Saying WOW has few, if any, sandbox elements exhibits a lack of understanding of the core of what sandbox is.
Sandbox is player freedom. When you choose between 4 starting zones and 2-3 zones at any given level to quest in, that's player freedom. When you choose to run dungeons or craft or PVP or socialize, that's player freedom. When you choose to switch specs, that's player freedom.
Overall WOW doesn't offer a completely blank slate for players to do anything they want, and it's certainly a themepark MMORPG. But to say it offers few sandbox elements is a gross oversimplification. Every MMORPG out there involves both linear and nonlinear elements. It's just an overall tilt that determines whether players label it themepark or sandbox.
People on this site should really pay attention to this quote
Really? I was just about to reply Axehilts post; This guy has no clue what 'player freedom' means. If your definition of player freedom is to choose on which zone you grind your exp, or when you choose to 'switch specs', you clearly have no idea what player freedom means.
No offense but if only game you have ever played is WoW, don't even bother to post about player freedom.
That is so true, most of todays gamers only play a few MMOs and WoW being thier primairy MMO, haven't really exprienced much.
Both of you start with the assumption that WoW is the only (or one of only few) MMO(s) Axehilt has played. If ad hominem is your only argument, you'd be better off keeping your opinions to yourself.
There's plenty of freedom in many games but some people merely choose to acknowledge only a handful. This thread is bound to end up in a flame war over definitions and semantics.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Saying WOW has few, if any, sandbox elements exhibits a lack of understanding of the core of what sandbox is.
Sandbox is player freedom. When you choose between 4 starting zones and 2-3 zones at any given level to quest in, that's player freedom. When you choose to run dungeons or craft or PVP or socialize, that's player freedom. When you choose to switch specs, that's player freedom.
Overall WOW doesn't offer a completely blank slate for players to do anything they want, and it's certainly a themepark MMORPG. But to say it offers few sandbox elements is a gross oversimplification. Every MMORPG out there involves both linear and nonlinear elements. It's just an overall tilt that determines whether players label it themepark or sandbox.
People on this site should really pay attention to this quote
Really? I was just about to reply Axehilts post; This guy has no clue what 'player freedom' means. If your definition of player freedom is to choose on which zone you grind your exp, or when you choose to 'switch specs', you clearly have no idea what player freedom means.
No offense but if only game you have ever played is WoW, don't even bother to post about player freedom.
That is so true, most of todays gamers only play a few MMOs and WoW being thier primairy MMO, haven't really exprienced much.
Both of you start with the assumption that WoW is the only (or one of only few) MMO(s) Axehilt has played. If ad hominem is your only argument, you'd be better off keeping your opinions to yourself.
There's plenty of freedom in many games but some people merely choose to acknowledge only a handful. This thread is bound to end up in a flame war over definitions and semantics.
I don't care how many games he's played.
He either doesn't understand what "freedom" means in the context players are using it, or he is trying to undermine the meaning and concept of such games.
He either doesn't understand what "freedom" means in the context players are using it, or he is trying to undermine the meaning and concept of such games.
I personally think any less freedom than Second Life and you're basically playing a theme park. Does that mean I'm better at freedom than you, and you're missing the meaning and concept because you're just not free-minded enough?
I mean, c'mon. Does your game have pre-made in-game models? Sure, you can tweak some sliders, maybe change a few colors, but big deal!
I bet your sandbox of choice also has built in combat rules. Can you redefine the meaning of combat? Create your own monsters? Can you switch from an Arabian setting to an SF one to vampires?
How much freedom does your 'sandbox' really give you? Really? LImitless freedom? Hardly.
Can you be a cake decorator in your game? How many arms can you have? Games, by their very nature, restrict your freedom. If you have limitless freedom, it's no longer a game. Games consist of rules.
A true sandbox game would have you and the game developers sitting in a room, and as you talk to them they modify things to your whims. On the spot.
I think people should admit it's not like there's these big zones, and sandboxes are all over here, and theme parks are all over there, and hybrids huddling in the middle, segregated from both. It's a sliding scale, on multiple different subjects... games can have sandbox aspects in some areas, and then lack them in others.
I tend to agree with Axehilt and Meowhead. Saying WoW does not have sandboxy elements is a lie. Yes sandbox also needs player driven areas or some way to affect the game world (Which Ryzom doesn't yet we still call that a sandbox).
But Wow does give more choices than say EQ, which means it has more freedom and is therefore more sandboxy than EQ.
Eve may have more (I disagree but thats another arguement), but to say it has not is rediculous.
It's a scale with second life on one end and something else on the super mario bros on the other, WoW is somewhere in the middle.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
He either doesn't understand what "freedom" means in the context players are using it, or he is trying to undermine the meaning and concept of such games.
I personally think any less freedom than Second Life and you're basically playing a theme park. Does that mean I'm better at freedom than you, and you're missing the meaning and concept because you're just not free-minded enough?
I mean, c'mon. Does your game have pre-made in-game models? Sure, you can tweak some sliders, maybe change a few colors, but big deal!
I bet your sandbox of choice also has built in combat rules. Can you redefine the meaning of combat? Create your own monsters? Can you switch from an Arabian setting to an SF one to vampires?
How much freedom does your 'sandbox' really give you? Really? LImitless freedom? Hardly.
Can you be a cake decorator in your game? How many arms can you have? Games, by their very nature, restrict your freedom. If you have limitless freedom, it's no longer a game. Games consist of rules.
A true sandbox game would have you and the game developers sitting in a room, and as you talk to them they modify things to your whims. On the spot.
I think people should admit it's not like there's these big zones, and sandboxes are all over here, and theme parks are all over there, and hybrids huddling in the middle, segregated from both. It's a sliding scale, on multiple different subjects... games can have sandbox aspects in some areas, and then lack them in others.
Frankly, that's about as dumb an argument as anyone can make. The old "take it so far it falls off the cliff" argument.
And it puts you squarely in the same category as Axehilt. You either don't understand at all (despite the fact that it's been explained so many, many times) or you are trying to undermine it.
The take it off the cliff, take it to the extreme is a very valid way to determine the overall effectiveness of your argument. It's even taught as a rational when trying to decide between two answers on the MCAT.
It doesn't apply to everything but the sliding scale argument definately does apply. Sandbox is about freedom. The more freedom you have the more sandbox you have. WoW has more freedom than some games making it more sandboxy than them.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I'm sorry, I know some people in this thread love/like WoW very much and that they're trying to make a point implying that a number of MMORPG gamers don't really know what they want in their MMO games, which is a valid discussion.
But saying that WoW is a sandbox game is simply hilarious, especially since it was WoW that introduced the whole concept and design philosophy of 'themepark MMORPG': World of Warcraft by its very design defined the very concept of 'themepark MMO' as the 1st MMO that was recognised as such.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I tend to agree with Axehilt and Meowhead. Saying WoW does not have sandboxy elements is a lie. Yes sandbox also needs player driven areas or some way to affect the game world (Which Ryzom doesn't yet we still call that a sandbox).
But Wow does give more choices than say EQ, which means it has more freedom and is therefore more sandboxy than EQ.
Eve may have more (I disagree but thats another arguement), but to say it has not is rediculous.
It's a scale with second life on one end and something else on the super mario bros on the other, WoW is somewhere in the middle.
Venge
Who says WoW doesn't have any Sandboxy elements? Maybe one or two people, but I doubt most feel that way. Every game has some sandbox elements, that's true. But it doesn't make them a "Sandbox Game". It doesn't change that boring play style of being directed by quests through a zoned game world of stagnant repetition.
Frankly, that's about as dumb an argument as anyone can make. The old "take it so far it falls off the cliff" argument.
And it puts you squarely in the same category as Axehilt. You either don't understand at all (despite the fact that it's been explained so many, many times) or you are trying to undermine it.
I'm sorry. Sandbox is defined as 'precisely this much freedom, but no more, and no less'?
People keep saying 'Sandbox is about freedom'. Apparently it's about tightly limited freedom, since you believe that once I mention more freedom than the point at which you've drawn the line, I've driven it off a cliff? So a sandbox MMORPG is apparently basically like a sandbox in a preschool run by ex-prison guards.
I apparently missed the explanation. Can you explain exactly how much freedom it takes to unsandbox something, and how much lack of freedom it takes to do the same? Can you explain how nostalgia and personal preference affects the measurement, so I can get a better grasp on how this is supposed to work?
Quests have nothing to do with sandbox. In MMO you can choose to do them or not, which means there is a choice.
And no one here said WoW was a sandbox.
You agree with me when I say that WoW does have sandbox elements but you didn't agree with Axehilt when he said:
Saying WOW has few, if any, sandbox elements exhibits a lack of understanding of the core of what sandbox is.
Sandbox is player freedom. When you choose between 4 starting zones and 2-3 zones at any given level to quest in, that's player freedom. When you choose to run dungeons or craft or PVP or socialize, that's player freedom. When you choose to switch specs, that's player freedom.
Overall WOW doesn't offer a completely blank slate for players to do anything they want, and it's certainly a themepark MMORPG. But to say it offers few sandbox elements is a gross oversimplification. Every MMORPG out there involves both linear and nonlinear elements. It's just an overall tilt that determines whether players label it themepark or sandbox.
What he is saying here, and what you are and I are saying are the same things. WoW has some sandbox elements to it, however it does not offer a complete sandbox game.
He and you agree that all games have some sandbox elements but some doesnt' make it a sandbox. As he said it's just the overall tilt, or the number of sandbox elements, that determine what we label it.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I'm sorry, I know some people in this thread love/like WoW very much and that they're trying to make a point implying that a number of MMORPG gamers don't really know what they want in their MMO games, which is a valid discussion.
But saying that WoW is a sandbox game is simply hilarious, especially since it was WoW that introduced the whole concept and design philosophy of 'themepark MMORPG': World of Warcraft by its very design defined the very concept of 'themepark MMO' as the 1st MMO that was recognised as such.
Absolutely nobody has made the argument that WoW is a sandbox game.
The original comment was that WoW is definitely a themepark MMORPG, but it still has some sandbox elements... and more than some people will admit to.
Personally, I find the whole sandbox argument hilarious, because people apply so many different definitions to it, it's almost completely useless as a term here in mmorpg.com (Despite claims that there's a unified front and answer and that us people who don't 'get' sandboxes should have been paying more attention)
Some people insist it needs FFA PvP, some people insist there can't be any quests. Some people say that player housing is an integral part of the sandpark experience. I totally understand why that one thread was started to try and create an agreed upon gaming lexicon. Making statements like 'Sandbox is about freedom' leaves the definition glaringly open to all sorts of abuse (As I love cheerily demonstrating with the Second Life example)
This is what happens when an important term has no agreed upon definition. Everybody goes ahead and twists things to their own desire. Suddenly now, WoW is a sandbox...POOF! Some even claim it could be more "sandboxy" than EVE...GASP!
In RL humans are true masters of this phenomenon. If science or any form of logic cannot explain something, there will always be those that take the initiative and just make something up. The scary part is, other people seem to end up following.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
This is what happens when an important term has no agreed upon definition. Everybody goes ahead and twists things to their own desire. Suddenly now, WoW is a sandbox...POOF! Some even claim it could be more "sandboxy" than EVE...GASP!
In RL humans are true masters of this phenomenon. If science or any form of logic cannot explain something, there will always be those that take the initiative and just make something up. The scary part is, other people seem to end up following.
I actually don't MIND the really simple, easy to use explanation "Sandbox is freedom, theme park is directed content", just because it's SO easy to show how that makes sandbox a purely relative thing, and that MMORPGs boasting about being 'sandbox' is like a bunch of turtles talking about how one of them is 'really fast'. Sure. Fast... for a turtle.
The differences between sandbox oriented MMORPG's and themepark oriented MMORPG's are far smaller and far blurrier than a lot of people give credit for.
It's often more of a certain focus or prevalence of certain features in a game, a design philosophy of how these features were being handled and used that differed from how the same features were being used or implemented in another game.
Iirc WoW was the first MMORPG that was called with the back-then new term 'themepark MMORPG', and looking back at what made people use that term or recognise what it implies, it's more of a feeling, a perception than concrete requirements. If I should guess, it was Blizzard's design philosophy and approach towards MMORPG design that gave rise to this feel of 'themepark' when playing WoW after its predecessors: a smaller MMO world with a higher content density which was done on purpose, high accessibility ('handholding' by lack of a better word) and a less unforgiving gameplay, and most of all, a leveling experience that was predominantly catered for by a guided questing experience from one quest hub to the next.
The argument can be made that when looked at it differently, WoW has 'sandbox features': but there was a reason for that WoW was initially called a 'themepark MMO', the first of that kind, features or a 'look and feel' that made it be experienced differently from its predecessors or from MMO's that are now called 'sandbox MMO's" (justly or unjustly).
A feel as if you were on a 'theme park', if you will.
Originally posted by Meowhead
Absolutely nobody has made the argument that WoW is a sandbox game.
The original comment was that WoW is definitely a themepark MMORPG, but it still has some sandbox elements... and more than some people will admit to.
Meh, this post wasn't there yet before I started writing my own post.
Ah well, consider this new post an addition to your post, not a counter towards it
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
That seems quite reasonable Mr. Maverick, and I'm not going to argue with you on that. Also, in addition to adding a TOTALLY AWESOME avatar picture (People said I was MAD when I said I could breed a red haired part Asian baby, MAD. Now who's laughing? AAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAA... Ha), I've realized I can make people my friends.
I'm now going to start friending everybody who can make a reasonable argument, whether or not I actually agree with it.
(edit: Random note. I think I type these messages a lot faster than most people do on the forums, as I'll often ninja people repeatedly, and that's in between posting in three other topics, and another forum. Either I type really fast, or I just put less thought into what I say. Nothing wrong with being an airheaded secretary, I guess. Helps broaden the casting in detective shows.)
I'm sorry, I know some people in this thread love/like WoW very much and that they're trying to make a point implying that a number of MMORPG gamers don't really know what they want in their MMO games, which is a valid discussion.
But saying that WoW is a sandbox game is simply hilarious, especially since it was WoW that introduced the whole concept and design philosophy of 'themepark MMORPG': World of Warcraft by its very design defined the very concept of 'themepark MMO' as the 1st MMO that was recognised as such.
Absolutely nobody has made the argument that WoW is a sandbox game.
The original comment was that WoW is definitely a themepark MMORPG, but it still has some sandbox elements... and more than some people will admit to.
Personally, I find the whole sandbox argument hilarious, because people apply so many different definitions to it, it's almost completely useless as a term here in mmorpg.com (Despite claims that there's a unified front and answer and that us people who don't 'get' sandboxes should have been paying more attention)
Some people insist it needs FFA PvP, some people insist there can't be any quests. Some people say that player housing is an integral part of the sandpark experience. I totally understand why that one thread was started to try and create an agreed upon gaming lexicon. Making statements like 'Sandbox is about freedom' leaves the definition glaringly open to all sorts of abuse (As I love cheerily demonstrating with the Second Life example)
You're right that no one claimed WoW was a Sandbox game. And that did get convoluted here. But the real issue is that there are people here, like Axehilt, and like you just now, that are trying to make it look like "Sandbox gamers" don't know what they want. That's not the case at all. We all know what a sandbox game is and what isn't.
The rest, the sorts of things you just pointed to, are debates with the Sandbox genre itself. That doesn't change what a Sandbox is or isn't. Yes, some few poeple say that 'Sandbox" needs wide open PvP and many don't agree. But none of them would say that a PvP server in WoW is a Sandbox game, even if you added looting.
So what if there's a lot of different opinions within "Sandbox"? There's the same within "Themepark".
You're right that no one claimed WoW was a Sandbox game. And that did get convoluted here. But the real issue is that there are people here, like Axehilt, and like you just now, that are trying to make it look like "Sandbox gamers" don't know what they want. That's not the case at all. We all know what a sandbox game is and what isn't.
The rest, the sorts of things you just pointed to, are debates with the Sandbox genre itself. That doesn't change what a Sandbox is or isn't. Yes, some few poeple say that 'Sandbox" needs wide open PvP and many don't agree. But none of them would say that a PvP server in WoW is a Sandbox game, even if you added looting.
So what if there's a lot of different opinions within "Sandbox"? There's the same within "Themepark".
Actually, I've seen people say Earthrise is/isn't a Sandbox, that MO is/isn't a sandbox, that EVE is/isn't a sandbox, that Ryzom is/isn't a sandbox.
Some sandbox fans are REALLY picky! I mean, like super picky!
I insist you DON'T all know what a sandbox game is, and what isn't. It's really easy in obvious cases... WoW is a theme park. It's THE theme park, so to speak. It's like Disney World of MMORPGs.
There is no simple, unified definition that allows people to neatly divide games into two camps though. People also keep tacking on all sorts of things to 'this is a sandbox' that I would consider completely extraneous. Like FFA PvP (Some people SWEAR by that though. I have seen more than one person in threads insisting a real MMO has to have FFA PvP or it's just a carebear game wanting to be a theme park) Just look at the beginning of this topic. Look at the explanation of a sandbox. It's more like the poster is describing a specific game, rather than a genre. The definition of Theme park that was given is most definitely 'WoW'. As if gear based grinding was an absolute dividing line between theme park and sandbox.
Also, in addition to adding a TOTALLY AWESOME avatar picture (People said I was MAD when I said I could breed a red haired part Asian baby, MAD. Now who's laughing? AAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAA... Ha)
Heh, kudos. And yep, genetics is a great creation game: although not sure whether it's a 'themepark' or 'sandbox' sort
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
The differences between sandbox oriented MMORPG's and themepark oriented MMORPG's are far smaller and far blurrier than a lot of people give credit for.
It's often more of a certain focus or prevalence of certain features in a game, a design philosophy of how these features were being handled and used that differed from how the same features were being used or implemented in another game.
Iirc WoW was the first MMORPG that was called with the back-then new term 'themepark MMORPG', and looking back at what made people use that term or recognise what it implies, it's more of a feeling, a perception than concrete requirements. If I should guess, it was Blizzard's design philosophy and approach towards MMORPG design that gave rise to this feel of 'themepark' when playing WoW after its predecessors: a smaller MMO world with a higher content density which was done on purpose, high accessibility ('handholding' by lack of a better word) and a less unforgiving gameplay, and most of all, a leveling experience that was predominantly catered for by a guided questing experience from one quest hub to the next.
The argument can be made that when looked at it differently, WoW has 'sandbox features': but there was a reason for that WoW was initially called a 'themepark MMO', the first of that kind, features or a 'look and feel' that made it be experienced differently from its predecessors or from MMO's that are now called 'sandbox MMO's" (justly or unjustly).
A feel as if you were on a 'theme park', if you will.
Originally posted by Meowhead
Absolutely nobody has made the argument that WoW is a sandbox game.
The original comment was that WoW is definitely a themepark MMORPG, but it still has some sandbox elements... and more than some people will admit to.
Meh, this post wasn't there yet before I started writing my own post.
Ah well, consider this new post an addition to your post, not a counter towards it
EQ was where the "Themepark" term originated. Exactly for the reasons you pointed out.
The reason is because of the level grind. With such power gaps created between levels, you have to divide the game world into zones tailored for groups of levels. And once you do that, you have to show players a way around so they don't get lost in the wrong zones. That's where the term came from. Like being at a Themepark and using your tickets to see the whole park. Here to here to here to here.
"Sandbox" came about at the same time. UO was the first major MMORPG, and it didn't have this "ticket to ride" play style.
So, UO was a "Sandbox", and EQ was a "Themepark". It's that simple. It's how you play the game.
And WoW took " Themepark" to an all new level. They refined it to what works the best in such a game.
We're still waiting for someone to do that for "Sandbox".
I find the last post amusing because I was lectured by some 'MMO vets' on how vanilla EQ was a sandbox game and how they should do games more like that. Ha.
Actually, I've seen people say Earthrise is/isn't a Sandbox, that MO is/isn't a sandbox, that EVE is/isn't a sandbox, that Ryzom is/isn't a sandbox.
Some sandbox fans are REALLY picky! I mean, like super picky!
I insist you DON'T all know what a sandbox game is, and what isn't. It's really easy in obvious cases... WoW is a theme park. It's THE theme park, so to speak. It's like Disney World of MMORPGs.
There is no simple, unified definition that allows people to neatly divide games into two camps though. People also keep tacking on all sorts of things to 'this is a sandbox' that I would consider completely extraneous.
You have to start at the edges and the core, just like with songs, with some of them you can say 'yeah, that's clearly rock or soul or dance, those songs are the very defining essence of that genre' and then you look at the songs that are more inbetweeners.
So, relating it to MMORPG's: what MMO's are what made people think of the subgenres 'themepark MMO' and 'sandbox MMO'?
For WoW it's clear, it was the game that gave rise to the term 'themepark MMORPG'.
But I'd say MMO's like UO, EVE Online and SWG are sandbox oriented.
Also, the lack of features doesn't make an MMORPG automatically 'sandbox', that's all too easy. I'd call older MMO's that didn't have the abundance of features current MMO's have simply 'old school'.
EQ is an 'old school' MMORPG, but not a sandbox MMO.
Originally posted by Amaranthar
So, UO was a "Sandbox", and EQ was a "Themepark". It's that simple. It's how you play the game.
In the years that I played EQ, I've never heard EQ being described or tagged 'themepark' by MMORPG gamers, nor for DAoC or AC. It was when WoW came out that I first heard of this term, and it was always used in combination with WoW.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
You're right that no one claimed WoW was a Sandbox game. And that did get convoluted here. But the real issue is that there are people here, like Axehilt, and like you just now, that are trying to make it look like "Sandbox gamers" don't know what they want. That's not the case at all. We all know what a sandbox game is and what isn't.
The rest, the sorts of things you just pointed to, are debates with the Sandbox genre itself. That doesn't change what a Sandbox is or isn't. Yes, some few poeple say that 'Sandbox" needs wide open PvP and many don't agree. But none of them would say that a PvP server in WoW is a Sandbox game, even if you added looting.
So what if there's a lot of different opinions within "Sandbox"? There's the same within "Themepark".
Actually, I've seen people say Earthrise is/isn't a Sandbox, that MO is/isn't a sandbox, that EVE is/isn't a sandbox, that Ryzom is/isn't a sandbox.
Some sandbox fans are REALLY picky! I mean, like super picky!
I insist you DON'T all know what a sandbox game is, and what isn't. It's really easy in obvious cases... WoW is a theme park. It's THE theme park, so to speak. It's like Disney World of MMORPGs.
There is no simple, unified definition that allows people to neatly divide games into two camps though. People also keep tacking on all sorts of things to 'this is a sandbox' that I would consider completely extraneous. Like FFA PvP (Some people SWEAR by that though. I have seen more than one person in threads insisting a real MMO has to have FFA PvP or it's just a carebear game wanting to be a theme park) Just look at the beginning of this topic. Look at the explanation of a sandbox. It's more like the poster is describing a specific game, rather than a genre. The definition of Theme park that was given is most definitely 'WoW'. As if gear based grinding was an absolute dividing line between theme park and sandbox.
Well, if you read what I just posted, you'll there there is a definition, based on how a game is made to be played. The cases you site, I've seen them too. I cringe when I see them.
Comments
Both of you start with the assumption that WoW is the only (or one of only few) MMO(s) Axehilt has played. If ad hominem is your only argument, you'd be better off keeping your opinions to yourself.
There's plenty of freedom in many games but some people merely choose to acknowledge only a handful. This thread is bound to end up in a flame war over definitions and semantics.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I don't care how many games he's played.
He either doesn't understand what "freedom" means in the context players are using it, or he is trying to undermine the meaning and concept of such games.
Once upon a time....
Freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeedoooooooooooooooooooooom!
Voted Sand Box
My brand new bloggity blog.
FFXI describes the best play style for me. The quests in that game are good and its not about killing 10 crabs thank god.
I personally think any less freedom than Second Life and you're basically playing a theme park. Does that mean I'm better at freedom than you, and you're missing the meaning and concept because you're just not free-minded enough?
I mean, c'mon. Does your game have pre-made in-game models? Sure, you can tweak some sliders, maybe change a few colors, but big deal!
I bet your sandbox of choice also has built in combat rules. Can you redefine the meaning of combat? Create your own monsters? Can you switch from an Arabian setting to an SF one to vampires?
How much freedom does your 'sandbox' really give you? Really? LImitless freedom? Hardly.
Can you be a cake decorator in your game? How many arms can you have? Games, by their very nature, restrict your freedom. If you have limitless freedom, it's no longer a game. Games consist of rules.
A true sandbox game would have you and the game developers sitting in a room, and as you talk to them they modify things to your whims. On the spot.
I think people should admit it's not like there's these big zones, and sandboxes are all over here, and theme parks are all over there, and hybrids huddling in the middle, segregated from both. It's a sliding scale, on multiple different subjects... games can have sandbox aspects in some areas, and then lack them in others.
I tend to agree with Axehilt and Meowhead. Saying WoW does not have sandboxy elements is a lie. Yes sandbox also needs player driven areas or some way to affect the game world (Which Ryzom doesn't yet we still call that a sandbox).
But Wow does give more choices than say EQ, which means it has more freedom and is therefore more sandboxy than EQ.
Eve may have more (I disagree but thats another arguement), but to say it has not is rediculous.
It's a scale with second life on one end and something else on the super mario bros on the other, WoW is somewhere in the middle.
Venge
Frankly, that's about as dumb an argument as anyone can make. The old "take it so far it falls off the cliff" argument.
And it puts you squarely in the same category as Axehilt. You either don't understand at all (despite the fact that it's been explained so many, many times) or you are trying to undermine it.
Once upon a time....
The take it off the cliff, take it to the extreme is a very valid way to determine the overall effectiveness of your argument. It's even taught as a rational when trying to decide between two answers on the MCAT.
It doesn't apply to everything but the sliding scale argument definately does apply. Sandbox is about freedom. The more freedom you have the more sandbox you have. WoW has more freedom than some games making it more sandboxy than them.
Venge
I'm sorry, I know some people in this thread love/like WoW very much and that they're trying to make a point implying that a number of MMORPG gamers don't really know what they want in their MMO games, which is a valid discussion.
But saying that WoW is a sandbox game is simply hilarious, especially since it was WoW that introduced the whole concept and design philosophy of 'themepark MMORPG': World of Warcraft by its very design defined the very concept of 'themepark MMO' as the 1st MMO that was recognised as such.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Who says WoW doesn't have any Sandboxy elements? Maybe one or two people, but I doubt most feel that way. Every game has some sandbox elements, that's true. But it doesn't make them a "Sandbox Game". It doesn't change that boring play style of being directed by quests through a zoned game world of stagnant repetition.
Once upon a time....
I'm sorry. Sandbox is defined as 'precisely this much freedom, but no more, and no less'?
People keep saying 'Sandbox is about freedom'. Apparently it's about tightly limited freedom, since you believe that once I mention more freedom than the point at which you've drawn the line, I've driven it off a cliff? So a sandbox MMORPG is apparently basically like a sandbox in a preschool run by ex-prison guards.
I apparently missed the explanation. Can you explain exactly how much freedom it takes to unsandbox something, and how much lack of freedom it takes to do the same? Can you explain how nostalgia and personal preference affects the measurement, so I can get a better grasp on how this is supposed to work?
Quests have nothing to do with sandbox. In MMO you can choose to do them or not, which means there is a choice.
And no one here said WoW was a sandbox.
You agree with me when I say that WoW does have sandbox elements but you didn't agree with Axehilt when he said:
Saying WOW has few, if any, sandbox elements exhibits a lack of understanding of the core of what sandbox is.
Sandbox is player freedom. When you choose between 4 starting zones and 2-3 zones at any given level to quest in, that's player freedom. When you choose to run dungeons or craft or PVP or socialize, that's player freedom. When you choose to switch specs, that's player freedom.
Overall WOW doesn't offer a completely blank slate for players to do anything they want, and it's certainly a themepark MMORPG. But to say it offers few sandbox elements is a gross oversimplification. Every MMORPG out there involves both linear and nonlinear elements. It's just an overall tilt that determines whether players label it themepark or sandbox.
What he is saying here, and what you are and I are saying are the same things. WoW has some sandbox elements to it, however it does not offer a complete sandbox game.
He and you agree that all games have some sandbox elements but some doesnt' make it a sandbox. As he said it's just the overall tilt, or the number of sandbox elements, that determine what we label it.
Venge
Absolutely nobody has made the argument that WoW is a sandbox game.
The original comment was that WoW is definitely a themepark MMORPG, but it still has some sandbox elements... and more than some people will admit to.
Personally, I find the whole sandbox argument hilarious, because people apply so many different definitions to it, it's almost completely useless as a term here in mmorpg.com (Despite claims that there's a unified front and answer and that us people who don't 'get' sandboxes should have been paying more attention)
Some people insist it needs FFA PvP, some people insist there can't be any quests. Some people say that player housing is an integral part of the sandpark experience. I totally understand why that one thread was started to try and create an agreed upon gaming lexicon. Making statements like 'Sandbox is about freedom' leaves the definition glaringly open to all sorts of abuse (As I love cheerily demonstrating with the Second Life example)
This is what happens when an important term has no agreed upon definition. Everybody goes ahead and twists things to their own desire. Suddenly now, WoW is a sandbox...POOF! Some even claim it could be more "sandboxy" than EVE...GASP!
In RL humans are true masters of this phenomenon. If science or any form of logic cannot explain something, there will always be those that take the initiative and just make something up. The scary part is, other people seem to end up following.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
I actually don't MIND the really simple, easy to use explanation "Sandbox is freedom, theme park is directed content", just because it's SO easy to show how that makes sandbox a purely relative thing, and that MMORPGs boasting about being 'sandbox' is like a bunch of turtles talking about how one of them is 'really fast'. Sure. Fast... for a turtle.
Good thing no one said WoW is a sandbox.
Venge
The differences between sandbox oriented MMORPG's and themepark oriented MMORPG's are far smaller and far blurrier than a lot of people give credit for.
It's often more of a certain focus or prevalence of certain features in a game, a design philosophy of how these features were being handled and used that differed from how the same features were being used or implemented in another game.
Iirc WoW was the first MMORPG that was called with the back-then new term 'themepark MMORPG', and looking back at what made people use that term or recognise what it implies, it's more of a feeling, a perception than concrete requirements. If I should guess, it was Blizzard's design philosophy and approach towards MMORPG design that gave rise to this feel of 'themepark' when playing WoW after its predecessors: a smaller MMO world with a higher content density which was done on purpose, high accessibility ('handholding' by lack of a better word) and a less unforgiving gameplay, and most of all, a leveling experience that was predominantly catered for by a guided questing experience from one quest hub to the next.
The argument can be made that when looked at it differently, WoW has 'sandbox features': but there was a reason for that WoW was initially called a 'themepark MMO', the first of that kind, features or a 'look and feel' that made it be experienced differently from its predecessors or from MMO's that are now called 'sandbox MMO's" (justly or unjustly).
A feel as if you were on a 'theme park', if you will.
Meh, this post wasn't there yet before I started writing my own post.
Ah well, consider this new post an addition to your post, not a counter towards it
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
That seems quite reasonable Mr. Maverick, and I'm not going to argue with you on that. Also, in addition to adding a TOTALLY AWESOME avatar picture (People said I was MAD when I said I could breed a red haired part Asian baby, MAD. Now who's laughing? AAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAA... Ha), I've realized I can make people my friends.
I'm now going to start friending everybody who can make a reasonable argument, whether or not I actually agree with it.
(edit: Random note. I think I type these messages a lot faster than most people do on the forums, as I'll often ninja people repeatedly, and that's in between posting in three other topics, and another forum. Either I type really fast, or I just put less thought into what I say. Nothing wrong with being an airheaded secretary, I guess. Helps broaden the casting in detective shows.)
You're right that no one claimed WoW was a Sandbox game. And that did get convoluted here. But the real issue is that there are people here, like Axehilt, and like you just now, that are trying to make it look like "Sandbox gamers" don't know what they want. That's not the case at all. We all know what a sandbox game is and what isn't.
The rest, the sorts of things you just pointed to, are debates with the Sandbox genre itself. That doesn't change what a Sandbox is or isn't. Yes, some few poeple say that 'Sandbox" needs wide open PvP and many don't agree. But none of them would say that a PvP server in WoW is a Sandbox game, even if you added looting.
So what if there's a lot of different opinions within "Sandbox"? There's the same within "Themepark".
Once upon a time....
Actually, I've seen people say Earthrise is/isn't a Sandbox, that MO is/isn't a sandbox, that EVE is/isn't a sandbox, that Ryzom is/isn't a sandbox.
Some sandbox fans are REALLY picky! I mean, like super picky!
I insist you DON'T all know what a sandbox game is, and what isn't. It's really easy in obvious cases... WoW is a theme park. It's THE theme park, so to speak. It's like Disney World of MMORPGs.
There is no simple, unified definition that allows people to neatly divide games into two camps though. People also keep tacking on all sorts of things to 'this is a sandbox' that I would consider completely extraneous. Like FFA PvP (Some people SWEAR by that though. I have seen more than one person in threads insisting a real MMO has to have FFA PvP or it's just a carebear game wanting to be a theme park) Just look at the beginning of this topic. Look at the explanation of a sandbox. It's more like the poster is describing a specific game, rather than a genre. The definition of Theme park that was given is most definitely 'WoW'. As if gear based grinding was an absolute dividing line between theme park and sandbox.
Heh, kudos. And yep, genetics is a great creation game: although not sure whether it's a 'themepark' or 'sandbox' sort
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
EQ was where the "Themepark" term originated. Exactly for the reasons you pointed out.
The reason is because of the level grind. With such power gaps created between levels, you have to divide the game world into zones tailored for groups of levels. And once you do that, you have to show players a way around so they don't get lost in the wrong zones. That's where the term came from. Like being at a Themepark and using your tickets to see the whole park. Here to here to here to here.
"Sandbox" came about at the same time. UO was the first major MMORPG, and it didn't have this "ticket to ride" play style.
So, UO was a "Sandbox", and EQ was a "Themepark". It's that simple. It's how you play the game.
And WoW took " Themepark" to an all new level. They refined it to what works the best in such a game.
We're still waiting for someone to do that for "Sandbox".
Once upon a time....
I find the last post amusing because I was lectured by some 'MMO vets' on how vanilla EQ was a sandbox game and how they should do games more like that. Ha.
You have to start at the edges and the core, just like with songs, with some of them you can say 'yeah, that's clearly rock or soul or dance, those songs are the very defining essence of that genre' and then you look at the songs that are more inbetweeners.
So, relating it to MMORPG's: what MMO's are what made people think of the subgenres 'themepark MMO' and 'sandbox MMO'?
For WoW it's clear, it was the game that gave rise to the term 'themepark MMORPG'.
But I'd say MMO's like UO, EVE Online and SWG are sandbox oriented.
Also, the lack of features doesn't make an MMORPG automatically 'sandbox', that's all too easy. I'd call older MMO's that didn't have the abundance of features current MMO's have simply 'old school'.
EQ is an 'old school' MMORPG, but not a sandbox MMO.
In the years that I played EQ, I've never heard EQ being described or tagged 'themepark' by MMORPG gamers, nor for DAoC or AC. It was when WoW came out that I first heard of this term, and it was always used in combination with WoW.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Well, if you read what I just posted, you'll there there is a definition, based on how a game is made to be played. The cases you site, I've seen them too. I cringe when I see them.
Once upon a time....