Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Why the lack of backing for Sandbox mmos?
nateslo
Member UncommonPosts: 49
I'm gonna make this really direct and to the point. I very unhappy with the current selection of sandbox style mmos out there right now. I've been gaming for a long time (15+ years) and there is really nothing out there that excites me. I want a really good sandbox fantasy mmo. There have been a few glimmers of hope, with Darkfall and Mortal Online, but both seem to be fizzling out. I dont think Im alone in feeling this way. My question is...
Why arent any major companies making Sandbox mmos?
Both Darkfall and MO are made by very small companies, just not capable of delivering the gaming experience and qualitly I want in a game.
I know some will say that the sandbox hardcore player base is just not big enough to make a game profitable, but I have to disagree. Just a quick look at forums across the web the show that many many others are looking for a quality sandbox mmo. I think if a major company would put out a polished high quality sandbox mmo, unlike this sloppy 10 year old looking stuff we are getting recently, they would be incredibly succesful, and would blow the genre way open for others to follow.
Comments
Sorry bro if the was a damand for them someone would supply them.
i hate to say it but it all has to do with cash. are there sandbox games out there sure but with the polish and support you want?
youll have to answer that.
The following statement is false
The previous statement is true
Have you tried EVE online? One of the best graphics I've seen in any games(yes, including non-mmo) and a complete sandbox with player ruled economics, system reingns, full pvp loot and much more...this game is as hardcore as you want
I think I actually spent way more time reading and theorycrafting about MMOs than playing them
Few want them, so few make them. It comes with the territory when you place yourself in a niche group.
Sorry.
Katsma is Lithuanian for 'he who drinks used douche fluid'.
Simple, really. Themeparks sell better.
No doubt there will be a resurgence of the sandbox MMO when the mainstream (themepark) market is saturated, but right now all the big-money developers are focused on knocking WoW off the top slot.
Besides, I still don't get the whole "sandbox" thing. Whenever I ask what makes sandboxes so great, the answer I always get is "the freedom" .. but freedom to do what exactly? .. no-one seems able to elucidate.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Because all the greedy little piggies want WoW dollars. It has nothing to do with their being a "low demand". People who say that are only saying it to either make themselves seem important or they truly don't have a finger on the pulse of that gaming demographic.
No, MMOs used to be made by geeks for geeks. Now they are created by CEOs for shareholders. And shareholders want their game "like WoW" because they want that chance to strike it rich.
If you'll notice, it's only the indy companies that don't have that heavy "AAA" shareholder pressure that try anything outside of the Blizzard recipe.
The days of making in-depth, detailed, MMO worlds has gone by and now we are faced with games based on minimal effort with a hopes for a high ROI from the box sales.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Source?
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
There are no real "sandbox" games out there because that's not what the masses want.
A sandbox is a toy, not a game. It's something to play with, manipulate as you please, and then scrap it all and start over if you're not happy with it.
Think of the simplest toy available, one that everyone around the world is familiar with... a ball. A ball is a toy. By itself, you can bounce it off the ground and catch it. You can throw it against a wall and catch it. You can throw it to another person and have them catch it, and then throw it back to you so you can... catch it. Hundreds of millions of children all around the world play with a ball every day.
Adults don't.
Adults crave structure and purpose. They take that ball and they design rules for playing and then they create a game. Basketball is a game. Baseball is a game. Football is a game. All of these games use a toy, and then apply rules, structure, and conditions for winning. This is what adults want. If that weren't so, then we'd all be playing catch with one another in our spare time, rather than watching (or playing) the games I mentioned.
The same thing goes for MMOs. EVE Online is the closest thing we have right now to a succesful "sandbox" MMO. EVE Online has rules and structure. The folks at CCP recognized long ago that they wouldn't be able to survive on the revenue from the sandbox crowd alone. They added content that gave players an opportunity to play their game on a more casual basis. They did this because they recognized that this is what most people want.
You may not agree, but that's not a requirement. The facts speak for themselves.
If there was a high demand the "greedy little piggies" as you call them would make sandboxes for the cash plain and simple.
The following statement is false
The previous statement is true
To have a character be able to advance meaningfully in a variety of ways:
1) Crafting w/o having to rely on advancing combat abilities
2) Having the ability to put up a building as a goods shop, or a tavern/bar, or a hospital, or any other goods/service storefront that would fit the setting.
3) To create stories and missions/quests via a variety of tools that let you put things in the game to drive those plots like various structures (forts, bars, towers, walls, etc.)
4) Freedom to employ your imagination via game systems that are essentially putty for players to form instead of relying on the devs to use their imagination (with respect to content generation) as a means to fun.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
What I don't get about these two terms is.
In sandbox games you can't make anything, the developers make it all for you and you just play it in a non linear fashion. Which to me is a themepark because in a themepark you travel round in a non linear fashion and everyone is equal so you can do things right away with yor friends.
In these Themepark games the only difference I see is the linear leveling system which means you travel through zones you're told to. Which is abit like Ikea where you have to travel ages following the arrows to get to friends if they're already in there. Which Tbh I don't think is like a Themepark at all......
Now Garry's Mod, thats a virtual Sandbox because you're building things from scratch like contraptions and you can make your own items us Maya or whatever and port them in if you want to. You use your tools to build things and we all know what it's about but thats more like a sandbox to me.
I don't remember that ever happening in EVE, I could move around the Galaxy with non linear progression and visit any of the sights the developers created for me. However I couldn't create my own content like at no point was I creating my own quests or getting sheets of metal and using a gun to tie them altogether. I can craft in WoW, theres an AH run by people in WoW and you can have guild PVP in WoW so they arn't arguments for a sandbox mmorpg. Capturing space isn't an argument for a sandbox because thats just a capture point game and you wouldn't call BF or TF2 a sandbox.
If there was a high demand the "greedy little piggies" as you call them would make sandboxes for the cash plain and simple.
Your assumption that I'm trying to play the "this demand is bigger than your demand" middle school game. Sorry, I'm not playing the measuring game. I'm just stating that there is a significant demand for those types of games created by a company with access to AAA money.
No, their WoW blinders prevent them, and many others, from acknowledging that the demand is there because there's no way to say, hey 12million people demand a sandbox game. That said, if a solid, polished one was created, I think it'd grab 500K+ subscriptions. That is significant.
Oh, and I'm not trying to convince you to agree with me. It just is what it is. *shrug*
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
To have a character be able to advance meaningfully in a variety of ways:
1) Crafting w/o having to rely on advancing combat abilities
2) Having the ability to put up a building as a goods shop, or a tavern/bar, or a hospital, or any other goods/service storefront that would fit the setting.
3) To create stories and missions/quests via a variety of tools that let you put things in the game to drive those plots like various structures (forts, bars, towers, walls, etc.)
4) Freedom to employ your imagination via game systems that are essentially putty for players to form instead of relying on the devs to use their imagination (with respect to content generation) as a means to fun.
I'll give you the non-combat advancement. That's a good one. More games need that.
Non-instanced player-housing was a blight on the landscapes of UO and SWG.
The last two sound like things roleplayers do every day on themepark games.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
To have a character be able to advance meaningfully in a variety of ways:
1) Crafting w/o having to rely on advancing combat abilities
2) Having the ability to put up a building as a goods shop, or a tavern/bar, or a hospital, or any other goods/service storefront that would fit the setting.
3) To create stories and missions/quests via a variety of tools that let you put things in the game to drive those plots like various structures (forts, bars, towers, walls, etc.)
4) Freedom to employ your imagination via game systems that are essentially putty for players to form instead of relying on the devs to use their imagination (with respect to content generation) as a means to fun.
I'll give you the non-combat advancement. That's a good one. More games need that.
Non-instanced player-housing was a blight on the landscapes of UO and SWG.
The last two sound like things roleplayers do every day on themepark games.
Non inctanced housing worked well in SWG and I didn't feel like it impacted on the world. The problem that SWG had was the developers never made any content to fit in them planets. I loved traveling round and going to places like Fort Tuskan and Jabbas Palace but it's like...... wheres the content SOE? We never got any content until RotW and it sucked.
It worked in SWG though because you could have different Planets so you could create advanture planets and housing planets. Thing is they made advanture Planets and they still put nothing on them lol.
To have a character be able to advance meaningfully in a variety of ways:
1) Crafting w/o having to rely on advancing combat abilities
2) Having the ability to put up a building as a goods shop, or a tavern/bar, or a hospital, or any other goods/service storefront that would fit the setting.
3) To create stories and missions/quests via a variety of tools that let you put things in the game to drive those plots like various structures (forts, bars, towers, walls, etc.)
4) Freedom to employ your imagination via game systems that are essentially putty for players to form instead of relying on the devs to use their imagination (with respect to content generation) as a means to fun.
I'll give you the non-combat advancement. That's a good one. More games need that.
Non-instanced player-housing was a blight on the landscapes of UO and SWG.
The last two sound like things roleplayers do every day on themepark games.
The idea for housing was good in those (UO and SWG), the implementation needed to be adjusted. I'm a fan of the idea that in those two games houses could only be put up in designated areas.I think that would have alleviated some of the eyesore.
Well, aside from Star Wars Galaxies, I'd like to know what games allow players to construct those buildings of have such a detailed crafting system to allow players to make pieces of art, like a vase, and have it placed in a home to be stolen by others (as part of the background, not advocating the stealing mechanic), and that allows players to write clues on to say a notepad that can be placed to be found so that other players can pick up a trail and eventually solve the mystery.
I mean, yeah, people can type some of this stuff out, but it takes it to another, more involved level if the right tools are in place.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
If there was a high demand the "greedy little piggies" as you call them would make sandboxes for the cash plain and simple.
Your assumption that I'm trying to play the "this demand is bigger than your demand" middle school game. Sorry, I'm not playing the measuring game. I'm just stating that there is a significant demand for those types of games created by a company with access to AAA money.
No, their WoW blinders prevent them, and many others, from acknowledging that the demand is there because there's no way to say, hey 12million people demand a sandbox game. That said, if a solid, polished one was created, I think it'd grab 500K+ subscriptions. That is significant.
Oh, and I'm not trying to convince you to agree with me. It just is what it is. *shrug*
Trust me if company's thought they could get 500k+ subs we would be flooded with sandboxs
The following statement is false
The previous statement is true
There are no real "sandbox" games out there because that's not what the masses want.
A sandbox is a toy, not a game. It's something to play with, manipulate as you please, and then scrap it all and start over if you're not happy with it.
Think of the simplest toy available, one that everyone around the world is familiar with... a ball. A ball is a toy. By itself, you can bounce it off the ground and catch it. You can throw it against a wall and catch it. You can throw it to another person and have them catch it, and then throw it back to you so you can... catch it. Hundreds of millions of children all around the world play with a ball every day.
Adults don't.
Adults crave structure and purpose. They take that ball and they design rules for playing and then they create a game. Basketball is a game. Baseball is a game. Football is a game. All of these games use a toy, and then apply rules, structure, and conditions for winning. This is what adults want. If that weren't so, then we'd all be playing catch with one another in our spare time, rather than watching (or playing) the games I mentioned.
The same thing goes for MMOs. EVE Online is the closest thing we have right now to a succesful "sandbox" MMO. EVE Online has rules and structure. The folks at CCP recognized long ago that they wouldn't be able to survive on the revenue from the sandbox crowd alone. They added content that gave players an opportunity to play their game on a more casual basis. They did this because they recognized that this is what most people want.
You may not agree, but that's not a requirement. The facts speak for themselves.
Yay another person that agrees with my so-called insane views. By and large most social communities are based and perpetuated by structure. To go further one could say that humans by nature crave structure (even though I disagree). Since our societies are built around structures most people have a problem when you give them the ability to function outside of a structure.
Though let's define a structure in this context: A defined set of ideas, rules and circumstances that are clearly marked by boundry.
This is what is offered by the current 'themepark' mmo's - clear structure. People, by and large, like this based on what their current social world offers them. When you give most people the kind of freedom a sandbox world offers they flounder because they don't know what to do. They don't know what to do because there isn't anything or anyone around to tell them or more basically there is no structure for them to build from.
A sandbox game is not necessarily a toy. Rather a sandbox game is an area without a clear boundry and in that vague area are a large number of toys, ideally anyway. These toys are all scattered about and there is no artificial construct (levels) stopping you from going to whichever one you want to. Some toys might simply be more complex (smarter AI, better abilities, better 'equipment') so you might need another toy to be able to use the former. Some might simply be larger so you need some friends.
Structured mmo's take all of these toys and then apply different sizes and colors to each. Then they are all arranged in order and each marked off from each other (by level, area, etc.) so that you must go in order. Most people like this. This is primarily because there's little to no guess work in what it is you're supposed to do. This is then called content which is associated as good. Where as exploring new areas, open dungeons and the like while enjoying the pure experience of it is called grind and associated as bad.
Structure has a beginning and an end. Meaning of course that you know when you've started and when you're done. Most people like that because it instills a sense of accomplishment. Of course you can still have a measure of this kind of linear accomplishment in a sandbox setting. The problem is that devs (and us, the community) construct one or the other, not something with some of both. A game is either full of content (good) which means pure linear accomplishment or it's bad. The real problem is that as a collective society of creators and enjoyers of mmo's we refuse to see any sort of middle ground. It's -this- or -that-, never both. Blue -or- yellow, never green.
If there was a high demand the "greedy little piggies" as you call them would make sandboxes for the cash plain and simple.
Your assumption that I'm trying to play the "this demand is bigger than your demand" middle school game. Sorry, I'm not playing the measuring game. I'm just stating that there is a significant demand for those types of games created by a company with access to AAA money.
No, their WoW blinders prevent them, and many others, from acknowledging that the demand is there because there's no way to say, hey 12million people demand a sandbox game. That said, if a solid, polished one was created, I think it'd grab 500K+ subscriptions. That is significant.
Oh, and I'm not trying to convince you to agree with me. It just is what it is. *shrug*
Trust me if company's thought they could get 500k+ subs we would be flooded with sandboxs
Well, then, the only thing I could take from this is that the people running these companies are sequestered from their audience / customers, lol. I just find it funny that they continue attempting to recreate Blizzard's success and they keep failing, time and again. Aion is the only one to get over the 1 million mark I believe and it had already been out for a year in Korea.
It'll be a good day as far as I'm concerned when these CEOs realize they can't beat WoW at it's own forumla, so they let it remain king of the themeparks and try to establish their own bit of royalty as king of sandboxes.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Isn't that sandbox supposed to give you ball, and player create Basketball, Baseball, Football, Rugby within game themselves?
I just think that no one out there have enough power to convince investor / game developers / distributor that sandbox MMO would bring enough players that would give them profit more than current mainstream MMORPG. I wish someone can very soon, though. I'm one of the person who looking forward to sandbox MMORPG where developer would give me lots of toy to play with and create my own contents. The ability to creatively create unique stuffs in sandbox game and show it to everyone else is what excite me.
Couldn't it be that there are no sandbox MMO's (or at least, multiple ones) out there because it takes _years_ to build an MMO? Just because someone demands something today (or last year) doesnt mean its there tomorrow.. These things take time..
There are no real "sandbox" games out there because that's not what the masses want.
A sandbox is a toy, not a game. It's something to play with, manipulate as you please, and then scrap it all and start over if you're not happy with it.
Think of the simplest toy available, one that everyone around the world is familiar with... a ball. A ball is a toy. By itself, you can bounce it off the ground and catch it. You can throw it against a wall and catch it. You can throw it to another person and have them catch it, and then throw it back to you so you can... catch it. Hundreds of millions of children all around the world play with a ball every day.
Adults don't.
Adults crave structure and purpose. They take that ball and they design rules for playing and then they create a game. Basketball is a game. Baseball is a game. Football is a game. All of these games use a toy, and then apply rules, structure, and conditions for winning. This is what adults want. If that weren't so, then we'd all be playing catch with one another in our spare time, rather than watching (or playing) the games I mentioned.
The same thing goes for MMOs. EVE Online is the closest thing we have right now to a succesful "sandbox" MMO. EVE Online has rules and structure. The folks at CCP recognized long ago that they wouldn't be able to survive on the revenue from the sandbox crowd alone. They added content that gave players an opportunity to play their game on a more casual basis. They did this because they recognized that this is what most people want.
You may not agree, but that's not a requirement. The facts speak for themselves.
Thanks I never thought of it like that
I'm going to take a stab at this. If you take EvE as an example. You will see that its player driven, you are one person in a larg galaxy trying to make it. You can mine, pirate, figth for space, produce ships/mods or just come up with your own idea to make money. People in eve use many diffrent tactics to get ISK/money. Its a bit like Manopoly in space
. In the end its about the money but how you go by getting it is up to you. Why not start a bank?, sell your cargo space? or Manafacture some drugs? it realy is up to you...
If you take your avrage Themepark MMO, what can you do?
1. Level
2. PvP
3. Rune endgame instances that the developers suply. over and over again.
Themeparks are static games the only thing you can change is your gear... kinda boring going from the intence Political scheeming of EvE to just sit down and lvl a toon to max and get gear...
But whatever floats your boat eh...
ps: Sanboxes are more like IRL and hey I understand that people play games to be entertained... Im just not one of them...
There are no real "sandbox" games out there because that's not what the masses want.
A sandbox is a toy, not a game. It's something to play with, manipulate as you please, and then scrap it all and start over if you're not happy with it.
Think of the simplest toy available, one that everyone around the world is familiar with... a ball. A ball is a toy. By itself, you can bounce it off the ground and catch it. You can throw it against a wall and catch it. You can throw it to another person and have them catch it, and then throw it back to you so you can... catch it. Hundreds of millions of children all around the world play with a ball every day.
Adults don't.
Adults crave structure and purpose. They take that ball and they design rules for playing and then they create a game. Basketball is a game. Baseball is a game. Football is a game. All of these games use a toy, and then apply rules, structure, and conditions for winning. This is what adults want. If that weren't so, then we'd all be playing catch with one another in our spare time, rather than watching (or playing) the games I mentioned.
The same thing goes for MMOs. EVE Online is the closest thing we have right now to a succesful "sandbox" MMO. EVE Online has rules and structure. The folks at CCP recognized long ago that they wouldn't be able to survive on the revenue from the sandbox crowd alone. They added content that gave players an opportunity to play their game on a more casual basis. They did this because they recognized that this is what most people want.
You may not agree, but that's not a requirement. The facts speak for themselves.
Yay another person that agrees with my so-called insane views. By and large most social communities are based and perpetuated by structure. To go further one could say that humans by nature crave structure (even though I disagree). Since our societies are built around structures most people have a problem when you give them the ability to function outside of a structure.
Though let's define a structure in this context: A defined set of ideas, rules and circumstances that are clearly marked by boundry.
This is what is offered by the current 'themepark' mmo's - clear structure. People, by and large, like this based on what their current social world offers them. When you give most people the kind of freedom a sandbox world offers they flounder because they don't know what to do. They don't know what to do because there isn't anything or anyone around to tell them or more basically there is no structure for them to build from.
A sandbox game is not necessarily a toy. Rather a sandbox game is an area without a clear boundry and in that vague area are a large number of toys, ideally anyway. These toys are all scattered about and there is no artificial construct (levels) stopping you from going to whichever one you want to. Some toys might simply be more complex (smarter AI, better abilities, better 'equipment') so you might need another toy to be able to use the former. Some might simply be larger so you need some friends.
Structured mmo's take all of these toys and then apply different sizes and colors to each. Then they are all arranged in order and each marked off from each other (by level, area, etc.) so that you must go in order. Most people like this. This is primarily because there's little to no guess work in what it is you're supposed to do. This is then called content which is associated as good. Where as exploring new areas, open dungeons and the like while enjoying the pure experience of it is called grind and associated as bad.
Structure has a beginning and an end. Meaning of course that you know when you've started and when you're done. Most people like that because it instills a sense of accomplishment. Of course you can still have a measure of this kind of linear accomplishment in a sandbox setting. The problem is that devs (and us, the community) construct one or the other, not something with some of both. A game is either full of content (good) which means pure linear accomplishment or it's bad. The real problem is that as a collective society of creators and enjoyers of mmo's we refuse to see any sort of middle ground. It's -this- or -that-, never both. Blue -or- yellow, never green.
The Problem I have with the sandbox freedom, is that there us no surprise from the game mechanics, if I can do just about everything.
Iam going to use the W word for my example-
In WoW, if I play a Paladin, then gameplay on other classes would be different and unique to them. If I run into a Warrior, I know he cant do what I can, and it fights different. If I roll a Rogue, then again, I gain a new suprising combat system, different from my Paladin mechanic.
But if I had to the freedom of no classes, then there would be no joy of trying new mechanic,s since my toon would be able to use everything.
The Problem I have with the sandbox freedom, is that there us no surprise from the game mechanics, if I can do just about everything.
Iam going to use the W word for my example-
In WoW, if I play a Paladin, then gameplay on other classes would be different and unique to them. If I run into a Warrior, I know he cant do what I can, and it fights different. If I roll a Rogue, then again, I gain a new suprising combat system, different from my Paladin mechanic.
But if I had to the freedom of no classes, then there would be no joy of trying new mechanic,s since my toon would be able to use everything.
Sandbox does not mean you are 'able to use everything', it's more that you have a choice of what you can do.
Using your combat example: Class-based game: I am a ranged class, firing at a melee class. The melee player runs up to me to attack because he knows I am weaker at close combat. He also knows all my strengths and weaknesses as he has a ranged class himself.
Skill based game (which is what many people see sandbox to be): I am firing my ranged weapon at another player. The player runs up to me, thinking that I am weaker at close range. I then pull out a massive axe and chop his head off because I also have trained in melee skills. That player is surprised as he didn't expect it. Alternatively I might not have melee skills and die quickly. It's not so cut-and-dry how things will pan out.
Name a sandbox MMO other than Ultima that has large market success.Simple put a medicore linear mmo will make money than good sandbox.EvE has 300,000 subs after five years,AoC had 800,000 at its peak.Aoc was not able to retain those people but that was because of bad mangement more than people upset at the actual game.You can make a reasonable guess if Vanguard,Aoc and War wait and brought out well polished games they will have a similar retention rate to what Aion will have.I can bet you after 6 months it will have more players than EvE and when companies spend amount that companies have to make quality games they expect make it back.
Linear MMO with more built in rules and gameplay maximize playerbase,Sandbox games don't.FFA pvp and full looting turn off a very large group players almost cutting your playerbase in half.It is about money think about you spend millions of dollars making a game why would make a game where half of the players could play won't play it.
The lack of backing lies in the people born in the late 80's and the 90's (the current majority playing the MMO genre) who have never experienced games that actually required you to think/do something by yourself and solve problems by yourself, they've grown into the "hand holding" game experience era, thus they want everything to be spoonfed to them in the easiest possible way, they lack the tenaciousness that used to be required in the early RPG games for completion.
They want everything NOW and not in a month, they want to be best from the get-go and not work for it, or do something for it