I don't know why some people associate PVP with sandbox.
If anything PVP is not conducive to exploration and self determination, it allows another person behind a PC to alter your path by force. It is why many PVE player literally never touch PVP games after their first experience, it takes away self-determination, which should be a corner stone of a sandbox environment.
In the real world, everywhere where there is terror and conflict, people don't feel free, they feel oppressed. This same thing happens in many PVP games, which is why PVE players refuse to play them, they don't feel free, they feel oppressed and they don't like a world of conflict where you are not free to explore.
Vanguard and EQ are much more like sandboxes than any PVP game I played.
Lets for arguments sake say that WoW had no level caps... basically it's endless... you can keep grinding the same dailies, the same mobs, et al forever. At what point do you say to yourself... this is pointless?
Ultimately there needs to be an activity that is fun to do, not merely a task to do. Otherwise having limitless levels or no levels at all becomes pointless. The reality is, there is a point to levels... it gives someone something to strive towards. If everything is limitless you get to the point where you get tired of going no where endlessly.
Another person who has obviously never played a game like Civilization, Age of Empires or others, nor has seen series like Log Horizon
The ultimate point of a sandbox is to not only do what you want, but also help others, its the most cooperative form of true mmo there is. You gain rep by being the best at something on the server. You then turn your attention to helping others through what you can do. Its that simple. In a sandbox its about kingdom building along with me building.
Bruce Lee did not simply "stop" when he mastered Kung Fu, he turned his attention to others and started to teach.
A history lesson for those that don't get sandboxes. MMORPGS started off the back of pen and paper rpgs. People who started the genre and played in its early days wanted virtual worlds. Places where they can actually have influence. When developers saw the more solo friendly wow which brought in more casual players much of the focus changed.
If you don't get them hey that's absolutely fine. You don't have to force yourself to like anything. There are more than enough themeparks out there to go "beat"
Me? I'd rather live in a world than play just a series of levels while sitting in a city waiting for a queue to pop.
I've played games like those but I don't like them. My preferred genre are RPG's and Action games. I have never once played a game to "help" another, unless you count the endless hours me and brother spent beating Resident Evil when I was younger. I play games for me, because it is my hobby of choice.
I get sandboxes perfectly, what I don't get is this notion that Building, crafting and PvP is all there is. I played Asheron's Call for 6 straight years and then on and off for 8 more. It is a Sandbox and to date is the only sandbox I get because it comprises of exploration, combat, dynamic loot system and character progression both horizontal and vertical. And it does in with this novel concept that you don't need another person to do any of it.
I also have been playing D&D since 1982 so I get Pen and Paper RPG's and not once did I ever play it with this concept I was going to influence the world.....if anything I this this borders on the realm of Themepark trappings with their whole "you're the Hero Bullsh*t" Which work in a single player game but In a world of thousands of others, not everyone can be the hero. All I ever want to do is pass the time, have fun, socialize when need be and explore a living breathing world with minimal developmental hurdles.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by azzamasin Most sandboxes fail because they insist on including FFA PvP and remove any form of developmental guided PvE systems.
Archeage doesn't have ffa pvp and its pve game is a tutorial
I said most not all. With that being said it still has non consensual PvP, which I think detracts a huge number of players. Too me Archeage would be amazing if it had a PvE server.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I personally think players should die in role playing games but of course not until a very long time like maybe 2 years of game time.A quality developer should have no problem creating content and if they create some good global content it keeps the entire player base excited and active.
Role playing a character should NEVER be about grinding gear,it is just a simple concept that devs have always used for lack of creativity and real immersion ideas.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Originally posted by ikcin Simply themepark players are afraid from the freedom.
No, they aren't "afraid" they just show up in the game with a completely different set of desires and expectations.
The person who prefers theme parks are there to be entertained. The person who prefers sandbox already knows what will entertain them and they just want the tools to do it.
Seems reasonable, but I do not think so. In themeparks you follow the directions of developer, in sandbox you follow the directions from developer too. Except Minecraft where you do everything you want, and it is a total mess. So let think about sandbox in the concept of MMO, not of RPG. What is the main difference with themepark? The competition. In themepark the competition is limited by instances and the achievements. In sandbox you are placed in open world, and your achievements are related to other players, not to the rules of developer. In sandbox you choose how to play in the term not only of the world, created from developer, but in terms of other players. In themepark you choose how to play only in therm of the world. So themepark MMORPG is not MMORPG in fact, but it is a solo RPG with limited multiplayer options like arenas and bgs. In sandbox MMORPG you make choices related with other players. In both cases you can change the world and you do not make your fun alone. The only reason to choose themepark pve instead of sandbox pvp /pvp is not only fight, but every kind of competition/ is that you are afraid from competition.
I don't believe that's necessarily correct.
You're assuming that there "has to" be competition and there has to be a comparison. Is there really that much competition in "A tale in the desert"?
And what about personal goals that have nothing to do with comparing to others.
I think you are judging a sandbox solely on how you interact with it. And you can't do that.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Originally posted by ikcin Simply themepark players are afraid from the freedom.
No, they aren't "afraid" they just show up in the game with a completely different set of desires and expectations.
The person who prefers theme parks are there to be entertained. The person who prefers sandbox already knows what will entertain them and they just want the tools to do it.
That's actually quite spot on, come to think of it.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Yeah you might be able to clear a spot in the woods, build a house with the wood you've collected, plant a crop, hunt, gather and craft, and then what? What happens next? Do you continue grinding materials for a bigger house, keep yourself fed etc. What do you do when you don't have to struggle anymore? Is that the endgame?
Thoughts?
You might be able to do all the quests, do the raids and get geared up.
And then what?
What do you do when you don't struggle anymore in Themeparks?
The "then what" predicament is applicable to anything.
You become immortal - travel through the universe, see and learn everything - then what?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
To get the proper sense of sandbox I look at minecraft. You start the game and you're thrown somewhere, anywhere in the world. There are no quests, a NPC to tell you what to do, where to go. There is nothing really. Do people say "and then what" the moment they enter minecraft?
What usually destroys these sandbox MMOs is the huge timesink leveling up system and they always exagerate it with that thing. You have to lv up, there is no other choice if you want to succeed in the game. So right off the bat the player is forced down a path that after a while he doesn't enjoy. Completely unnecessary huge part of the game that is not fun. It is what usually ruins open world pvp too. A guy wins only because he killed some mobs 10000 times which tends to give the impression that ffa pvp is unfair.
Yeah you might be able to clear a spot in the woods, build a house with the wood you've collected, plant a crop, hunt, gather and craft, and then what? What happens next? Do you continue grinding materials for a bigger house, keep yourself fed etc. What do you do when you don't have to struggle anymore? Is that the endgame?
Thoughts?
You might be able to do all the quests, do the raids and get geared up.
And then what?
What do you do when you don't struggle anymore in Themeparks?
The "then what" predicament is applicable to anything.
You become immortal - travel through the universe, see and learn everything - then what?
You're assuming that there "has to" be competition and there has to be a comparison. Is there really that much competition in "A tale in the desert"?
And what about personal goals that have nothing to do with comparing to others.
I think you are judging a sandbox solely on how you interact with it. And you can't do that.
It is amazing how direct question make the people quite
OK, that was not for you.
Very good point. First I think, I'm not judging subjective. But ofc you may be right. Let say you are in open world sandbox MMO, and everyone has own personal goals /because the man is a social animal, that goals are usually related with the other players and that is important/, so the conflict of personal goals creates the competition, the coincidence of goals leads to cooperation. So your point in fact improves mine. Sometimes the competition leads to that, some players can not fulfills their goals, it is true. But in every group game there shall be winners and losers. And this is the main problem, like I said already, some players are afraid not to lose, so much, they want to play alone vs mobs, instead vs players. So the devs made games without losers, and without winners, like GW2, TESO and etc.
And do you know what I really do not like. That so called pve players often blame the others for their own attitude.
Well, it's true, and I'm not saying there can't be competition. I could even agree with you and say that there are definitely people who "do" compete for resources in sandbox games. but I don't think that's everybody (per the point of cooperation) and I really don't think that's why people avoid sandbox games.
The few people I spoke with who indicated that they didn't like sandbox/open world games never said anything about competing or losing.
though, to your point, there are people who truly believe that if they play the game they are entitled to everything in that game. I'm not one of those people.
In any case, in the few instances of me inquiring about "why" those people didn't like these games, their answers pointed to them getting in game, looking around for things to do and then quitting.
They want to experience content not immerse themselves in their own content.
Probably one of the reasons why (and not to get into a debate on whether this game is a sandbox or not) when skyrim came out people were coming to these forums and saying how they "beat the game in 16 hours" (or so) but couldn't understand how people were spending hundreds of hours in the game. To that point I now have 1090 hours and still climbing.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
You're assuming that there "has to" be competition and there has to be a comparison. Is there really that much competition in "A tale in the desert"?
And what about personal goals that have nothing to do with comparing to others.
I think you are judging a sandbox solely on how you interact with it. And you can't do that.
It is amazing how direct question make the people quite
OK, that was not for you.
Very good point. First I think, I'm not judging subjective. But ofc you may be right. Let say you are in open world sandbox MMO, and everyone has own personal goals /because the man is a social animal, that goals are usually related with the other players and that is important/, so the conflict of personal goals creates the competition, the coincidence of goals leads to cooperation. So your point in fact improves mine. Sometimes the competition leads to that, some players can not fulfills their goals, it is true. But in every group game there shall be winners and losers. And this is the main problem, like I said already, some players are afraid not to lose, so much, they want to play alone vs mobs, instead vs players. So the devs made games without losers, and without winners, like GW2, TESO and etc.
And do you know what I really do not like. That so called pve players often blame the others for their own attitude.
To that point, it's worth considering that it's possible you are projecting your own competitive nature in your assessment. It's entirely possible that they are not playing to either win or lose, but to create, build and explore. They're approaching the game much as they would Minecraft, Etch-a-Sketch, Play-Doh or any other toy.
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
Don't themepark games suffer from this much more? Many sandboxes are open ended but themeparks generally you run out of content and are forced to repeat content until you are feed new content.
Yeah you might be able to clear a spot in the woods, build a house with the wood you've collected, plant a crop, hunt, gather and craft, and then what? What happens next? Do you continue grinding materials for a bigger house, keep yourself fed etc. What do you do when you don't have to struggle anymore? Is that the endgame?
Thoughts?
If a sandbox lets you get to that point it is just a failure in game design. There should be no end to a sandbox.
Sovrath I completely agree with your point, but Skirym is not a MMO.
Well, the point I was trying to make, and I suppose needs clarification, is the idea of a player finding their own focus, their own objectives.
So in my example, there were players who literally came to these forums because they 'beat the game" in "x" amount of hours and did't understand why players were playing hundreds (never mind over a thousand) hours.
That's because they approached the game as simply a quest game. They jumped aboard, finished the themepark part and that was it for them.
Yet there are players who have played the game for hundreds and hundreds of hours.
That's why the players who are "theme parkers" have such problems with open ended or sandbox games. They are looking for the quests and they play the quests until their end (if they can find them) and then wonder (per the title of the thread) "and then what?".
Their expectations are completely about finding and completing ready made content. Not having their own personal goals and working to fulfill them.
also, you don't need pvp for a sandbox game. A tale in the desert doesn't have it and Ryzom has consensual pvp as far as I can tell.
Of course if a sandbox game does have pvp then that speaks to another issue in that there are players who don't want to pvp. But there are several factors for that. One of the biggest is that some players in these games who partake in pvp are just lousy people and they take things too far.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
To that point, it's worth considering that it's possible you are projecting your own competitive nature in your assessment. It's entirely possible that they are not playing to either win or lose, but to create, build and explore. They're approaching the game much as they would Minecraft, Etch-a-Sketch, Play-Doh or any other toy.
I like competition, ffa pvp, arenas, in fact every feature with fight vs players. I like the good story, immersion and good game aesthetic too. I like the smart quests. I like to create, build and explore too. The only think I do not like is the grinding of mobs, because it is boring, no matter if I grind for exp or for quest. So how exactly I'm projecting my own competitive nature? I do not deny any aspect of the game except maybe grinding.
Interesting that you didn't include the statement I was referring to. The one I specifically highlighted so that we could avoid straw men and obtuse replies.
"And this is the main problem, like I said already, some players are afraid not to lose..."
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
Both themepark and sandbox games have massive problems. What needs to be done is with skill use of procedural content generation/AI/ as well as some themepark and sandbox elements is to move past these current games.
I see gw2 events as a very tentative step in that direction - Storybricks promises more. Its possible to create a best of both worlds kind of scenario. Bethesda's single player games are a stab at this.. There is some underlying story but you are given a lot of freedom in how you accomplish this.. Who you make friends with and such. and what 'quests' you undertake. Same with a few other single player games..
But game makers seem to fear the complexity of trying to make this kind of more complex game work in an MMO. It can though - the faction system in EQ was a stab at that.. We can do even better today and hopefully some game company will. Its the same with procedural content. You need some hand developed content but having say a landscape procedurally generated can add a lot of spice to the world..
This question reminded me of Chalker and his Well World series and what happened to the Markovians. Essentially the same question but one directed at our very existence.
I think a sandbox game needs players who are quite flexible and able to enjoy the freedom and not everyone is looking for that in a game. I like themeparks and I like the hybrid sand/themepark games more. I enjoy dungeons a lot am your real D&D fan and I love groups and delving through them.
I cannot answer your question because I am not a huge roleplayer in fact the only reason I play on RP servers is because the community tends to be more civilized on those servers. I get bored if left to my own devices and I do enjoy a good story someone else has written. I am also not a leader I am a follower. Leaders need followers
Yeah you might be able to clear a spot in the woods, build a house with the wood you've collected, plant a crop, hunt, gather and craft, and then what? What happens next? Do you continue grinding materials for a bigger house, keep yourself fed etc. What do you do when you don't have to struggle anymore? Is that the endgame?
Thoughts?
same is true for game on rails.
after killing the 100 rats and getting to level 20...then what?
how is it different? oh that's right, its not.
oh and by the way..I have been working on my property in Wurm for 1 year now and I still have plenty yet to do.
Why is this topic sandbox specific? I ask myself the same question with pretty much all mmorpg's. I hit max level, I have decent gear... now what?
My answer is usually, "quit".
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
That's what happens when a game is only concerned with getting to the end. Re sandboxes, totally different, ths game is about evolving your avatar within a community. it's like playing a sport with your friends every week - you tend not to say 'well that's it what now' at the end of the sporting match either.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Why is this topic sandbox specific? I ask myself the same question with pretty much all mmorpg's. I hit max level, I have decent gear... now what?
My answer is usually, "quit".
What I'm seeing is that MMORPGs nowadays have become about the self. Me, me, me! What is in it for me? How much loot can I get? What kind of loot can I get?
I thought MMORPGs were about the interaction with others. Loot is finite. Content is finite. The relationships built go beyond that and the game becomes about community, instead of selfish reasons.
I know, I've struggled with this myself but I'm finding my path now.
Comments
I don't know why some people associate PVP with sandbox.
If anything PVP is not conducive to exploration and self determination, it allows another person behind a PC to alter your path by force. It is why many PVE player literally never touch PVP games after their first experience, it takes away self-determination, which should be a corner stone of a sandbox environment.
In the real world, everywhere where there is terror and conflict, people don't feel free, they feel oppressed. This same thing happens in many PVP games, which is why PVE players refuse to play them, they don't feel free, they feel oppressed and they don't like a world of conflict where you are not free to explore.
Vanguard and EQ are much more like sandboxes than any PVP game I played.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Archeage doesn't have ffa pvp and its pve game is a tutorialAny mmo worth its salt should be like a good prostitute when it comes to its game world- One hell of a faker, and a damn good shaker!
I've played games like those but I don't like them. My preferred genre are RPG's and Action games. I have never once played a game to "help" another, unless you count the endless hours me and brother spent beating Resident Evil when I was younger. I play games for me, because it is my hobby of choice.
I get sandboxes perfectly, what I don't get is this notion that Building, crafting and PvP is all there is. I played Asheron's Call for 6 straight years and then on and off for 8 more. It is a Sandbox and to date is the only sandbox I get because it comprises of exploration, combat, dynamic loot system and character progression both horizontal and vertical. And it does in with this novel concept that you don't need another person to do any of it.
I also have been playing D&D since 1982 so I get Pen and Paper RPG's and not once did I ever play it with this concept I was going to influence the world.....if anything I this this borders on the realm of Themepark trappings with their whole "you're the Hero Bullsh*t" Which work in a single player game but In a world of thousands of others, not everyone can be the hero. All I ever want to do is pass the time, have fun, socialize when need be and explore a living breathing world with minimal developmental hurdles.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I said most not all. With that being said it still has non consensual PvP, which I think detracts a huge number of players. Too me Archeage would be amazing if it had a PvE server.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I personally think players should die in role playing games but of course not until a very long time like maybe 2 years of game time.A quality developer should have no problem creating content and if they create some good global content it keeps the entire player base excited and active.
Role playing a character should NEVER be about grinding gear,it is just a simple concept that devs have always used for lack of creativity and real immersion ideas.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I don't believe that's necessarily correct.
You're assuming that there "has to" be competition and there has to be a comparison. Is there really that much competition in "A tale in the desert"?
And what about personal goals that have nothing to do with comparing to others.
I think you are judging a sandbox solely on how you interact with it. And you can't do that.
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
That's actually quite spot on, come to think of it.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
My solutions
1. Procedurally generated content.
2. Hard content, flexible hard content and developer controlled hard content.
3. PvP and resource and territory control.
4. Community crafting projects with player decisions behind direction taken.
MMORPG'S are far behind in the sandbox department because non themepark MMORPG development was abandoned 10 years ago.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
To get the proper sense of sandbox I look at minecraft. You start the game and you're thrown somewhere, anywhere in the world. There are no quests, a NPC to tell you what to do, where to go. There is nothing really. Do people say "and then what" the moment they enter minecraft?
What usually destroys these sandbox MMOs is the huge timesink leveling up system and they always exagerate it with that thing. You have to lv up, there is no other choice if you want to succeed in the game. So right off the bat the player is forced down a path that after a while he doesn't enjoy. Completely unnecessary huge part of the game that is not fun. It is what usually ruins open world pvp too. A guy wins only because he killed some mobs 10000 times which tends to give the impression that ffa pvp is unfair.
I just watched that last night :P
Well, it's true, and I'm not saying there can't be competition. I could even agree with you and say that there are definitely people who "do" compete for resources in sandbox games. but I don't think that's everybody (per the point of cooperation) and I really don't think that's why people avoid sandbox games.
The few people I spoke with who indicated that they didn't like sandbox/open world games never said anything about competing or losing.
though, to your point, there are people who truly believe that if they play the game they are entitled to everything in that game. I'm not one of those people.
In any case, in the few instances of me inquiring about "why" those people didn't like these games, their answers pointed to them getting in game, looking around for things to do and then quitting.
They want to experience content not immerse themselves in their own content.
Probably one of the reasons why (and not to get into a debate on whether this game is a sandbox or not) when skyrim came out people were coming to these forums and saying how they "beat the game in 16 hours" (or so) but couldn't understand how people were spending hundreds of hours in the game. To that point I now have 1090 hours and still climbing.
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
To that point, it's worth considering that it's possible you are projecting your own competitive nature in your assessment. It's entirely possible that they are not playing to either win or lose, but to create, build and explore. They're approaching the game much as they would Minecraft, Etch-a-Sketch, Play-Doh or any other toy.
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
If a sandbox lets you get to that point it is just a failure in game design. There should be no end to a sandbox.
Well, the point I was trying to make, and I suppose needs clarification, is the idea of a player finding their own focus, their own objectives.
So in my example, there were players who literally came to these forums because they 'beat the game" in "x" amount of hours and did't understand why players were playing hundreds (never mind over a thousand) hours.
That's because they approached the game as simply a quest game. They jumped aboard, finished the themepark part and that was it for them.
Yet there are players who have played the game for hundreds and hundreds of hours.
That's why the players who are "theme parkers" have such problems with open ended or sandbox games. They are looking for the quests and they play the quests until their end (if they can find them) and then wonder (per the title of the thread) "and then what?".
Their expectations are completely about finding and completing ready made content. Not having their own personal goals and working to fulfill them.
also, you don't need pvp for a sandbox game. A tale in the desert doesn't have it and Ryzom has consensual pvp as far as I can tell.
Of course if a sandbox game does have pvp then that speaks to another issue in that there are players who don't want to pvp. But there are several factors for that. One of the biggest is that some players in these games who partake in pvp are just lousy people and they take things too far.
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
Interesting that you didn't include the statement I was referring to. The one I specifically highlighted so that we could avoid straw men and obtuse replies.
"And this is the main problem, like I said already, some players are afraid not to lose..."
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
Both themepark and sandbox games have massive problems. What needs to be done is with skill use of procedural content generation/AI/ as well as some themepark and sandbox elements is to move past these current games.
I see gw2 events as a very tentative step in that direction - Storybricks promises more. Its possible to create a best of both worlds kind of scenario. Bethesda's single player games are a stab at this.. There is some underlying story but you are given a lot of freedom in how you accomplish this.. Who you make friends with and such. and what 'quests' you undertake. Same with a few other single player games..
But game makers seem to fear the complexity of trying to make this kind of more complex game work in an MMO. It can though - the faction system in EQ was a stab at that.. We can do even better today and hopefully some game company will. Its the same with procedural content. You need some hand developed content but having say a landscape procedurally generated can add a lot of spice to the world..
This question reminded me of Chalker and his Well World series and what happened to the Markovians. Essentially the same question but one directed at our very existence.
I think a sandbox game needs players who are quite flexible and able to enjoy the freedom and not everyone is looking for that in a game. I like themeparks and I like the hybrid sand/themepark games more. I enjoy dungeons a lot am your real D&D fan and I love groups and delving through them.
I cannot answer your question because I am not a huge roleplayer in fact the only reason I play on RP servers is because the community tends to be more civilized on those servers. I get bored if left to my own devices and I do enjoy a good story someone else has written. I am also not a leader I am a follower. Leaders need followers
same is true for game on rails.
after killing the 100 rats and getting to level 20...then what?
how is it different? oh that's right, its not.
oh and by the way..I have been working on my property in Wurm for 1 year now and I still have plenty yet to do.
Why is this topic sandbox specific? I ask myself the same question with pretty much all mmorpg's. I hit max level, I have decent gear... now what?
My answer is usually, "quit".
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
What I'm seeing is that MMORPGs nowadays have become about the self. Me, me, me! What is in it for me? How much loot can I get? What kind of loot can I get?
I thought MMORPGs were about the interaction with others. Loot is finite. Content is finite. The relationships built go beyond that and the game becomes about community, instead of selfish reasons.
I know, I've struggled with this myself but I'm finding my path now.
Its either stop playing or start over and try something different.
Trying to replay in a different way is actually where everything but the sandbox falls short.