To work a game needs to be more than Just a Sandbox. For success we need a box which defines the sand and we need toys in the sand to play with. In a MMORPG the box is the genre Sci-FI, fantasy, horror etc. The sand is the world itself and having it as open as possible so we have the freedom to move around and do what we want. Either working purely of the sand element such as exploration or building sandcastles. But we also need tiys things that allow os to focus on some organised play these would be themepark esq sequnces quest chains, dungeons etc.
A game thats all sand lacks substance and overtime will become boring. A game thats all toys lacks flexibility and freedom eventually its finished ...
So in my view a successful Sandbox game will also have a themepark element and a successful Themepark should have a sandbox element.
Lastly, PVP isn't an element of Sandbox or Themepark its a whole different discussion.
As long as the only 'classes' to choose from in a game are combat related, then its not a sandbox anyway imo, too many games seem to want to claim the sandbox title, when really, all they are is just FFA PVP games. Sandbox games are niche in themselves, ones that focus primarily on pvp even more so, there just isnt that much call for them, so any new games trying to create a space in the market based on that, are likely to fail by default. I think any Sandbox MMO trying to make a success of it these days, has to be more than just combat focused, and thats the problem with the newer games, they are too focused on combat whether its pvp or pve related.
I've never found a real sandbox. It is always a ffa pvp landscape with some housing thrown in. I don't like having to worry about losing everything I have accomplished in a game the second a group of gankers catch me out in the open. Or some random hacker.
Also the other "sandboxes" I've played are buggy messes with zero actual content for players to utilize to create a living player run world.
Playing: Smite, Marvel Heroes Played: Nexus:Kingdom of the Winds, Everquest, DAoC, Everquest 2, WoW, Matrix Online, Vangaurd, SWG, DDO, EVE, Fallen Earth, LoTRo, CoX, Champions Online, WAR, Darkfall, Mortal Online, Guild Wars, Rift, Tera, Aion, AoC, Gods and Heroes, DCUO, FF14, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, Wildstar, ESO, ArcheAge Waiting On: Nothing. Mmorpg's are dead.
Sandbox MMOs will not do so well, because new players start with solo games that theme park MMOs are based on. So a sandbox seems strange, they are not sure what to do. Games like Minecraft may change that, but for every Minecraft there are a thousand titles which predispose players into playing theme parks.
I would prefer a hybrid anyway, theme park wrapped in a sandbox sandwich. Best of both worlds.
Why should we over analyze this? SWG existed at a time when Themepark was just a type of area to visit in the overall game, there was no real Themepark genre then, WOW essentially lead to the coining of the term.
When someone says sandbox they're talking about a game where you decide how you want to play, essentially what any sandbox mode entailed in older RTS games. It often goes hand in hand with some type of communal building system in an MMO. What need be considered beyond that? When it comes to understanding what a person is referring to?
Personally I rank player interdependence very high on what makes a good sandbox.
Also, as several have mentioned SWG I would like to point out that before it was revamped there were only a few places to get quest chains and they were very very short compared to Themepark quest hubs (The Imperial Base, The Rebel Base, Nym's, Krayt Skull on Tatooine, Jabba's Palace, maybe 1-2 more). Additionally there were a couple like the Crystal reward outside Bestine from the Imperial facility, the painting on Endor, and the Dathomir Prison. Besides these we basically had the mission terminals.
The themeparkification came with the NGE.
Agreed, although I'd say it started with ROTW/CU
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Sandbox MMOs will not do so well, because new players start with solo games that theme park MMOs are based on. So a sandbox seems strange, they are not sure what to do. Games like Minecraft may change that, but for every Minecraft there are a thousand titles which predispose players into playing theme parks.
I would prefer a hybrid anyway, theme park wrapped in a sandbox sandwich. Best of both worlds.
I don't think themepark MMORPGs are doing that great either .. even Blizz is not making new ones.
Solo games, mobile games, focused instanced online games ..... yes.
Sandbox MMOs will not do so well, because new players start with solo games that theme park MMOs are based on. So a sandbox seems strange, they are not sure what to do. Games like Minecraft may change that, but for every Minecraft there are a thousand titles which predispose players into playing theme parks.
I would prefer a hybrid anyway, theme park wrapped in a sandbox sandwich. Best of both worlds.
I don't think themepark MMORPGs are doing that great either .. even Blizz is not making new ones.
Solo games, mobile games, focused instanced online games ..... yes.
Themepark old style MMORPGs ... i don't think so.
I think i know why Destiny isn't coming to the PC now, and that reason is Overwatch, the real question is, if Overwatch hits consoles, will players jump ship and play it instead, i wouldn't be surprised if they would, so maybe as its their own game, maybe Overwatch won't be on console, but your probably right about one thing for sure, i don't think Blizzard are going to make another Themepark MMO, i think they'll just keep on churning out more expacs and content for WoW, given the stylised nature of the graphics, they probably think they can get away with those for another 10 years, i'm doubtful myself, but who knows, maybe they will, but for mobile games, they have hearthstone, the mobile market isn't really suitable for much else tbh, and it wouldn't surprise me if Overwatch turns out to be a really huge thing, way bigger than Destiny, already console players are begging for it to be released on console, but, sadly for them, its going to be a PC master race game. So, Blizzard not making new MMO's, they are probably too busy making more online games to really worry about it, maybe they will in another 5 or 10 years, hopefully by then we will be looking at VRMMO's.
A game can be sandbox-ish without PvP, however without the ability to PvP it is not a true sandbox. The ability to attack someone is one of those player-authored elements you speak of.
No, sandbox only means the game is largely controlled by players. The analogy really can't be any clearer -- sandboxes aren't complicated concepts. They're some walls and some sand, and that's it. The rest is up to players in the sandbox to do whatever they want.
So while PVP can be one of the ways players are put in control, PVP isn't a requirement to be a sandbox.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I have to agree that pvp is not a good basis for a sandbox that is going to carry a large audience. Pvp ends up being a meta activity that usually opposes world immersion. A successful sandbox needs to be able to have a world you want to be in, not just an arena for fighting players
MMORPG players are often like Hobbits: They don't like Adventures
It is completely ludicrous that you'd suggest we are even getting real sandbox MMOs. They either fall into the quasi-sandbox genre but still have way too many themepark elements to really be a sandbox or they are just garbage. What is going on is we just aren't getting good games. Doesn't matter what we ask for. Could be any genre. If all we get is garbage well, nobody is going to like it. Lets see how awesome an MMO does when its truely 100% a sandbox game AND it has the production quality of any other AAA title out there. Great example? Something like skyrim, but an MMO and have all the player tools to make it a sandbox experience. What does that mean? Means we have the tools to make content, effect the world and people around us and we get the tools to tell meaningful stories through our characters and our actions. Think Ultima Online but with a much broader toolset to reflect the fact that we're 18 years later and should have something to show for it. AKA - more features (right now most of the time games have less)
Then some of you would find another reason to cry about that game, or complain its to much money...Issue today is you can't make every one happy period... Far as some of these sandboxes, they make money thats all that matters... Also the true MMO player has moved on, MMO's are not what they used to be... because of poor communitys and the whole me, me attitude, which do not work in sandbox MMO's... So I find it funny when gamers blame, devs, when its gamer's as well,they cause issues for devs, and for other gamers.. Look in the mirror...
I think that as long as sandbox remains so closely tied to pvp, the genre will not succeed. There is a subset of sandbox fans that see the games only as an opportunity to harass other players, and by nature of a sandbox they are fully capable of doing that. In my experience these players end up chasing out the rest of the playerbase.
I also think sandboxes struggle with motivating players. With the themeparks you just need to run that crappy dungeon 3 more times to get the token to get the item that will increase your healing to help your group clear the dungeon you are actually interested in. Carrot-on-a-stick gameplay is constant motivation, and despite it being implemented very poorly these days, I still think it is an important aspect of RPGs. A lot of sandboxes neglect to give the player these important short term goals.
Asheron call 1... Had many PVE servers, and one PVP, with FULL loot.... Guess what the game lasted for years, and years, todays gamers ruined MMO's period... Guess what server was the favorite......
Mmoprgs are a niche market of video games Sandboxes are a niche of the MMORPG market OWPVP is a niche of sandboxes and devs keep sticking owpvp in their sandboxes
So, you have a niche of a niche in a niche market that can't get enough players to float...not suprising.
It's one of my major annoyances, that for some reason, sandbox developers seem to think OWPvP is essential to the sandbox experience.
Because people want more then just OWPVP......... For some reason all the new ones seem to be going the same route everything has to do with pvp once you reach a certain point in the game...
They do. What doesn't appeal to the masses is OWPvP. To many sandbox fans that's how you ruin a good sanbox game.
OWPvP is an integral part of sandbox mmorpgs. games that heavily restrict where you can pvp are called themepark games
PvP or no PvP in any form, has absolutely no bearing on whether or not a game is a Sandbox or Themepark. Your very narrow definition is way off the mark. So far off the mark as to be laughable.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
I've joined this late, but I often wonder if it's impossible to create a true sandbox because of the limitation of programming i.e. in a true sandbox, you would be able to do anything, otherwise people will call it a themepark - but how can a programmer legislate for a character doing anything? You will never get to the utopian sandbox as that is essentially real life - so why play a game to mirror real life?
I just can't see the thing that people strive for ever being created i.e. make your own rules type of thing. If people don't want it to that extreme, then what exactly do they want so that they can play in a sandbox?
It's because no one has managed to make an EvE Online type of sandbox on the ground, yet.. EvE is the only one with a real market and complex geopolitical gameplay along side of your standard mmo grind type gameplay that has succeeded for many many many years. But eh.. space ships arent everyone's cup of tea. Mmo's need to stop making worlds with a single market (auction house), for example..
You see, I wouldn't even call EVE a sandbox. You are limited by how you play it i.e. you can't land on a planet in the game, you can't fly your ship around in space (it flies for you), you can't walk around in pubic areas and do things with other characters - it's very constrained. Even taking over areas of space and erecting stations or outposts etc is no different that in a themepark pvp game of capture the flag; it's just played out on a bigger scale. In a true sandbox, you would not be constrained to the ships you are, the fittings you are and the issues that are in the game. The pve is scripted too, so I don't get why people call it a sandbox, when it isn't. It may be the closest to the sandbox dream, but it's not.
People will try to argue that you can effect the universal economy in EVE so that makes it a sandbox. Well you can affect the prices in WoW by what you sell on the Auction House.
Games don't fail because of OWPVP, they fail because they're bad.
Games do indeed fail because they are bad. Having said that, putting unpopular design choices into your game is poor decision making and greatly reduces market penetration. It is fine for people to Like/love owpvp but burying heads in the sand and reusing to accept that it isn't popular can damn a game.
I've joined this late, but I often wonder if it's impossible to create a true sandbox because of the limitation of programming i.e. in a true sandbox, you would be able ot do anything, otherwise people will call it a themepark - but how can a programmer legislate for a character doing anything? You will never get to the utopian sandbox as that is essentially real life - so why play a game to mirror real life?
I just can't see the thing that people strive for ever being created i.e. make your own rules type of thing. If people don't want it to that extreme, then what exactly do they want so that they can play in a sandbox?
I don't know or have the answer but originally my concept was to radical. It can be done but the programming is complex.
If you care to hear it, here it is.
Originally my game had no PvP at all. It ended up getting people trying to convince me to add the PvP so I went to a system of faction OW FFA where the NPC was tied to the player faction. That got so downturned I decided that if there was going to be PvP then fuck it not worth doing.
I wanted to make everything in the world useable and not have any respawning on private owned land. The public land was on a long timer but the areas that were bought were where you cleared the resources and used them to craft your own stuff to build the house, city or castle.
If you never logged in for a long period (6 months) your ownership was removed and the land was up for sale again. The new owner could live in it, salvage it for a new place or resell it.
The idea got such a low response and even showing the system in action so I removed the videos and said screw this shit.
I think i know why Destiny isn't coming to the PC now, and that reason is Overwatch, the real question is, if Overwatch hits consoles, will players jump ship and play it instead,
It is not a one or zero though. There is no reason why players cannot play Destiny *and* Overwatch.
Comments
A game thats all sand lacks substance and overtime will become boring. A game thats all toys lacks flexibility and freedom eventually its finished ...
So in my view a successful Sandbox game will also have a themepark element and a successful Themepark should have a sandbox element.
Lastly, PVP isn't an element of Sandbox or Themepark its a whole different discussion.
Sandbox games are niche in themselves, ones that focus primarily on pvp even more so, there just isnt that much call for them, so any new games trying to create a space in the market based on that, are likely to fail by default.
I think any Sandbox MMO trying to make a success of it these days, has to be more than just combat focused, and thats the problem with the newer games, they are too focused on combat whether its pvp or pve related.
Also the other "sandboxes" I've played are buggy messes with zero actual content for players to utilize to create a living player run world.
Playing: Smite, Marvel Heroes
Played: Nexus:Kingdom of the Winds, Everquest, DAoC, Everquest 2, WoW, Matrix Online, Vangaurd, SWG, DDO, EVE, Fallen Earth, LoTRo, CoX, Champions Online, WAR, Darkfall, Mortal Online, Guild Wars, Rift, Tera, Aion, AoC, Gods and Heroes, DCUO, FF14, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, Wildstar, ESO, ArcheAge
Waiting On: Nothing. Mmorpg's are dead.
Sandbox MMOs will not do so well, because new players start with solo games that theme park MMOs are based on. So a sandbox seems strange, they are not sure what to do. Games like Minecraft may change that, but for every Minecraft there are a thousand titles which predispose players into playing theme parks.
I would prefer a hybrid anyway, theme park wrapped in a sandbox sandwich. Best of both worlds.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Solo games, mobile games, focused instanced online games ..... yes.
Themepark old style MMORPGs ... i don't think so.
So while PVP can be one of the ways players are put in control, PVP isn't a requirement to be a sandbox.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Asheron call 1... Had many PVE servers, and one PVP, with FULL loot.... Guess what the game lasted for years, and years, todays gamers ruined MMO's period... Guess what server was the favorite......
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I just can't see the thing that people strive for ever being created i.e. make your own rules type of thing. If people don't want it to that extreme, then what exactly do they want so that they can play in a sandbox?
People will try to argue that you can effect the universal economy in EVE so that makes it a sandbox. Well you can affect the prices in WoW by what you sell on the Auction House.
Having said that, putting unpopular design choices into your game is poor decision making and greatly reduces market penetration.
It is fine for people to Like/love owpvp but burying heads in the sand and reusing to accept that it isn't popular can damn a game.
I don't know or have the answer but originally my concept was to radical. It can be done but the programming is complex.
If you care to hear it, here it is.
Originally my game had no PvP at all. It ended up getting people trying to convince me to add the PvP so I went to a system of faction OW FFA where the NPC was tied to the player faction. That got so downturned I decided that if there was going to be PvP then fuck it not worth doing.
I wanted to make everything in the world useable and not have any respawning on private owned land. The public land was on a long timer but the areas that were bought were where you cleared the resources and used them to craft your own stuff to build the house, city or castle.
If you never logged in for a long period (6 months) your ownership was removed and the land was up for sale again. The new owner could live in it, salvage it for a new place or resell it.
The idea got such a low response and even showing the system in action so I removed the videos and said screw this shit.
Now go ahead and find a programmer to do it.
If you are interested in making a MMO maybe visit my page to get a free open source engine.