Isn't that kind of the reason to call them "sandboxes?" I don't think I've ever played in a sandbox as a child and had a "story line" told to me by the makers of the sandbox. I understand what you're saying, and agree, but ask, "What defines a 'sandbox MMORPG?' Why is called sandbox?"
World Lore is one thing, but "story lines" (and/or quests) are quite another
Sandbox is often defined on player freedom and/or player driven content/economy, I'd say, that's why EVE is called a sandbox.
But a MMO storyline, a vibrant world full of npcs, quests, dungeons, events, etc, is absolutely compatible with a sandbox, it's pretty much like I said, they just put in sandbox mechanics and a basic rather hollow game-world, and expect that the sandbox elements, especially economy/crafting and/or PvP will do the trick for replayability.
This works when it works, but also means that those type of titles never feel anywhere close to the level of content, especially on the PvE side, that MMOs can provide.
Sandboxes relly too much on sandbox mechanics for replayability to avoid doing traditional MMO content, such as storylines, dungeons/raids, etc, etc...
This is a core problem of most sandboxes around, so sandbox MMOs often put the pitch of "freedom to do what you want, build, craft, survive, etc", but when it comes to have work done on something like a storyline they run away or approach it superficially.
There is a middle ground though, a sandbox could have quests though the two gameplay styles would need separate rewards etc. So crafting is the domain of sandbox while leveling is whats done by questing, that sort of thing.
I think a sandbox game should just be a sanbox.
The issue is that the game world needs to support reasons for the players to do things.
In Lineage 2, not really a "sandbox" per se, while there were quests most people didn't do them. It was a grind game. But the reason players leveled was becasue they needed to be more powerful for pvp and for sieges. The other reason was to level dwarves for crafting and gathering materials.
So a sandbox doesn't need quests. It needs reasons to be in the world that are fun for the players. Heck, it could even be a pve game where the enemies for sieges are npc's.
Give the players are reason to be in the world other than "I can build a house" and that should be enough for initial play. Obviously that will only last so long so other reasons would need to be made.
That supporting players with reasons to do gameplay is crucial, we have so often see the modern MMOs launch then take away reasons to play or play as much.
Well being more powerful for sieges and PvP would be the reason for quests in my vision of the best way to do it. Lots of grouping mind you, that's what grind always could do better that questing, that would need to be addressed. Sandbox is very much crafting and building that house, but also where RvR occurs.
In fact I thought the best idea would be to have regions which were the "questing core" surrounded by regions of "sandbox borderlands". I know some sandbox and questing purists will be screaming at the idea, but it could be the best of both worlds.
Sandboxes relly too much on sandbox mechanics for replayability to avoid doing traditional MMO content, such as storylines, dungeons/raids, etc, etc...
This is a core problem of most sandboxes around, so sandbox MMOs often put the pitch of "freedom to do what you want, build, craft, survive, etc", but when it comes to have work done on something like a storyline they run away or approach it superficially.
Isn't that kind of the reason to call them "sandboxes?" I don't think I've ever played in a sandbox as a child and had a "story line" told to me by the makers of the sandbox. I understand what you're saying, and agree, but ask, "What defines a 'sandbox MMORPG?' Why is called sandbox?"
World Lore is one thing, but "story lines" (and/or quests) are quite another
Let's take it up a notch, you own a beach resort which has actual sand which guests are free to do as they wish.
Sure, the can lay on it, bury each other, throw a frisbee or make sandcastles.
As the resort owner you can amp all of these up a notch. You can host a competitive tanning contest on a regular basis, awarding prizes and providing public recognition.
You could also host 2 on 2 beach volleyball competitions, set up leagues and invite ESPN 4 to broadcast.
How about hosting sand sculpt competitions? First by providing heavy earth moving tools so participants can make 3 story castles....then you can divide them into teams and provide battering rams to knock them all down. (If only someone made a video game like this)
Of course, the resort itself is another big sandbox of possibilities..and the water, such possibilities beyond just swimming and wading. (Jetski Jousting, going to have to trademark that one)
Now sure, you could just let players organize most of these activities but they would likely pale in comparison to what you the owner of the resort can muster due to your expertise and funding to organize them all
Sandbox video games are similar, sure, players can be given many tools but it doesn't mean such games wouldn't benefit greatly from some guidance and organization to maximize their fun.
Kind of like in EVE, while there certainly is no shortages of player created empires willing to invade someone's space, having scripted pve pirate incursions or sleeper invasions certainly does add to the fun, without the usual asshat factor player made content often brings.
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
Games have aspects that are great, but nobody has put together a package I really want to play.
I thought UO nailed it with having housing you could design and own in the world.
I thought Archeage, at times, did a great job at giving you a reason to craft and trade in a way that actually felt integrated into the game and not a system built on top. The political and jail system were cool, too.
Right now, every game feels the same - start picking up sticks and rocks.
They all end up gankboxes.
I feel like people develop a game, and then come up with design goals and a reason for it to exist after release.
1. MMORPG games are now created by people who sometimes haven't even played them.
2. games are being developed in such a way that the first place is profit. It means that the values are wrong from the beginning.
Add up these two facts, and you get a horrifying truth about how all games are made at the moment.
The only exception is probably indie developers. And among them (for obvious reasons), still half want their project to pay off. But they do it somehow... nobler.
Sandboxes relly too much on sandbox mechanics for replayability to avoid doing traditional MMO content, such as storylines, dungeons/raids, etc, etc...
This is a core problem of most sandboxes around, so sandbox MMOs often put the pitch of "freedom to do what you want, build, craft, survive, etc", but when it comes to have work done on something like a storyline they run away or approach it superficially.
Isn't that kind of the reason to call them "sandboxes?" I don't think I've ever played in a sandbox as a child and had a "story line" told to me by the makers of the sandbox. I understand what you're saying, and agree, but ask, "What defines a 'sandbox MMORPG?' Why is called sandbox?"
World Lore is one thing, but "story lines" (and/or quests) are quite another
no because Skyrim is also called a Sandbox like all Elder Scrolls games, yet they have story, dungeons, and content.
In the MMO space, Sandbox has become synonymous with PvP MMOs with little to no PvE. Thats why most of them fail.
Sandboxes relly too much on sandbox mechanics for replayability to avoid doing traditional MMO content, such as storylines, dungeons/raids, etc, etc...
This is a core problem of most sandboxes around, so sandbox MMOs often put the pitch of "freedom to do what you want, build, craft, survive, etc", but when it comes to have work done on something like a storyline they run away or approach it superficially.
Isn't that kind of the reason to call them "sandboxes?" I don't think I've ever played in a sandbox as a child and had a "story line" told to me by the makers of the sandbox. I understand what you're saying, and agree, but ask, "What defines a 'sandbox MMORPG?' Why is called sandbox?"
World Lore is one thing, but "story lines" (and/or quests) are quite another
no because Skyrim is also called a Sandbox like all Elder Scrolls games, yet they have story, dungeons, and content.
In the MMO space, Sandbox has become synonymous with PvP MMOs with little to no PvE. Thats why most of them fail.
Let Me ask you this.
Whats a post WoW (2003) PvE Sandbox MMO? name it.
I disagree about Elder Scrolls games. They appear to be sandboxes, but everything is "prefabricated." Skyrim, houses are "choose which piece goes where" with little room for individual decoration. Ever cut a tree down? Sure, there are specific ores one can mine, used for specific crafting recipes. Can you mix and match armor pieces? Where is the "sandbox" here? Don't get me into "spellcrafting." Right, there is ZERO spellcrafting.
Oblivion I never played long so will not comment, but I can guess since Bethesda used the same engine for this game.
Morrowind housing was just "choose your faction (Hlaalu, Redoran. Telvanni) and hire builders to "create"the factions pre-fab at a pre-defined location. Can you dig? Can you build? Can you create wood from trees?
No, The Elder Scrolls are nowhere near a "sandbox."
The last part I tend to agree with. When I an MMO calling itself "sandbox" these days, all that comes to mind to PvP-centric. It may have "good tools" that players can create with, but sandboxes are much more for me.
As Quizzical points out regularly, there are quite a few "sandboxes" out now (most are NOT post-WoW) that players who want "sandboxes" seem to repeatedly pass on. It's cool if they're not for them (not for me either), but asking/begging for an MMO to cater to each players' specific wants is untenable, don't you think?
I know what I want play, but it would "please" ONLY me. So I look at an MMORPG that "best matches" what I desire to play. Currently, no MMORPG comes close to meeting that criteria for me
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Sandboxes relly too much on sandbox mechanics for replayability to avoid doing traditional MMO content, such as storylines, dungeons/raids, etc, etc...
This is a core problem of most sandboxes around, so sandbox MMOs often put the pitch of "freedom to do what you want, build, craft, survive, etc", but when it comes to have work done on something like a storyline they run away or approach it superficially.
Isn't that kind of the reason to call them "sandboxes?" I don't think I've ever played in a sandbox as a child and had a "story line" told to me by the makers of the sandbox. I understand what you're saying, and agree, but ask, "What defines a 'sandbox MMORPG?' Why is called sandbox?"
World Lore is one thing, but "story lines" (and/or quests) are quite another
no because Skyrim is also called a Sandbox like all Elder Scrolls games, yet they have story, dungeons, and content.
In the MMO space, Sandbox has become synonymous with PvP MMOs with little to no PvE. Thats why most of them fail.
Let Me ask you this.
Whats a post WoW (2003) PvE Sandbox MMO? name it.
Well, that gets back to "what is a sandbox." That doesn't seem to be agreed upon by everyone.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Sandboxes relly too much on sandbox mechanics for replayability to avoid doing traditional MMO content, such as storylines, dungeons/raids, etc, etc...
This is a core problem of most sandboxes around, so sandbox MMOs often put the pitch of "freedom to do what you want, build, craft, survive, etc", but when it comes to have work done on something like a storyline they run away or approach it superficially.
Isn't that kind of the reason to call them "sandboxes?" I don't think I've ever played in a sandbox as a child and had a "story line" told to me by the makers of the sandbox. I understand what you're saying, and agree, but ask, "What defines a 'sandbox MMORPG?' Why is called sandbox?"
World Lore is one thing, but "story lines" (and/or quests) are quite another
no because Skyrim is also called a Sandbox like all Elder Scrolls games, yet they have story, dungeons, and content.
In the MMO space, Sandbox has become synonymous with PvP MMOs with little to no PvE. Thats why most of them fail.
Let Me ask you this.
Whats a post WoW (2003) PvE Sandbox MMO? name it.
Well, that gets back to "what is a sandbox." That doesn't seem to be agreed upon by everyone.
And it never will be agreed as long as we all understand that its fine.
no because Skyrim is also called a Sandbox like all Elder Scrolls games, yet they have story, dungeons, and content.
In the MMO space, Sandbox has become synonymous with PvP MMOs with little to no PvE. Thats why most of them fail.
Let Me ask you this.
Whats a post WoW (2003) PvE Sandbox MMO? name it.
Project Gorgon is the only one I can think of. Husband & Wife indie dev team. Looks like it was made with 2003 graphics. I would definitely call it a PVE Sandbox.
Agree with your point, not much money going into developing a PVE one. PVP full loot gank squad crowd has commandeered sandboxes.
Closest thing to PVE sandboxes now are survival games.
Sandboxes relly too much on sandbox mechanics for replayability to avoid doing traditional MMO content, such as storylines, dungeons/raids, etc, etc...
This is a core problem of most sandboxes around, so sandbox MMOs often put the pitch of "freedom to do what you want, build, craft, survive, etc", but when it comes to have work done on something like a storyline they run away or approach it superficially.
Isn't that kind of the reason to call them "sandboxes?" I don't think I've ever played in a sandbox as a child and had a "story line" told to me by the makers of the sandbox. I understand what you're saying, and agree, but ask, "What defines a 'sandbox MMORPG?' Why is called sandbox?"
World Lore is one thing, but "story lines" (and/or quests) are quite another
no because Skyrim is also called a Sandbox like all Elder Scrolls games, yet they have story, dungeons, and content.
In the MMO space, Sandbox has become synonymous with PvP MMOs with little to no PvE. Thats why most of them fail.
Let Me ask you this.
Whats a post WoW (2003) PvE Sandbox MMO? name it.
I disagree about Elder Scrolls games. They appear to be sandboxes, but everything is "prefabricated." Skyrim, houses are "choose which piece goes where" with little room for individual decoration. Ever cut a tree down? Sure, there are specific ores one can mine, used for specific crafting recipes. Can you mix and match armor pieces? Where is the "sandbox" here? Don't get me into "spellcrafting." Right, there is ZERO spellcrafting.
Oblivion I never played long so will not comment, but I can guess since Bethesda used the same engine for this game.
Morrowind housing was just "choose your faction (Hlaalu, Redoran. Telvanni) and hire builders to "create"the factions pre-fab at a pre-defined location. Can you dig? Can you build? Can you create wood from trees?
No, The Elder Scrolls are nowhere near a "sandbox."
I agree but many here have jumped on me for heretically saying that Skyrim is not a sandbox
I think many don't know how to categorize open world games where you can choose to do quests and dungeons "out of order" or not at all and throw the sandbox designation at them when it doesn't fit.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
The latest "Sandbox" MMORPG I enjoyed was Darkfall Online/Unholy Wars. The gameplay, atmosphere and overall feeling was top notch. Nothing has come close for me before or after. What caused it to fail was terrible management. Players waited and waited for more sand to be added, but they went from DFO to DFUW without informing the players and that was the start of the down...fall... DFUW attracted less hardcore players which was a good thing, but the trust was already shattered.
10 years later I am still craving a similar experience. It was absolutely fantastic.
Sandboxes relly too much on sandbox mechanics for replayability to avoid doing traditional MMO content, such as storylines, dungeons/raids, etc, etc...
This is a core problem of most sandboxes around, so sandbox MMOs often put the pitch of "freedom to do what you want, build, craft, survive, etc", but when it comes to have work done on something like a storyline they run away or approach it superficially.
Isn't that kind of the reason to call them "sandboxes?" I don't think I've ever played in a sandbox as a child and had a "story line" told to me by the makers of the sandbox. I understand what you're saying, and agree, but ask, "What defines a 'sandbox MMORPG?' Why is called sandbox?"
World Lore is one thing, but "story lines" (and/or quests) are quite another
no because Skyrim is also called a Sandbox like all Elder Scrolls games, yet they have story, dungeons, and content.
In the MMO space, Sandbox has become synonymous with PvP MMOs with little to no PvE. Thats why most of them fail.
Let Me ask you this.
Whats a post WoW (2003) PvE Sandbox MMO? name it.
The Elder Scrolls games (at least morrowind, oblivion and skyrim which i played) are not Sandboxes, they are very obviously themeparks.
The overwhelming majority of content is curated by the developers in the form of quests, guilds, dungeons, caves and castles. The devs created a large themepark (the world) and filled it full of rides (the quests).
The only thing that separates the Elder Scrolls games from typical RPGs is that they are non-linear. Just because you can choose the order in which you take the rides, doesn't make it any less a themepark.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Eve Online and XI are sandbox mmo that come to mind. They eased things up in XI, but the economy is still driven by players (Good and bad).
Like XIV though, I cant justify ANYONE paying more per month for ONE game, compared to something like PS Plus and Gamepass which offers hundreds of AAA games. Just not logical, regardless of how much I gush over XI.
Still SE's best multiplayer game ever though, by a country mile. Still somewhat of a sandbox. Very old-school with K.O penalties and needed to beg people for help.
Sandboxes relly too much on sandbox mechanics for replayability to avoid doing traditional MMO content, such as storylines, dungeons/raids, etc, etc...
This is a core problem of most sandboxes around, so sandbox MMOs often put the pitch of "freedom to do what you want, build, craft, survive, etc", but when it comes to have work done on something like a storyline they run away or approach it superficially.
Isn't that kind of the reason to call them "sandboxes?" I don't think I've ever played in a sandbox as a child and had a "story line" told to me by the makers of the sandbox. I understand what you're saying, and agree, but ask, "What defines a 'sandbox MMORPG?' Why is called sandbox?"
World Lore is one thing, but "story lines" (and/or quests) are quite another
no because Skyrim is also called a Sandbox like all Elder Scrolls games, yet they have story, dungeons, and content.
In the MMO space, Sandbox has become synonymous with PvP MMOs with little to no PvE. Thats why most of them fail.
Let Me ask you this.
Whats a post WoW (2003) PvE Sandbox MMO? name it.
Ryzom launched in 2004. Ryzom has no classes, no quests, no missions. Everything is player made. It does have some PvP, but it's not mandatory at all.
Semantically, Ryzom (Sep 16, 2004) released two months before WoW (Nov 23, 2004).
Not sure why MMOExposed said 2003.
EVE released May 6, 2003 FFXI May 16, 2002 A Tale in the Desert Feb 15, 2003
Even EQ2 predates WoW by a couple weeks.
Not that anything MMOExposed said made any sense, but there is a peculiarity there.
Would say Face of Mankind (March 27, 2006) was a neat social and sandbox type MMO that came after WoW, but sadly it's no longer around.
Ahh yes, Face of Mankind. The game were you choose one of five faces for your character.
I think that with 5 five faces they went overboard:
the name says "Face of mankind" not "FaceS of Mankind".
I "LOL'd", hoping you were being facetious
If not, my apologies
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
My first MMO was a 'sandbox' MMO. Star Wars Galaxies and I have looked at many since then, that penned themselves 'Sandbox'. What I kept seeing was free for all open world PvP in every offering and I tried enough of those to know the sandbox becomes a litter box when that content is force injected in to it.
Any sense of freedom, exploration and creativity goes out the window the second one attention starved asshat forces you to drop everything and entertain them. And it will happen all the time if you prove to be a 'worthy opponent'. In any case it is now no longer a sandbox.
My first MMO was a 'sandbox' MMO. Star Wars Galaxies and I have looked at many since then, that penned themselves 'Sandbox'. What I kept seeing was free for all open world PvP in every offering and I tried enough of those to know the sandbox becomes a litter box when that content is force injected in to it.
Any sense of freedom, exploration and creativity goes out the window the second one attention starved asshat forces you to drop everything and entertain them. And it will happen all the time if you prove to be a 'worthy opponent'. In any case it is now no longer a sandbox.
In affect they are forcing you to play their game. As the prey.
My first MMO was a 'sandbox' MMO. Star Wars Galaxies and I have looked at many since then, that penned themselves 'Sandbox'. What I kept seeing was free for all open world PvP in every offering and I tried enough of those to know the sandbox becomes a litter box when that content is force injected in to it.
Any sense of freedom, exploration and creativity goes out the window the second one attention starved asshat forces you to drop everything and entertain them. And it will happen all the time if you prove to be a 'worthy opponent'. In any case it is now no longer a sandbox.
Another case of where those first gen MMORPGs actually did a far better job of including PvP than anything we've seen since.
SWG has a great system that includes neutral, Rebel, and Imp players. It also has a lot of Rebel and Imp NPCs, including guards in cities. But the genius came in the flagging system: on leave (temp neutral, unless discovered by certain Rebel/Imp NPCs), combatant (hostile only to Rebel/Imp NPCs depending upon player alignment), and special forces (true PvP flagging).
You could take part in the GCW without flagging SF, but flagging up SF increased your rewards, and the largest GCW point rewards came from taking out other players of the opposing faction. Certain GCW events forced SF status because they were PvP events, but one could grind out GCW ranks without having to engage in PvP until they chose to do so.
It's amazing that SWG and DAoC existed so long ago, but modern MMORPGs have actively avoided learning so much from them.
I think many players like the idea of sandbox games, but then when they start playing do not like all the work needed, so the player base drops fast. I believe that hybrid MMO's are the way to go, because they give some structure and make things a little easier for the players and this keeps more players in the game.
Comments
But a MMO storyline, a vibrant world full of npcs, quests, dungeons, events, etc, is absolutely compatible with a sandbox, it's pretty much like I said, they just put in sandbox mechanics and a basic rather hollow game-world, and expect that the sandbox elements, especially economy/crafting and/or PvP will do the trick for replayability.
This works when it works, but also means that those type of titles never feel anywhere close to the level of content, especially on the PvE side, that MMOs can provide.
Well being more powerful for sieges and PvP would be the reason for quests in my vision of the best way to do it. Lots of grouping mind you, that's what grind always could do better that questing, that would need to be addressed. Sandbox is very much crafting and building that house, but also where RvR occurs.
In fact I thought the best idea would be to have regions which were the "questing core" surrounded by regions of "sandbox borderlands". I know some sandbox and questing purists will be screaming at the idea, but it could be the best of both worlds.
Sure, the can lay on it, bury each other, throw a frisbee or make sandcastles.
As the resort owner you can amp all of these up a notch. You can host a competitive tanning contest on a regular basis, awarding prizes and providing public recognition.
You could also host 2 on 2 beach volleyball competitions, set up leagues and invite ESPN 4 to broadcast.
How about hosting sand sculpt competitions? First by providing heavy earth moving tools so participants can make 3 story castles....then you can divide them into teams and provide battering rams to knock them all down. (If only someone made a video game like this)
Of course, the resort itself is another big sandbox of possibilities..and the water, such possibilities beyond just swimming and wading. (Jetski Jousting, going to have to trademark that one)
Now sure, you could just let players organize most of these activities but they would likely pale in comparison to what you the owner of the resort can muster due to your expertise and funding to organize them all
Sandbox video games are similar, sure, players can be given many tools but it doesn't mean such games wouldn't benefit greatly from some guidance and organization to maximize their fun.
Kind of like in EVE, while there certainly is no shortages of player created empires willing to invade someone's space, having scripted pve pirate incursions or sleeper invasions certainly does add to the fun, without the usual asshat factor player made content often brings.
"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
I thought UO nailed it with having housing you could design and own in the world.
I thought Archeage, at times, did a great job at giving you a reason to craft and trade in a way that actually felt integrated into the game and not a system built on top. The political and jail system were cool, too.
Right now, every game feels the same - start picking up sticks and rocks.
They all end up gankboxes.
I feel like people develop a game, and then come up with design goals and a reason for it to exist after release.
In the MMO space, Sandbox has become synonymous with PvP MMOs with little to no PvE. Thats why most of them fail.
Let Me ask you this.
Whats a post WoW (2003) PvE Sandbox MMO? name it.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
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
Project Gorgon is the only one I can think of. Husband & Wife indie dev team. Looks like it was made with 2003 graphics. I would definitely call it a PVE Sandbox.
Agree with your point, not much money going into developing a PVE one. PVP full loot gank squad crowd has commandeered sandboxes.
Closest thing to PVE sandboxes now are survival games.
I think many don't know how to categorize open world games where you can choose to do quests and dungeons "out of order" or not at all and throw the sandbox designation at them when it doesn't fit.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
10 years later I am still craving a similar experience. It was absolutely fantastic.
Like XIV though, I cant justify ANYONE paying more per month for ONE game, compared to something like PS Plus and Gamepass which offers hundreds of AAA games. Just not logical, regardless of how much I gush over XI.
Still SE's best multiplayer game ever though, by a country mile. Still somewhat of a sandbox. Very old-school with K.O penalties and needed to beg people for help.
Ryzom launched in 2004. Ryzom has no classes, no quests, no missions. Everything is player made. It does have some PvP, but it's not mandatory at all.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
Not sure why MMOExposed said 2003.
EVE released May 6, 2003
FFXI May 16, 2002
A Tale in the Desert Feb 15, 2003
Even EQ2 predates WoW by a couple weeks.
Not that anything MMOExposed said made any sense, but there is a peculiarity there.
Would say Face of Mankind (March 27, 2006) was a neat social and sandbox type MMO that came after WoW, but sadly it's no longer around.
Ahh yes, Face of Mankind. The game were you choose one of five faces for your character.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
https://www.mankindreborn.com/
Any sense of freedom, exploration and creativity goes out the window the second one attention starved asshat forces you to drop everything and entertain them. And it will happen all the time if you prove to be a 'worthy opponent'. In any case it is now no longer a sandbox.
Once upon a time....
SWG has a great system that includes neutral, Rebel, and Imp players. It also has a lot of Rebel and Imp NPCs, including guards in cities. But the genius came in the flagging system: on leave (temp neutral, unless discovered by certain Rebel/Imp NPCs), combatant (hostile only to Rebel/Imp NPCs depending upon player alignment), and special forces (true PvP flagging).
You could take part in the GCW without flagging SF, but flagging up SF increased your rewards, and the largest GCW point rewards came from taking out other players of the opposing faction. Certain GCW events forced SF status because they were PvP events, but one could grind out GCW ranks without having to engage in PvP until they chose to do so.
It's amazing that SWG and DAoC existed so long ago, but modern MMORPGs have actively avoided learning so much from them.