I don't mind a theme park or story grind. What I do mind, however, is the lack of things to do during end-game. Am I to delve into redundant Battlegrounds and Raids 24-7?
No.
Sometimes I want to put the engine and neutral and just relax, e.g., plop down a house, start a shop, entertain myself with deep crafting, meet new faces and possibly join with them via player cities.
Why is the current mentality "either or"? I want both in one game.
<gasp> A compromise position? Wanting both questing and viable open world content? In one game?
Actually All MMO are sandboxes. Actually almost all MMO's are wow-clone themeparks.
People just keep adding on their defintion to what a Sandbox is the beginning. Nope, there is only one good definition and it's mine. Sandbox=player created content.
The games that where called sandboxes like GTA and Spiderman games. Sandbox just refers to game with out levels that was Sandboxes was in the beginning.You game forced to play with levels aka Mario level 1-1,1-2,1-3,1-4. That's you making a bad definition of sandbox.
I didn't make it up.All you anybody has do is type GTA and Sandbox.Almost every single maganize that review GTA calls it a sandbox.Sandbox just refers to non linear gameplay,MMO fans took the defintion and ran with turn into something else.The same thing with Ultimate Spiderman.
People keep fooling themselves,What if WoW hid player and enemy levels got rid of the quest marker and add player housing.What would be the difference between it and Ultima Online and the answer is very little. Line between Sandbox and Themepark isn't as big as people think.It is waste of time me going back back argue over a term because everybody gave different define of what a sandbox MMO fans will believe what they want.
If what i am saying isn't right why is Grand thef Auto,Oblivion,Hulk ultimate destuction,Prototype call sandboxes?Just type any of those games in google and you will see them describe as sandboxes.Why? Because Sandbox is about freedom of play not the world it is in.
I didn't make it up.All you anybody has do is type GTA and Sandbox.Almost every single maganize that review GTA calls it a sandbox.Sandbox just refers to non linear gameplay,
I didn't make it up.All you anybody has do is type GTA and Sandbox.Almost every single maganize that review GTA calls it a sandbox.Sandbox just refers to non linear gameplay,
By that definition WOW is a sandbox.
Starting point A: level 1 new character. Ending point B: Max level. WoW is linear and not sandbox. happy to help!
GTA is a sandbox single player RPG. But more would be expected from a sandbox MMO because it allows for players to interact with each other so we could have player housing, cities, politics, more diverse range of player specialization, etc. None of that would be applicable to a single player game like GTA- I mean, can you imagine being a dancer in GTA the way you could be in pre-CU SWG? Haha.. Who would you entertain? NPCs?
So GTA is about as sandbox as reasonable for a single player game to get... No reason to have more customization for a game where nobody sees you or what you've built.
I liked how the OP listed the sandbox games it got me pretty excited. But after looking them all up, the only one I really feel is viable is Vanguard- Which is a game that I am very glad I quit after 3 days of addiction, because otherwise I would probably be one of those whiners on these forums saying that Vanguards really good but theres not enough people playing it and SOE is letting it go down the drain. I feel sorry for Vanguard players. I don't want to watch a game die right after I join it.
I will now go back to my lonely playing of rollercoaster tycoon, mount & blade, and soldat.
I didn't make it up.All you anybody has do is type GTA and Sandbox.Almost every single maganize that review GTA calls it a sandbox.Sandbox just refers to non linear gameplay,
By that definition WOW is a sandbox.
Which is why i said all MMO are sandboxes.Now the thing is all MMO are not good virtual worlds.WoW does a crappy job of being virtual world while Ultima and Everquest do way better job of being virtual world making you feel like you are living in the world.
WoW and wow clones are trying to a good video game rpg where the players realize they are playing a game.Everquest and Ultima did good job of being a living world,Where players forget get they are playing a video game.
The battle should not be sandbox and themeparks.The battle is "Ease" versus "Immersion".
I didn't make it up.All you anybody has do is type GTA and Sandbox.Almost every single maganize that review GTA calls it a sandbox.Sandbox just refers to non linear gameplay,
By that definition WOW is a sandbox.
Starting point A: level 1 new character. Ending point B: Max level. WoW is linear and not sandbox. happy to help!
That's the definition of all games, all games are themepark then.
Which is why i said all MMO are sandboxes.Now the thing is all MMO are not good virtual worlds.WoW does a crappy job of being virtual world while Ultima and Everquest do way better job of being virtual world making you feel like you are living in the world.
How you "feel" is subjective, need a..... OK HOW DO YOU REPLY TO SOMETHING OUTSIDE OF THE DAMN QUOTES?!
I didn't make it up.All you anybody has do is type GTA and Sandbox.Almost every single maganize that review GTA calls it a sandbox.Sandbox just refers to non linear gameplay,
By that definition WOW is a sandbox.
Which is why i said all MMO are sandboxes.Now the thing is all MMO are not good virtual worlds.WoW does a crappy job of being virtual world while Ultima and Everquest do way better job of being virtual world making you feel like you are living in the world.
WoW and wow clones are trying to a good video game rpg where the players realize they are playing a game.Everquest and Ultima did good job of being a living world,Where players forget get they are playing a video game.
The battle should not be sandbox and themeparks.The battle is "Ease" versus "Immersion".
I generally agree Luck. WoW has several different ways of leveling to max right now. PvP, battleground craft, dungons, quests, gathering. You can get to max with all of them.
WoW has more options than most games. Add housing, hide quests and it is pretty much the same as what most people consider a sandbox.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Which is why i said all MMO are sandboxes.Now the thing is all MMO are not good virtual worlds.WoW does a crappy job of being virtual world while Ultima and Everquest do way better job of being virtual world making you feel like you are living in the world.
How you "feel" is subjective, need a..... OK HOW DO YOU REPLY TO SOMETHING OUTSIDE OF THE DAMN QUOTES?!
"Feel" is subjective but WoW and themeparks does not care about immersion,Ease is the number goal hence dungeon finder,group finder,threat meters,Instances,Question mark abobe the head.Themeparks are about getting you to the fun quickly.
Vitrtual Worlds games are about immersion trying to get to forget that you are playing a videogame,Menus are keep to minium,Anything to take you of the game is aviod like instances,quest finder,group finders,Arrow above the head etc..Things are put in place to give world size like no fast travel or No global auction houses.Human interaction is more important than npc you are give tools in th game to work together.What people actually want is Immersion which why EQ(Themepark hybrid) and Ultima(a sandbox) is loved by gamers.It is why people love the first 20 levels of AoC.
Good MMORPG make you forget for a little while you are playing a videogame.It is about FEEL
Archage,Dawntide,The Repouplation,Origins,Embers of Careus
Vanguard? Sandbox and old school? What is your definition of those terms? Because whatever they are, they are wrong. Vanguard is much like EQ, 10 years ago is not old shool. And there is nothing sandbox about vanguard. It's a linear game, albeit with a large, explorable world.
MO - bugged, poorly developed open world pvp arena with some crafting, broken territory control and housing
FE - Not a bad game, but it's now turned into cash shop scam, have fun with that
Darkfall - better than MO, but they are just too slow to develop the game
ER - really? Have you played this game? Infinitely worse than MO, if that is possible.
Ryzom - old, and not being developed anymore. Not a bad game, just really outdated and too low pop.
Eve - wont argue there, only sandbox game worth playing imo
Perp - blantant Eve clone. I like the game, just not enough there.
Mang - not my style
Xyson - underdevoloped game with 15 people playing it. Will never be finished.
Archage - maybe we will see this 2012? Who knows.
Dawntide - Played this a bit, really unfinished, poor engine optimization and graphics, good ideas, underdevoloped.
So yeah, we really have a ton of choices. I am totally blind. Please op, open my eyes!
In this case the judgement is made based on the fact that I have yet to see a remotely successful MMORPG Sandbox which didn't also start the genre while I also see MMORPGs which take steps towards being tigher-more-polished experiences (aka Themeparks) being more and more successful.
It's also paired with knowledge of what players generally seek out of games, and seeing how Sandbox mechanics line up with that vs. Themepark mechanics. Add in the fact that Themeparks do few-things-well while Sandbox tend to do many-things-poorly. Add in the fact that Simulations (Sandboxes) have historically performed worse than Games (Themeparks) throughout the entire history of videogaming.
It's a hardcore niche which will always see a trickle of low-medium budget games, but anyone who invests AAA resources into it is nuts.
The way to make a great sandbox is to make it incrementally, much like Haven & Hearth or Terraria, and ideally to not rely on being an MMO (because Niche + MMO is an awkward combo and Sandbox + MMO is also a bit awkward,) like Minecraft. So you start with an extremely basic tech which is flexible enough to add new features cheaply. It'll be interesting to see what comes out of Salem (which might take a similar approach to H&H) though the decision to go 3D is a bit odd since 2D made H&H's development lightning quick (with a professional-quality artist it could've been amazing.)
You're assuming that none of the Farmville and RTS Facebook types would transition to something like a hybrid with sandbox features if there were areas that protected their little communities from the pvpers. And your assumption could be %100 correct. I'd still like to see some numbers, though.
I'd also like to see a solid, enjoyable AAA hybrid with heavy sandbox features release in the near future. Archeage I suppose is the closest to that. We'll see whether the developers are willing to curb their pvpers a bit. If so, I might find out if something like what I'm interested in will fly or flop. If not, it will be another Darkfall, but maybe with more complexity and content it will still be successful as a pvp game. Not sure what the development costs are on it either way, though. It might be in the lower range.
Well I'd agree with that, if we're using the looser definition of sandbox which includes FarmVille.
But I doubt the hardcore sandbox lovers here consider FarmVille a sandbox MMORPG. I don't think I'd call it that either, even though it's clearly one of the most popular sandbox game experiences to date. Either way, it's certainly not the type of game the sandbox MMORPG crowd wants when they ask for AAA sandboxes to be made.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Every feature you list would definitely be considered a sandbox feature, but to require that sandbox games have those features is kind of ridiculous.
By your definition, UO was not a sandbox. It did not have any real kind of ecology, mobs just respawned at spawn points. Also, you could only dye clothes a solid color. In fact, I don't know if any MMORPG released would satisfy your definition of sandbox. Maybe Eve, I've never played it so I'm not really sure.
Wrong. When UO launched there was a functional ecosystem for the monsters and animals.
Later on it had to be recoded because the respawn rate was way too high. Its another "sandbox" theory that sounds incredibly awesome but doesn't really work in practice.
Well I'd agree with that, if we're using the looser definition of sandbox which includes FarmVille.
But I doubt the hardcore sandbox lovers here consider FarmVille a sandbox MMORPG. I don't think I'd call it that either, even though it's clearly one of the most popular sandbox game experiences to date. Either way, it's certainly not the type of game the sandbox MMORPG crowd wants when they ask for AAA sandboxes to be made.
You misunderstand. I don't say games like Farmville are sandbox MMOs, what I'm saying is that the right sandbox (or hybrid) MMO could draw some of the FB game crowd, and RTS crowd. And those are some good sized crowds. But the right MMO would not be a game like Darkfall or Mortal Online.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
Archage,Dawntide,The Repouplation,Origins,Embers of Careus
I am pretty sure i forgot some but the point remains the same,Complainers have selective vision when "they say omg they aren't making any sandboxes" or "omg they aren't making like they use" which is BS.
Here is the catch one game on the two list,Vanguard(which some people won't call a sandbox but is probably the most old school game) is made by support by major company all the rest are Indie games.All the people who complain about Sandbox games or "MMO aren't same" this what they are really saying
"I want major companies to spend 100 million on a game that will probably be a niche game,I am ignoring all the small games with the playing style i want because i want huge game support by big company"
I understand it somewhat but does not make any sense i see people going WoW style game suck and keep trying them,Then i see them say i wish there was a game that has a large open world(vanguard),deep game play(Vanguard) interesting classes(vanguard),great crafting(Vanguard) good player housing(vanguard).There is a game on the market that has everything you want why aren't you playing it? The funny thing is i would bet money if SOE closed Vanguard,wait six months released a new game called Ranguard which looks mighty familiar to Vanguard,that game would be huge success.
They are make games you like they are indie games not by companies so they have lesser resources which normal mean inferior graphics but playstyle you are looking for right now.Will you ever get one of those 100 million games to be a sandbox,Maybe 38 studios is making a game they made sandbox rpg single player game their mmo might be influnence by that,EverQuest Next might go back to more of its roots,You might get the perfect storm of IP and gamestyle like SWG before the change.
Please stop being blind though They never stop making sandboxes or strong virtual world mmos,They just became minority instead of majority when Ultima,EQ and others rule the market and they are now being made by small companies who can afford to risk to make a niche game.The mmo market is so big today they is more than enough room for a free to play games,sub games,Sandboxes game,theme park games,Action mmo,tab targeting mmo,etc..MMO should not be one style of game or one style of pricing...I am curious to what going to happen when Archage comes out which will have great graphics with huge budget..You will here people say it is not sandboxy enough...I don't like Asian art style.I am not saying to settle for bad games but please stop pretending that you are not being present with enough of fair choices of gaming for your game style.
You said it yourself Vanguard is not a sandbox and its REALY NOT A SANDBOX its a TEEMPARC and it failed first year this reason why it will never recover and prolly also with sony at helm after they took over.
Only a free two play model like LOTR it prolly survives not with P2P
I generally agree Luck. WoW has several different ways of leveling to max right now. PvP, battleground craft, dungons, quests, gathering. You can get to max with all of them.
WoW has more options than most games. Add housing, hide quests and it is pretty much the same as what most people consider a sandbox.
Venge
Did I miss something on recent WoW patch notes, but I don't recall being able to level up by crafting or gathering. I know these are options people want and features from other games.
I generally agree Luck. WoW has several different ways of leveling to max right now. PvP, battleground craft, dungons, quests, gathering. You can get to max with all of them.
WoW has more options than most games. Add housing, hide quests and it is pretty much the same as what most people consider a sandbox.
Venge
Did I miss something on recent WoW patch notes, but I don't recall being able to level up by crafting or gathering. I know these are options people want and features from other games.
seriously .. you don't level up by gathering. if you consider that a leveling path simply because you get a few pennies worth of xp for gathering a node .. idk what to tell you. you are obviously talking out of your backside.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity. I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
I didn't make it up.All you anybody has do is type GTA and Sandbox.Almost every single maganize that review GTA calls it a sandbox.Sandbox just refers to non linear gameplay,
By that definition WOW is a sandbox.
Which is why i said all MMO are sandboxes.Now the thing is all MMO are not good virtual worlds.WoW does a crappy job of being virtual world while Ultima and Everquest do way better job of being virtual world making you feel like you are living in the world.
WoW and wow clones are trying to a good video game rpg where the players realize they are playing a game.Everquest and Ultima did good job of being a living world,Where players forget get they are playing a video game.
The battle should not be sandbox and themeparks.The battle is "Ease" versus "Immersion".
I think i understand why you create this kind of thread then. You obviously have a very serious definition problem.
Sandbox refer to those sand box where kids play to make castle and stuff like that, they bring their toys, and can do anything they want with the sand. This is a way to design some mmo like Uo and Eve. They give to the player as much control as possible.
Themepark refer to Walt Disney like park that have different themes all around the country side. Once again mmo with such design refer to the fact you go play those game to get some entertainment, and watch the different and many aspect those park have. You actually are more like a witness, at the opposite as sandbox.
If you can't make this kind of distinction, there is nothing to talk about with you. Would you want to talk about an apple taste with someone that think they are the same than orange? i personally wouldn't, that would be boring and a waste of time tbh.
Sandbox are build around the UO model, themepark are build around the EQ model. I think this accepted enough to not need more explanations. That is the basic, if you don't understand that, i don't think you can really talk about those things.
I generally agree Luck. WoW has several different ways of leveling to max right now. PvP, battleground craft, dungons, quests, gathering. You can get to max with all of them.
WoW has more options than most games. Add housing, hide quests and it is pretty much the same as what most people consider a sandbox.
Venge
Did I miss something on recent WoW patch notes, but I don't recall being able to level up by crafting or gathering. I know these are options people want and features from other games.
Gathering, yes. Crafting, I don't think so.
Good luck to level up 1-85 with gathering !
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.? -Albert Einstein
"The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write. So if you notice that I'm no longer answering your nonsense, stop trying... because you just joined my block list.
I generally agree Luck. WoW has several different ways of leveling to max right now. PvP, battleground craft, dungons, quests, gathering. You can get to max with all of them.
WoW has more options than most games. Add housing, hide quests and it is pretty much the same as what most people consider a sandbox.
Venge
Did I miss something on recent WoW patch notes, but I don't recall being able to level up by crafting or gathering. I know these are options people want and features from other games.
Gathering, yes. Crafting, I don't think so.
Good luck to level up 1-85 with gathering !
My mistake sorry. I just went and checked, no I still can't gain xp by crafting - hopefully that will change. However I do get xp by gathering. And people have leveled 1-85 just by gathering. Several months ago there was a big deal about it on these boards.
Personally I would find that totally boring, however it is another path.
Venge.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
To me, a sandbox game means your general location in the world (town, zone, etc.) has very little to do with your character's level. Games with clearly-defined borders and certain level ranges within those borders automatically disqualify themselves from being considered "sandbox" games when they make it so you can not progress your character in those areas after a certain point.
Fallen Earth and Vanguard are disqualified from being considered true sandbox games, in my opinion. They do have impressive world sizes, but higher-level players have no reason to go back to beginning zones to progress their characters unless it is for a crafting ingredient.
True sandbox games today are too focused on PvP, in my opinion. MO, DF, and ER ruined their fun for me by turning the game into a free-for-all noob gankfest.
I haven't played the other "sandbox" games listed in the OP's post. They don't have anything to appeal to me.
Comments
<gasp> A compromise position? Wanting both questing and viable open world content? In one game?
Actually, this sounds like a pretty good idea.
I didn't make it up.All you anybody has do is type GTA and Sandbox.Almost every single maganize that review GTA calls it a sandbox.Sandbox just refers to non linear gameplay,MMO fans took the defintion and ran with turn into something else.The same thing with Ultimate Spiderman.
People keep fooling themselves,What if WoW hid player and enemy levels got rid of the quest marker and add player housing.What would be the difference between it and Ultima Online and the answer is very little. Line between Sandbox and Themepark isn't as big as people think.It is waste of time me going back back argue over a term because everybody gave different define of what a sandbox MMO fans will believe what they want.
If what i am saying isn't right why is Grand thef Auto,Oblivion,Hulk ultimate destuction,Prototype call sandboxes?Just type any of those games in google and you will see them describe as sandboxes.Why? Because Sandbox is about freedom of play not the world it is in.
By that definition WOW is a sandbox.
Starting point A: level 1 new character. Ending point B: Max level. WoW is linear and not sandbox. happy to help!
GTA is a sandbox single player RPG. But more would be expected from a sandbox MMO because it allows for players to interact with each other so we could have player housing, cities, politics, more diverse range of player specialization, etc. None of that would be applicable to a single player game like GTA- I mean, can you imagine being a dancer in GTA the way you could be in pre-CU SWG? Haha.. Who would you entertain? NPCs?
So GTA is about as sandbox as reasonable for a single player game to get... No reason to have more customization for a game where nobody sees you or what you've built.
I liked how the OP listed the sandbox games it got me pretty excited. But after looking them all up, the only one I really feel is viable is Vanguard- Which is a game that I am very glad I quit after 3 days of addiction, because otherwise I would probably be one of those whiners on these forums saying that Vanguards really good but theres not enough people playing it and SOE is letting it go down the drain. I feel sorry for Vanguard players. I don't want to watch a game die right after I join it.
I will now go back to my lonely playing of rollercoaster tycoon, mount & blade, and soldat.
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
Which is why i said all MMO are sandboxes.Now the thing is all MMO are not good virtual worlds.WoW does a crappy job of being virtual world while Ultima and Everquest do way better job of being virtual world making you feel like you are living in the world.
WoW and wow clones are trying to a good video game rpg where the players realize they are playing a game.Everquest and Ultima did good job of being a living world,Where players forget get they are playing a video game.
The battle should not be sandbox and themeparks.The battle is "Ease" versus "Immersion".
That's the definition of all games, all games are themepark then.
I generally agree Luck. WoW has several different ways of leveling to max right now. PvP, battleground craft, dungons, quests, gathering. You can get to max with all of them.
WoW has more options than most games. Add housing, hide quests and it is pretty much the same as what most people consider a sandbox.
Venge
"Feel" is subjective but WoW and themeparks does not care about immersion,Ease is the number goal hence dungeon finder,group finder,threat meters,Instances,Question mark abobe the head.Themeparks are about getting you to the fun quickly.
Vitrtual Worlds games are about immersion trying to get to forget that you are playing a videogame,Menus are keep to minium,Anything to take you of the game is aviod like instances,quest finder,group finders,Arrow above the head etc..Things are put in place to give world size like no fast travel or No global auction houses.Human interaction is more important than npc you are give tools in th game to work together.What people actually want is Immersion which why EQ(Themepark hybrid) and Ultima(a sandbox) is loved by gamers.It is why people love the first 20 levels of AoC.
Good MMORPG make you forget for a little while you are playing a videogame.It is about FEEL
Vanguard? Sandbox and old school? What is your definition of those terms? Because whatever they are, they are wrong. Vanguard is much like EQ, 10 years ago is not old shool. And there is nothing sandbox about vanguard. It's a linear game, albeit with a large, explorable world.
MO - bugged, poorly developed open world pvp arena with some crafting, broken territory control and housing
FE - Not a bad game, but it's now turned into cash shop scam, have fun with that
Darkfall - better than MO, but they are just too slow to develop the game
ER - really? Have you played this game? Infinitely worse than MO, if that is possible.
Ryzom - old, and not being developed anymore. Not a bad game, just really outdated and too low pop.
Eve - wont argue there, only sandbox game worth playing imo
Perp - blantant Eve clone. I like the game, just not enough there.
Mang - not my style
Xyson - underdevoloped game with 15 people playing it. Will never be finished.
Archage - maybe we will see this 2012? Who knows.
Dawntide - Played this a bit, really unfinished, poor engine optimization and graphics, good ideas, underdevoloped.
So yeah, we really have a ton of choices. I am totally blind. Please op, open my eyes!
Well I'd agree with that, if we're using the looser definition of sandbox which includes FarmVille.
But I doubt the hardcore sandbox lovers here consider FarmVille a sandbox MMORPG. I don't think I'd call it that either, even though it's clearly one of the most popular sandbox game experiences to date. Either way, it's certainly not the type of game the sandbox MMORPG crowd wants when they ask for AAA sandboxes to be made.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Wrong. When UO launched there was a functional ecosystem for the monsters and animals.
Later on it had to be recoded because the respawn rate was way too high. Its another "sandbox" theory that sounds incredibly awesome but doesn't really work in practice.
My youtube MMO gaming channel
You misunderstand. I don't say games like Farmville are sandbox MMOs, what I'm saying is that the right sandbox (or hybrid) MMO could draw some of the FB game crowd, and RTS crowd. And those are some good sized crowds. But the right MMO would not be a game like Darkfall or Mortal Online.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
You said it yourself Vanguard is not a sandbox and its REALY NOT A SANDBOX its a TEEMPARC and it failed first year this reason why it will never recover and prolly also with sony at helm after they took over.
Only a free two play model like LOTR it prolly survives not with P2P
Did I miss something on recent WoW patch notes, but I don't recall being able to level up by crafting or gathering. I know these are options people want and features from other games.
Gathering, yes. Crafting, I don't think so.
seriously .. you don't level up by gathering. if you consider that a leveling path simply because you get a few pennies worth of xp for gathering a node .. idk what to tell you. you are obviously talking out of your backside.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
I think i understand why you create this kind of thread then. You obviously have a very serious definition problem.
Sandbox refer to those sand box where kids play to make castle and stuff like that, they bring their toys, and can do anything they want with the sand. This is a way to design some mmo like Uo and Eve. They give to the player as much control as possible.
Themepark refer to Walt Disney like park that have different themes all around the country side. Once again mmo with such design refer to the fact you go play those game to get some entertainment, and watch the different and many aspect those park have. You actually are more like a witness, at the opposite as sandbox.
If you can't make this kind of distinction, there is nothing to talk about with you. Would you want to talk about an apple taste with someone that think they are the same than orange? i personally wouldn't, that would be boring and a waste of time tbh.
Sandbox are build around the UO model, themepark are build around the EQ model. I think this accepted enough to not need more explanations. That is the basic, if you don't understand that, i don't think you can really talk about those things.
Good luck to level up 1-85 with gathering !
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.? -Albert Einstein
"The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
So if you notice that I'm no longer answering your nonsense, stop trying... because you just joined my block list.
My mistake sorry. I just went and checked, no I still can't gain xp by crafting - hopefully that will change. However I do get xp by gathering. And people have leveled 1-85 just by gathering. Several months ago there was a big deal about it on these boards.
Personally I would find that totally boring, however it is another path.
Venge.
To me, a sandbox game means your general location in the world (town, zone, etc.) has very little to do with your character's level. Games with clearly-defined borders and certain level ranges within those borders automatically disqualify themselves from being considered "sandbox" games when they make it so you can not progress your character in those areas after a certain point.
Fallen Earth and Vanguard are disqualified from being considered true sandbox games, in my opinion. They do have impressive world sizes, but higher-level players have no reason to go back to beginning zones to progress their characters unless it is for a crafting ingredient.
True sandbox games today are too focused on PvP, in my opinion. MO, DF, and ER ruined their fun for me by turning the game into a free-for-all noob gankfest.
I haven't played the other "sandbox" games listed in the OP's post. They don't have anything to appeal to me.
I had to stop reading after pg 2... Vanguard was not a sandbox...
Ryzom is. Think it came out before Vanguard.