Good games last, bad games "fail." Simple as that. Sandbox, themepark - nothing to do with it.
All MMOs are a grind.
It's just that the audience for themepark is much bigger, so you get more money into that sub-genre, so the quality of titles in the sandbox sub-genre tend to be way worse, and thus more likely to not meet player expectations.
I haven't played sandboxes in awhile, but in the early days of MMOs, what made sandboxes so great was the lore and story. Yes they had questlines in them. Most newer sandboxes just figure to put players in a world full of monsters and other players to kill with no storyline or lore behind it. I'm pretty sure one of the main things that keeps people playing an MMO is story and lore (it's my number 1 requirement). I know if I don't like the story or lore of a game it has very little chance to last long on my computer.
There's also full loot PvP. It seems that everyone just automatically assumes full loot PvP when you mention a sandbox. It worked back in the day because there were more "good guys" than "bad guys". I didn't mind getting griefed or ganked back in the early sandboxes, because I could go to the nearest town and get at least 20 people to go hunt down the person that killed me and get my stuff back. It actually added a very nice dimension to the games. However, in today's community everyone wants to be solo and by themselves. If you walked into town after getting griefed and asked for help, you'd maybe get 2-3 people that would help but the vast majority of players would just yell at you "QUIT PLAYING YOU NOOB" or something like that lol.
I haven't played sandboxes in awhile, but in the early days of MMOs, what made sandboxes so great was the lore and story. Yes they had questlines in them. Most newer sandboxes just figure to put players in a world full of monsters and other players to kill with no storyline or lore behind it. ..
well speaking for myself lore and storyline is the least important part of a game...any game for that matter.
What is important to me however is the ability to do stuff
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
there are servers of minecraft with over 1500 players online.
No there aren't. You may have some with 1500 players REGISTERED, but online at the same time? The Minecraft server architecture would be on its knees, even with the latest Intel Xeon server technology.
Sandbox games do just fine. Minecraft and its clones (and not-so-clones) are doing fantastic.
Sandbox MMORPGs are the ones that struggle, which probably largely due to MMO meaning there are more players, which means each individual has less authorship over the experience. In a singleplayer Minecraft shard, you control the entire world, whereas in sandbox MMORPGs you have far less control.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Sandbox MMOs usually come with at least full PvP, if not full loot PvP. Which in turn guarantees that they are niche games.
Even back in the day when there were so few MMOs that you practically had to put up with that crap it was the number one complaint and reason for people to leave. What do you think is going to happen when they actually have a bunch alternatives where they don't have to put up with it?
I think if more sandbox games offered servers with different rulesets it'd go a long way towards resolving the issue. Then again, the servers with full PvP corpse loot rulesets would probably be ghost towns seeing how many PvPers don't want a challenge, but rather want victims instead. So fighting each other would be boring as hell for griefers, the subset of PvPers that generally want these options to begin with. xD
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
If you walked into town after getting griefed and asked for help, you'd maybe get 2-3 people that would help but the vast majority of players would just yell at you "QUIT PLAYING YOU NOOB" or something like that lol.
That is because it is so easy to dodge PVP in todays' games. Go to a PVE server, disable PVP mode, and many players are so busy doing PVE they won't bother helping someone as it messes up their XP/hr ratio.
With a open game where PVP griefing is possible it becomes a problem to them too as they could be the next victim. That's what makes it so great.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
there are servers of minecraft with over 1500 players online.
No there aren't. You may have some with 1500 players REGISTERED, but online at the same time? The Minecraft server architecture would be on its knees, even with the latest Intel Xeon server technology.
I don't think the success or failure of a game can be narrowed down so much. Though I can say that I've been told by people that I'm in the minority when it comes to preferring pve over pvp and that's why there are so many pvp heavy games. There have been countless times where I've been interested in a game only to find out that it focuses on pvp and basically ends up being a gankfest while leveling (for the more casual players like myself). The next game I subscribe to will have both and servers giving me the option to level pve only.
Sandbox games that focus too much on PvE or PvP but not both equally fail.
I disagree with that.
It has to do with popular appeal, good games succeed, bad games fail (also OP doesn't define "fail" - as he mentions games that shut down as being successful for example).
OP omitted the biggest sandbox game in the world that has over 50million players - Minecraft - its successful because its a damn good game fist and foremost - obviously its not the graphics, it's gameplay that rules in the end.
Just curious. Would you make the same argument if I replaced minecraft with "random facebook game".
I don't think this is the case. The communities for the failed sandbox titles say what needs to be fixed or whats blows and the devs usually don't listen, THAT's why they fail.
Originally posted by Blaqberi I don't think the success or failure of a game can be narrowed down so much. Though I can say that I've been told by people that I'm in the minority when it comes to preferring pve over pvp and that's why there are so many pvp heavy games. There have been countless times where I've been interested in a game only to find out that it focuses on pvp and basically ends up being a gankfest while leveling (for the more casual players like myself). The next game I subscribe to will have both and servers giving me the option to level pve only.
lol wut? What pvp heavy games? Most games nowadays are pve wow clones, its usually the other way around. Like in Black Desert, it was supposed to be open pvp and just got changed to themepark so it can get more profits.
Well PvP should not be the focus of a sandbox, it should be part of it.
There hasn't been a real PvE sandbox game yet. One where your actions can actually significantly change the world. The technology just hasn't been in place for it yet.
Comments
Good games last, bad games "fail." Simple as that. Sandbox, themepark - nothing to do with it.
All MMOs are a grind.
It's just that the audience for themepark is much bigger, so you get more money into that sub-genre, so the quality of titles in the sandbox sub-genre tend to be way worse, and thus more likely to not meet player expectations.
I haven't played sandboxes in awhile, but in the early days of MMOs, what made sandboxes so great was the lore and story. Yes they had questlines in them. Most newer sandboxes just figure to put players in a world full of monsters and other players to kill with no storyline or lore behind it. I'm pretty sure one of the main things that keeps people playing an MMO is story and lore (it's my number 1 requirement). I know if I don't like the story or lore of a game it has very little chance to last long on my computer.
There's also full loot PvP. It seems that everyone just automatically assumes full loot PvP when you mention a sandbox. It worked back in the day because there were more "good guys" than "bad guys". I didn't mind getting griefed or ganked back in the early sandboxes, because I could go to the nearest town and get at least 20 people to go hunt down the person that killed me and get my stuff back. It actually added a very nice dimension to the games. However, in today's community everyone wants to be solo and by themselves. If you walked into town after getting griefed and asked for help, you'd maybe get 2-3 people that would help but the vast majority of players would just yell at you "QUIT PLAYING YOU NOOB" or something like that lol.
well speaking for myself lore and storyline is the least important part of a game...any game for that matter.
What is important to me however is the ability to do stuff
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
he look a minecraft website..
http://minecraftservers.org/
What's that? ow.. multiple servers with more then 4k players online?
There is even one server with 14k players online..
Sandbox games do just fine. Minecraft and its clones (and not-so-clones) are doing fantastic.
Sandbox MMORPGs are the ones that struggle, which probably largely due to MMO meaning there are more players, which means each individual has less authorship over the experience. In a singleplayer Minecraft shard, you control the entire world, whereas in sandbox MMORPGs you have far less control.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Sandbox MMOs usually come with at least full PvP, if not full loot PvP. Which in turn guarantees that they are niche games.
Even back in the day when there were so few MMOs that you practically had to put up with that crap it was the number one complaint and reason for people to leave. What do you think is going to happen when they actually have a bunch alternatives where they don't have to put up with it?
I think if more sandbox games offered servers with different rulesets it'd go a long way towards resolving the issue. Then again, the servers with full PvP corpse loot rulesets would probably be ghost towns seeing how many PvPers don't want a challenge, but rather want victims instead. So fighting each other would be boring as hell for griefers, the subset of PvPers that generally want these options to begin with. xD
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
That is because it is so easy to dodge PVP in todays' games. Go to a PVE server, disable PVP mode, and many players are so busy doing PVE they won't bother helping someone as it messes up their XP/hr ratio.
With a open game where PVP griefing is possible it becomes a problem to them too as they could be the next victim. That's what makes it so great.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
sorry but i cant explain it any clearer then that.. i even showed you the website.. sorry man if people dont get this
Just curious. Would you make the same argument if I replaced minecraft with "random facebook game".
I don't think this is the case. The communities for the failed sandbox titles say what needs to be fixed or whats blows and the devs usually don't listen, THAT's why they fail.
Played-Everything
Playing-LoL
lol wut? What pvp heavy games? Most games nowadays are pve wow clones, its usually the other way around. Like in Black Desert, it was supposed to be open pvp and just got changed to themepark so it can get more profits.
Well PvP should not be the focus of a sandbox, it should be part of it.
There hasn't been a real PvE sandbox game yet. One where your actions can actually significantly change the world. The technology just hasn't been in place for it yet.