Sandbox is about the sand. The world is manipulated or co-authored by players.
That's what makes it different from themeparks which aren't manipulated, and have static "rides", and are only authored by the developer.
That's why games like Skyrim aren't sandboxes, since the player barely alters the world (apart from buying a few houses and placing trivial items around.)
But yeah, PVP isn't necessarily part of it. In fact the only sandbox (MMOs) I ended up liking effectively has zero PVP (ATITD and H&H)
PVP in a sandbox tends to suck unless implemented in a fairly controlled manner (King Arthur's Gold was fun apart from being tragically laggy.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Sandbox is about the sand. The world is manipulated or co-authored by players. That's what makes it different from themeparks which aren't manipulated, and have static "rides", and are only authored by the developer. That's why games like Skyrim aren't sandboxes, since the player barely alters the world (apart from buying a few houses and placing trivial items around.) But yeah, PVP isn't necessarily part of it. In fact the only sandbox (MMOs) I ended up liking effectively has zero PVP (ATITD and H&H) PVP in a sandbox tends to suck unless implemented in a fairly controlled manner (King Arthur's Gold was fun apart from being tragically laggy.)
I think Eve handles PvP well, there are great swathes of Hi security space where if someone shoots you they die and lose their ship, so you only get killed by someone determined rather than a casual ganker, of course the best rewards are in low security areas and the very best in sovereignty controlled areas you have to take and hold. So whilst it is open to PvP anywhere, hi security is very safe unless someone wants you dead more than they want to live.
how many pvp themeparks are there? Mostly themepark is for causual players who want to solo a mmo.
Is there a single themepark MMO around without PvP? Name one.
It might not be the kind of PvP you like but don't claim nonsense. Practically every themepark has PvP.
He didn't say themeparks don't have PVP. He was asking how many pvp themeparks there are, meaning themparks focused around PVP. In most themepark MMOs, PVP often seems secondary, tacked on or a complete afterthought.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Sandbox is about the sand. The world is manipulated or co-authored by players.
That's what makes it different from themeparks which aren't manipulated, and have static "rides", and are only authored by the developer.
That's why games like Skyrim aren't sandboxes, since the player barely alters the world (apart from buying a few houses and placing trivial items around.)
But yeah, PVP isn't necessarily part of it. In fact the only sandbox (MMOs) I ended up liking effectively has zero PVP (ATITD and H&H)
PVP in a sandbox tends to suck unless implemented in a fairly controlled manner (King Arthur's Gold was fun apart from being tragically laggy.)
I think Eve handles PvP well, there are great swathes of Hi security space where if someone shoots you they die and lose their ship, so you only get killed by someone determined rather than a casual ganker, of course the best rewards are in low security areas and the very best in sovereignty controlled areas you have to take and hold. So whilst it is open to PvP anywhere, hi security is very safe unless someone wants you dead more than they want to live.
The security system is reasonably good, sure.
However having all fights be one-sided slaughters which shallowly measure Time Investment and Who Can Bring More Friends is pretty much a textbook recipe for Bad PVP. There's a certain casual niche who wants that, and they get it in EVE, but most PVPers want PVP games about PVP.
While in a game like King Arthur's Gold you have two even teams who start on the same footing at the start of a round and skill determines the victor. But it's still a sandbox PVP game, because the gameplay entirely revolves around deforming the terrain and constructing freeform bases to keep the enemy out.
There's another game out there which is 3D like minecraft and is a WW1 FPS where you deform the terrain and construct bases. Same deal: sandbox PVP, but without all the non-skill factors that cause typical sandbox PVP to suck.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
how many pvp themeparks are there? Mostly themepark is for causual players who want to solo a mmo.
Is there a single themepark MMO around without PvP? Name one.
It might not be the kind of PvP you like but don't claim nonsense. Practically every themepark has PvP.
He didn't say themeparks don't have PVP. He was asking how many pvp themeparks there are, meaning themparks focused around PVP. In most themepark MMOs, PVP often seems secondary, tacked on or a complete afterthought.
thank you - mostly it seems that as far as themeparks go PvP is an after thought or an add-on. I use LOTRO's as an example. Does LOTRO have PvP? Yea, kind of but it has no real effect on the rest of the game so it seems added or tacked on.
Why can't pvp'rs enjoy the themepark made for them.
which themepark is made just for pvp'rs?
AOC, Allods Online, Perfect World, Lineage 2, Aika, Rohan...just to name a few.
...I don't know about most of those, but Perfect World? Are you nuts? That's a PvE grind-a-thon with an insignificant snippet of PvP tacked on to it. That definitely isn't a themepark devoted to PvP.
Sandbox is about the sand. The world is manipulated or co-authored by players.
That's what makes it different from themeparks which aren't manipulated, and have static "rides", and are only authored by the developer.
That's why games like Skyrim aren't sandboxes, since the player barely alters the world (apart from buying a few houses and placing trivial items around.)
But yeah, PVP isn't necessarily part of it. In fact the only sandbox (MMOs) I ended up liking effectively has zero PVP (ATITD and H&H)
PVP in a sandbox tends to suck unless implemented in a fairly controlled manner (King Arthur's Gold was fun apart from being tragically laggy.)
I think Eve handles PvP well, there are great swathes of Hi security space where if someone shoots you they die and lose their ship, so you only get killed by someone determined rather than a casual ganker, of course the best rewards are in low security areas and the very best in sovereignty controlled areas you have to take and hold. So whilst it is open to PvP anywhere, hi security is very safe unless someone wants you dead more than they want to live.
The security system is reasonably good, sure.
However having all fights be one-sided slaughters which shallowly measure Time Investment and Who Can Bring More Friends is pretty much a textbook recipe for Bad PVP. There's a certain casual niche who wants that, and they get it in EVE, but most PVPers want PVP games about PVP.
While in a game like King Arthur's Gold you have two even teams who start on the same footing at the start of a round and skill determines the victor. But it's still a sandbox PVP game, because the gameplay entirely revolves around deforming the terrain and constructing freeform bases to keep the enemy out.
There's another game out there which is 3D like minecraft and is a WW1 FPS where you deform the terrain and construct bases. Same deal: sandbox PVP, but without all the non-skill factors that cause typical sandbox PVP to suck.
You keep referring to "bad" PvP. But what you mean is non instanced PvP. Please stop doing this. You don't like non instanced PvP and thats fine. But saying its bad is dumb. Its just not instanced and you only like instanced.
Why can't pvp'rs enjoy the themepark made for them.
which themepark is made just for pvp'rs?
AOC, Allods Online, Perfect World, Lineage 2, Aika, Rohan...just to name a few.
...I don't know about most of those, but Perfect World? Are you nuts? That's a PvE grind-a-thon with an insignificant snippet of PvP tacked on to it. That definitely isn't a themepark devoted to PvP.
I don't think any of those are just pvp. Is AOC - Age of Conan - that is not just for PVP. I'll accept your opinion on those I have not played. Just for the record I don't really consider Asian grind fests MMO's - pve or pvp. Just my opinion but the developers would have to pay ME to play them.
Sandbox is about the sand. The world is manipulated or co-authored by players.
That's what makes it different from themeparks which aren't manipulated, and have static "rides", and are only authored by the developer.
That's why games like Skyrim aren't sandboxes, since the player barely alters the world (apart from buying a few houses and placing trivial items around.)
But yeah, PVP isn't necessarily part of it. In fact the only sandbox (MMOs) I ended up liking effectively has zero PVP (ATITD and H&H)
PVP in a sandbox tends to suck unless implemented in a fairly controlled manner (King Arthur's Gold was fun apart from being tragically laggy.)
I think Eve handles PvP well, there are great swathes of Hi security space where if someone shoots you they die and lose their ship, so you only get killed by someone determined rather than a casual ganker, of course the best rewards are in low security areas and the very best in sovereignty controlled areas you have to take and hold. So whilst it is open to PvP anywhere, hi security is very safe unless someone wants you dead more than they want to live.
The security system is reasonably good, sure.
However having all fights be one-sided slaughters which shallowly measure Time Investment and Who Can Bring More Friends is pretty much a textbook recipe for Bad PVP. There's a certain casual niche who wants that, and they get it in EVE, but most PVPers want PVP games about PVP.
While in a game like King Arthur's Gold you have two even teams who start on the same footing at the start of a round and skill determines the victor. But it's still a sandbox PVP game, because the gameplay entirely revolves around deforming the terrain and constructing freeform bases to keep the enemy out.
There's another game out there which is 3D like minecraft and is a WW1 FPS where you deform the terrain and construct bases. Same deal: sandbox PVP, but without all the non-skill factors that cause typical sandbox PVP to suck.
What you say sucks I like, and I do not consider arena or instanced PvP to be part of a sandbox PvP game. For me a sandbox PvP game has PvP everywhere. And in EVE there can be PvP in Hi-sec - other than ganking.. Wars can be held there. If you are at war with another corp and fire upon the other side in hi-sec then Concord does not step in.
What you say sucks I like, and I do not consider arena or instanced PvP to be part of a sandbox PvP game. For me a sandbox PvP game has PvP everywhere. And in EVE there can be PvP in Hi-sec - other than ganking.. Wars can be held there. If you are at war with another corp and fire upon the other side in hi-sec then Concord does not step in.
Well yeah, that's another well-designed aspect to the security system.
But as far as not considering instanced PVP part of a sandbox PVP game? Disliking it doesn't make it magically not a sandbox. The games I mentioned (King Arthur's Gold and Ace of Spades the WW1 minecraft-esque FPS) are sandboxes. Being instanced doesn't change that. It only changes whether or not someone likes it (and if they prefer casual PVP won by zerging and playing longer, they won't like it.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I decided to start this thread because I have heard so much misifnormation on sandbox games. The major point I want to address is the PvP aspect. From what I hear you are forced to fight all other players all the time. Now, some games may be like this. My main experience with sandbox MMO's comes from Shadowbane and EVE. Shadowbane had a lot of PvP, and yet if you knew the game you could avoid it and do whatever you wanted to do... being aware that you could be attacked. I remember times when I would solo and as long as I was aware of my surroundings I was never ganked. People would try but one can run away.
EVE... I mine in EVE and run 2 accoutns - 1 to mine and 1 to haul the ore back to station so that my miner can stay out in the belt uninterrupted. Basically i stay in i-sec where one has to be aware of suicide gankers. They can kill you but, mostly, they will lose their ship to Concord(the police). I do have a PvP alt that I only play when my corp has been war-dec'd. I went back to EVE a week or so ago and have only had no attempts to draw me into PvP... neither worked. Sandbox should have PvP but it is not necessairly the end all to sandbox. What it does do is add an aura of danger to even the most mundane of tasks... and that is why I like it. If EVE was a game where I could mine and never be attacked then it would be boring. For me the danger is the salt. Now I know many will post and say that i am wrong. All I have done is give my opinion, based on my actual in game sand box experience.
I don't have a problem with this post, you're just expressing your opinion, telling us what you like and why you like it.
However I do have a problem with your later posts.Where you basically told pve players to just go play themepark games.
Sandbox, themepark, pve and pvp are 4 different things not 2.There are people who like themepark games who also like pvp.Some themepark games have pvp servers.Likewise some people who like sandbox games also like pve and dislike forced pvp.I haven't seen anyone ask for the current pvp sandboxes to be changed but we would like for someone to make some pve sandbox games.
Why can't pvp'rs enjoy the themepark made for them.
which themepark is made just for pvp'rs?
AOC, Allods Online, Perfect World, Lineage 2, Aika, Rohan...just to name a few.
...I don't know about most of those, but Perfect World? Are you nuts? That's a PvE grind-a-thon with an insignificant snippet of PvP tacked on to it. That definitely isn't a themepark devoted to PvP.
I don't know if you played it or not, but PW has open world PvP. Anyone can be attacked outside of towns. Plus it has a territory warfare system where clans can fight for control and advantages. The game's whole purpose is to grow up your character to be able to take part in warfare.
Allods, Lineage are both games with open world PvP, players are only safe in cities. Lineage 2 is an absolutely PvP focused game.
Yes but there are already countless PvE games. PVE players need to let the Sandbox PVP crowd have a game or 2 to themselves that remains that way.
I wish there was a good sandbox game for the PvE players. PvP players have Darkfall, MO, Eve.
a tale in the desert. And all the themepark games are made with you pve players in mind.
You should broaden your horizon, a sandbox mmo should have all sorts of meaningfull player interaction, where pvp might be a part of it, but there is so much more what would make a sandbox game and the formula Sandbox = PVP just doesn't show me sandbox, but just shows me a online combat game which I already play and have played in several genre's like the normal multiplayer games where I thought a sandbox MMORPG would let the players have more impact on the gameworld and allot more player interaction with combat and non combat alike and feel more prever a mature setting, good graphics, awesome gameplay on all lvl's where every lvl counts and rushers to caplvl miss most out of the sanbox experiance.
The common misconception is that sandbox games are for PvP'ers.
Real sandboxes have a place for all playstyles. This is why the vast majority of them fail. They focus on one playstyle, at the expense of the rest. The game devolves into a PvP arena. The wolves conquer the few sheep around. The wolves turn on the wolves. Everyone leaves. The servers shut down.
The common misconception is that sandbox games are for PvP'ers.
Real sandboxes have a place for all playstyles. This is why the vast majority of them fail. They focus on one playstyle, at the expense of the rest. The game devolves into a PvP arena. The wolves conquer the few sheep around. The wolves turn on the wolves. Everyone leaves. The servers shut down.
^^^
This. Has happened at least 3-4 times to me over the years. However, I've also seen the opposite happen. UO for instance.
The developers get a bunch of those "wow like nerf mails" which involve a lot of tears and cries of "bullies got me" and then they nerf the crap out of the PVP side of the game, everyone eventually gets bored and leaves as above.
I decided to start this thread because I have heard so much misifnormation on sandbox games. The major point I want to address is the PvP aspect. From what I hear you are forced to fight all other players all the time. Now, some games may be like this. My main experience with sandbox MMO's comes from Shadowbane and EVE. Shadowbane had a lot of PvP, and yet if you knew the game you could avoid it and do whatever you wanted to do... being aware that you could be attacked. I remember times when I would solo and as long as I was aware of my surroundings I was never ganked. People would try but one can run away.
EVE... I mine in EVE and run 2 accoutns - 1 to mine and 1 to haul the ore back to station so that my miner can stay out in the belt uninterrupted. Basically i stay in i-sec where one has to be aware of suicide gankers. They can kill you but, mostly, they will lose their ship to Concord(the police). I do have a PvP alt that I only play when my corp has been war-dec'd. I went back to EVE a week or so ago and have only had no attempts to draw me into PvP... neither worked. Sandbox should have PvP but it is not necessairly the end all to sandbox. What it does do is add an aura of danger to even the most mundane of tasks... and that is why I like it. If EVE was a game where I could mine and never be attacked then it would be boring. For me the danger is the salt. Now I know many will post and say that i am wrong. All I have done is give my opinion, based on my actual in game sand box experience.
If you want even more fun, try wormholes. Same element of danger - but it's really more obvious - it can be hard to see suicide gankers in high-sec until it's too late.
I've been playing around 6 years now and just moved into a WH this week, it has totally revitalised the game for me. Huge amount of fun. I suggest it if you ever get bored of high-sec and want some bigger asteroids to mine/sleepers are also a fair bit of money. The wormhole changes daily so you never really know what environment you'll be in next. It's a great change from cloaky-fags in 0.0 or the low high-sec incomes I was getting used to.
The common misconception is that sandbox games are for PvP'ers.
Real sandboxes have a place for all playstyles. This is why the vast majority of them fail. They focus on one playstyle, at the expense of the rest. The game devolves into a PvP arena. The wolves conquer the few sheep around. The wolves turn on the wolves. Everyone leaves. The servers shut down.
^^^
This. Has happened at least 3-4 times to me over the years. However, I've also seen the opposite happen. UO for instance.
The developers get a bunch of those "wow like nerf mails" which involve a lot of tears and cries of "bullies got me" and then they nerf the crap out of the PVP side of the game, everyone eventually gets bored and leaves as above.
UO actually got a lot more popular after the introduction of Trammel. Not that I liked it, but it did. It's one of the few sandboxes to try and make compromises to further the genre. Their idea was right, but the execution could have been better.
In UO, you could PvP though if you wanted to. You could also avoid it. There was something for everyone. That's what sandboxes need to get back to.
I certainly have issues with open-world PvP in Sandboxes. There are times when I've actually enjoyed PvP, but most of the time it's dominated by twelve-year-olds that kill, pillage and plunder because it's fun, they're allowed to and it makes them feel better about themselves. The dynamics of lethality are too complex for most gamedesigners to comprehend so the learning curve in these games is frustrating at best.
Harvesters have to go to very specific places to harvest. Crafters are regulated to where they can craft. Hunters can only hunt in specific locations. But murderers and thieves can strike anywhere. Sure, that sounds exciting, but it's unrealistic. It's actually kind of ignorant. The digital world is just too shallow to simulate the dynamics of violence. The murderers and thieves can just log out and avoid any repercussions.
I am tired of Sandboxes that center themselves on PvP, especially when their designers keep saying otherwise.
I certainly have issues with open-world PvP in Sandboxes. There are times when I've actually enjoyed PvP, but most of the time it's dominated by twelve-year-olds that kill, pillage and plunder because it's fun, they're allowed to and it makes them feel better about themselves. The dynamics of lethality are too complex for most gamedesigners to comprehend so the learning curve in these games is frustrating at best.
Harvesters have to go to very specific places to harvest. Crafters are regulated to where they can craft. Hunters can only hunt in specific locations. But murderers and thieves can strike anywhere. Sure, that sounds exciting, but it's unrealistic. It's actually kind of ignorant. The digital world is just too shallow to simulate the dynamics of violence. The murderers and thieves can just log out and avoid any repercussions.
I am tired of Sandboxes that center themselves on PvP, especially when their designers keep saying otherwise.
In TTS your avatar doesn't log out. Now wouldn't that be an amazing factor in mmo pvp. You can't just kill a bunch of lowbies and log off to escape revenge.
The common misconception is that sandbox games are for PvP'ers.
Real sandboxes have a place for all playstyles. This is why the vast majority of them fail. They focus on one playstyle, at the expense of the rest. The game devolves into a PvP arena. The wolves conquer the few sheep around. The wolves turn on the wolves. Everyone leaves. The servers shut down.
If developers of sandbox mmo's would take one system that controls pvp and allows the game world to flourish, they should look no further than the origional SWG covert/overt system.
Originally posted by Cuathon In TTS your avatar doesn't log out. Now wouldn't that be an amazing factor in mmo pvp. You can't just kill a bunch of lowbies and log off to escape revenge.
Interesting concept, to be sure. But I keep seeing my avatar getting ganked everytime I log out. I am having flashbacks to that damn house I tried to build, only to have it constantly broken into or destroyed. When my real world schedual takes me away from my computer for weeks at a time, it's hard to get too invested in persistent worlds. Sandboxes that center on PvP seem to require this.
Comments
AOC, Allods Online, Perfect World, Lineage 2, Aika, Rohan...just to name a few.
Sandbox is about the sand. The world is manipulated or co-authored by players.
That's what makes it different from themeparks which aren't manipulated, and have static "rides", and are only authored by the developer.
That's why games like Skyrim aren't sandboxes, since the player barely alters the world (apart from buying a few houses and placing trivial items around.)
But yeah, PVP isn't necessarily part of it. In fact the only sandbox (MMOs) I ended up liking effectively has zero PVP (ATITD and H&H)
PVP in a sandbox tends to suck unless implemented in a fairly controlled manner (King Arthur's Gold was fun apart from being tragically laggy.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think Eve handles PvP well, there are great swathes of Hi security space where if someone shoots you they die and lose their ship, so you only get killed by someone determined rather than a casual ganker, of course the best rewards are in low security areas and the very best in sovereignty controlled areas you have to take and hold. So whilst it is open to PvP anywhere, hi security is very safe unless someone wants you dead more than they want to live.Pathfinder Online looks to be a very fine offering! You can read the blogs here http://goblinworks.com/blog/.
The game is still under development but you and anyone one else interested in sandbox games should keep an eye out.
"It would be awesome if you could duel your companion. Then you could solo pvp".--Thanes
Is there a single themepark MMO around without PvP? Name one.
It might not be the kind of PvP you like but don't claim nonsense. Practically every themepark has PvP.
I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.
He didn't say themeparks don't have PVP. He was asking how many pvp themeparks there are, meaning themparks focused around PVP. In most themepark MMOs, PVP often seems secondary, tacked on or a complete afterthought.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The security system is reasonably good, sure.
However having all fights be one-sided slaughters which shallowly measure Time Investment and Who Can Bring More Friends is pretty much a textbook recipe for Bad PVP. There's a certain casual niche who wants that, and they get it in EVE, but most PVPers want PVP games about PVP.
While in a game like King Arthur's Gold you have two even teams who start on the same footing at the start of a round and skill determines the victor. But it's still a sandbox PVP game, because the gameplay entirely revolves around deforming the terrain and constructing freeform bases to keep the enemy out.
There's another game out there which is 3D like minecraft and is a WW1 FPS where you deform the terrain and construct bases. Same deal: sandbox PVP, but without all the non-skill factors that cause typical sandbox PVP to suck.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
thank you - mostly it seems that as far as themeparks go PvP is an after thought or an add-on. I use LOTRO's as an example. Does LOTRO have PvP? Yea, kind of but it has no real effect on the rest of the game so it seems added or tacked on.
Currently bored with MMO's.
guess I should have included quotes "PvP Thempark" so that you understood i was talking about a thempark devoted to PvP.
Currently bored with MMO's.
...I don't know about most of those, but Perfect World? Are you nuts? That's a PvE grind-a-thon with an insignificant snippet of PvP tacked on to it. That definitely isn't a themepark devoted to PvP.
Where's the any key?
You keep referring to "bad" PvP. But what you mean is non instanced PvP. Please stop doing this. You don't like non instanced PvP and thats fine. But saying its bad is dumb. Its just not instanced and you only like instanced.
I don't think any of those are just pvp. Is AOC - Age of Conan - that is not just for PVP. I'll accept your opinion on those I have not played. Just for the record I don't really consider Asian grind fests MMO's - pve or pvp. Just my opinion but the developers would have to pay ME to play them.
Currently bored with MMO's.
What you say sucks I like, and I do not consider arena or instanced PvP to be part of a sandbox PvP game. For me a sandbox PvP game has PvP everywhere. And in EVE there can be PvP in Hi-sec - other than ganking.. Wars can be held there. If you are at war with another corp and fire upon the other side in hi-sec then Concord does not step in.
Currently bored with MMO's.
Well yeah, that's another well-designed aspect to the security system.
But as far as not considering instanced PVP part of a sandbox PVP game? Disliking it doesn't make it magically not a sandbox. The games I mentioned (King Arthur's Gold and Ace of Spades the WW1 minecraft-esque FPS) are sandboxes. Being instanced doesn't change that. It only changes whether or not someone likes it (and if they prefer casual PVP won by zerging and playing longer, they won't like it.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I don't have a problem with this post, you're just expressing your opinion, telling us what you like and why you like it.
However I do have a problem with your later posts.Where you basically told pve players to just go play themepark games.
Sandbox, themepark, pve and pvp are 4 different things not 2.There are people who like themepark games who also like pvp.Some themepark games have pvp servers.Likewise some people who like sandbox games also like pve and dislike forced pvp.I haven't seen anyone ask for the current pvp sandboxes to be changed but we would like for someone to make some pve sandbox games.
I don't know if you played it or not, but PW has open world PvP. Anyone can be attacked outside of towns. Plus it has a territory warfare system where clans can fight for control and advantages. The game's whole purpose is to grow up your character to be able to take part in warfare.
Allods, Lineage are both games with open world PvP, players are only safe in cities. Lineage 2 is an absolutely PvP focused game.
You should broaden your horizon, a sandbox mmo should have all sorts of meaningfull player interaction, where pvp might be a part of it, but there is so much more what would make a sandbox game and the formula Sandbox = PVP just doesn't show me sandbox, but just shows me a online combat game which I already play and have played in several genre's like the normal multiplayer games where I thought a sandbox MMORPG would let the players have more impact on the gameworld and allot more player interaction with combat and non combat alike and feel more prever a mature setting, good graphics, awesome gameplay on all lvl's where every lvl counts and rushers to caplvl miss most out of the sanbox experiance.
The common misconception is that sandbox games are for PvP'ers.
Real sandboxes have a place for all playstyles. This is why the vast majority of them fail. They focus on one playstyle, at the expense of the rest. The game devolves into a PvP arena. The wolves conquer the few sheep around. The wolves turn on the wolves. Everyone leaves. The servers shut down.
^^^
This. Has happened at least 3-4 times to me over the years. However, I've also seen the opposite happen. UO for instance.
The developers get a bunch of those "wow like nerf mails" which involve a lot of tears and cries of "bullies got me" and then they nerf the crap out of the PVP side of the game, everyone eventually gets bored and leaves as above.
My EVE YouTube Channel
If you want even more fun, try wormholes. Same element of danger - but it's really more obvious - it can be hard to see suicide gankers in high-sec until it's too late.
I've been playing around 6 years now and just moved into a WH this week, it has totally revitalised the game for me. Huge amount of fun. I suggest it if you ever get bored of high-sec and want some bigger asteroids to mine/sleepers are also a fair bit of money. The wormhole changes daily so you never really know what environment you'll be in next. It's a great change from cloaky-fags in 0.0 or the low high-sec incomes I was getting used to.
My EVE YouTube Channel
UO actually got a lot more popular after the introduction of Trammel. Not that I liked it, but it did. It's one of the few sandboxes to try and make compromises to further the genre. Their idea was right, but the execution could have been better.
In UO, you could PvP though if you wanted to. You could also avoid it. There was something for everyone. That's what sandboxes need to get back to.
I certainly have issues with open-world PvP in Sandboxes. There are times when I've actually enjoyed PvP, but most of the time it's dominated by twelve-year-olds that kill, pillage and plunder because it's fun, they're allowed to and it makes them feel better about themselves. The dynamics of lethality are too complex for most gamedesigners to comprehend so the learning curve in these games is frustrating at best.
Harvesters have to go to very specific places to harvest. Crafters are regulated to where they can craft. Hunters can only hunt in specific locations. But murderers and thieves can strike anywhere. Sure, that sounds exciting, but it's unrealistic. It's actually kind of ignorant. The digital world is just too shallow to simulate the dynamics of violence. The murderers and thieves can just log out and avoid any repercussions.
I am tired of Sandboxes that center themselves on PvP, especially when their designers keep saying otherwise.
TSW, LotRO, EQ2, SWTOR, GW2, V:SoH, Neverwinter, ArchAge, EQ, UO, DAoC, WAR, DDO, AoC, MO, BDO, SotA, B&S, ESO,
In TTS your avatar doesn't log out. Now wouldn't that be an amazing factor in mmo pvp. You can't just kill a bunch of lowbies and log off to escape revenge.
If developers of sandbox mmo's would take one system that controls pvp and allows the game world to flourish, they should look no further than the origional SWG covert/overt system.
Interesting concept, to be sure. But I keep seeing my avatar getting ganked everytime I log out. I am having flashbacks to that damn house I tried to build, only to have it constantly broken into or destroyed. When my real world schedual takes me away from my computer for weeks at a time, it's hard to get too invested in persistent worlds. Sandboxes that center on PvP seem to require this.
TSW, LotRO, EQ2, SWTOR, GW2, V:SoH, Neverwinter, ArchAge, EQ, UO, DAoC, WAR, DDO, AoC, MO, BDO, SotA, B&S, ESO,