon,scoreboard for soloers 2man teams 5 mans etc.
-who went deepest
-fastest
-who got most expensive loot
etc.
And Thrall screams "XxSuperkillerxX" just entered dungeon lvl 105,all hail XxSuperkillerxX ! new record!
Team Bunnyjumpers just entered lvl 204 ,all hail Team Bunnyjumpers!
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
People don't like randomly generated dungeons (Procedural is the right word here). EQ had some procedurally generated dungeons add in one expansion. That didn't stop WoW from stomping all over them. The more I read about Sandbox the more I convinced its mostly about bitter vets blowing smoke up people rear ends..
"Emergent" gameplay consists mostly of players using exploits. Procedural generation leads to instances like they have in Diablo 3. It's just not going to work - maybe in 20 years someone will invent a sandbox game that most people find fun.
Most hilarious was that someone claimed that Landmark wasn't even a 'real' sandbox..<g>
Gets old. Fast.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I would say,it gets fresh .Fast.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
YOU ARE NOT PREPARED!!!!
Sorry, had to
My problem with games today is that they are single line follow the bread crumb quest hub game.. It gulls me to no end that devs make these ultra-linear games that is nothing more then connect the dots.. However, I don't want pure sandbox either, cause it can lead to a dull lifeless world when the players are NOT creating the content.. I want to see a hybrid approach which I think they call it Sand Park now.. 50% of the game should be like a spider web of theme park events (NOT QUEST HUBS), so that the computer AI always has a list of chores players can be striving for such as "bounties" or dynamic events (better then what GW2 does)..
As for the Sandbox features, this should be PURE player economy with some default NPC options.. Sure I could buy a new chest armor that has AC 20 from the NPC vendor, but it will be inferior then any player made items.. The only thing I would have in the form of mob or boss drops would be mats or vendor trash that can be turned into coin or resources.. Maybe occasionally you might find a fine steel sword, or a quality bag that is tradable, and almost equal to player made items.. Also, for a player economy to thrive.. YOU must take goods OUT of the world at an allowable rate, for items coming INTO the game..
Sandbox games are easily abused by gamers, since the game rules are not stringent.
Example: like the Neverwinter foundry, where players create content like a set of quests and rules, with in game tools and visual parts, quite like a sandbox game. However, devious builders had created foundry contents that allow gamers with certain skills to KO 50 elites mobs at one go (In this case, its the Control Wizard's Shield spell, which can repel an unlimited number of mobs upon breaking the shield, into a chasm to instant kill them and get uber exp. Or is it Repel spell?). This had indirectly caused skills to be nerfed. (The Shield spell now only repels 5 mobs).
The possibility of the universe collapsing into a singularity is higher than the birth of a perfect MMORPG.
But anything gets boring if you do it enough. Moving product from planet to planet gets dull if that's all you do, it's the same today as it was yesterday, as it was last week and last month and last year. Crafting is only interesting if it's meaningful and there isn't a single MMO ever that I could consider it meaningful because what you make, everyone else is making too. I find nothing interesting about any of these things, such that I would stay with a particular game forever. SWG didn't have infinite gameplay, it had the ability to do the same things over and over and over and over again. It's the same hamster wheel as every other game, just with a little more choice in which wheel you run on.
That's why I'd rather play a game, have it end and then I can move on to a different game. No single game can possibly be all-encompassing. Everything gets boring, no matter what it is.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
PvP isn't infinite. Humans are funny creatures they never think of themselves as limited or that they behave in patterns within systems.
You have a certain set of skills and those skills can only be used in a finite number of ways. Depending on the number of skills, that number can be quite large. But more important than the possibility of variation is optimization, not all skill are useful in each situation.
Find any pvp game and ask how to beat class x vs class y. Will you get the answer, "no one knows, the possibilities are infinite!"
No, you won't. You'll get specific counters and branching counters to those counters and how to follow-up to what your opponent will likely do next (if this ability, then do this, if that ability, then do that and so on). It's usually fairly limited in what will be used in response to any other skills.
There is a lot of variation in PvP and the combinations of what you can encounter are quite large as you scale the number of players, but never is it infinite, esp on smaller scales. And even if what you encounter can be quite large, your response will always be much much more limited and finite to a pretty small degree.
and what happened to that game? It got changed, and then closed down.
Having infinite content and fun are two different things. May be most people prefer quality (more fun) than quantity (infinite amount).
Personally i prefer to have a concentrated fun experiences like in Dishonored. All infinite content game gets boring to me sooner or later (yes, even D3 .. although it does last a while because of fun combat).
You're confusing things. No video game is "infinite". PVP however, tends to have more longevity.
This is because playign against other people is somethign that as existed since time immemorial. It's just like picking up a football or baskteball, going to the field and have good simple fun playinng with and against each other.
Shooters, MOBAS, RTS's, racers, even fighting games have the same psychology. Sure, many don't enjoy these types and that's fine. Buty there's a reason many devs and pubs are trying to force multiplayers into single players games that clearly don't need it, like TLOU. Because it adds longevity keep them interested/paying.
Playing against the AI without new stories, quests, mods, alterations to gameplay (again, mods) or whatever usually gets old. Why do yuo think raids and hard dungeons get lock downs?
I'm sure this topic has derailed somewhat over the course of the thread but I'll respond to OP:
It depends on what you mean by pve. The way you could have a pve sandbox would be in the form of a rich player-driven economy. Giving people a reason to go farm mobs that are otherwise relatively boring and not designed to be flashy or entertaining in their own right, which is how pve is in themeparks. UO, for example, gave you a reason to go farm lich lords, dragons, white wyrms, etc. And people did it.... for years. There was no big fancy boss fight with cool cinematics or anything of the sort, they just kind of stood there and had a relatively short leash range. But people liked it because the game had a rich crafting system, and farming mobs dropped mats you needed. And the game had a robust player economy for a number of reasons, so farming mobs for gold also gave you a reason to go out and pve.
But that being said, there's no doubt that pvp fits very nicely in sandbox games because pvp is an inherently sandbox-y feature. It's all about freedom and player-driven content. What better way to have that than the ability to war with people and fight them? It creates incredibly fun and interesting politics/grudges/rivalries that you don't really get anywhere else. Games like Darkfall have actual politics and intrigue and spies because of pvp-driven conflict between clans.
So?
I agree, you have to look at game like Wurm Online non PVP server to see how a true sandbox game works without PVP.
IMO the future is sandpark/hybrid mmo's like ArcheAge or Age Of Wushu and Black Desert.
Themepark and sandbox features all under one roof.
so people don't care enough about its "infinite content" to keep it alive?
nah .. IMO the future is online games with some MMO elements like Destiny and Division.
I think having around 7 posts for the last nigh on 7 years is enough dude... go take a break because that future you see isn't that of MMOs but that of SP/MP games (which will become more MMO-like without supplanting actual MMOs).
Nari - the question wasn't "Why isn't this game made?" or any other variation dealing with what people like or don't like or what makes a viable game.
The question was what how do you make an endless sandbox for pve.
Few ways, pvp of course, but you don't want to go into that.
Other option might be item decay.
It did wonders in SWG, materials had to be harvested and every material spawned during a period and had different stats.
So every item eventually decayed and broke down after usage, so there was always a demand for new items and materials for everyone out there in the virtual world.
So that's a way to keep everyone busy and the economy rolling, even in a themepark.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
That's not even remotely true.
If "sandbox" is about choice and if there is a contingent of players who unilaterally don't like a particular choice (in this case pvp) and they all vote not to do it (or play a game that doesn't have it) then that doesn't suddenly mitigate all the power of the rest of the choices in the game.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo