I know my place. I go to the games that cater to my playstyle. I would never go to Hello Kitty Online and demand FFA PVP. I just don't understand why every sandbox game is expected to cater to lazy/slow/casual players.
The particular (potential) sandbox game we're discussing here is run by SOE. In fact, it's an Everquest game.
I'd say you may want to get used to seeing themepark players proposing an idea, from time to time. SOE's gaming properties are, as you say, infested with them.
You're not alone; it's easy to see that traditional sandbox "purists" are going to be in for a tough time, dealing with non-conventional sandbox ideas, particular once Smed is forthcoming with more detail.
Remember those weekly battles that used to take place here at mmorpg.com over "SWG, not a 'true' sandbox"? Yep. Still the same Smed.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Originally posted by MumboJumbo Minecraft let the cat out of the bag and made developers realise -> interactive object world + player imagination >> graphix + dev static content.
I do enjoy Minecraft a lot, except... its not an MMO at all. A full out Sandbox will NEVER work as an MMo due to the way it functions. A sandbox is like capitalism, a few thrive while the others are left in the dust with nothing at all. People don't usual accept this and would be quick to abandon ship.
There are plenty of mods for minecraft that make it mmo like.
Also minecraft isn't the only sandbox to get developers thinking, look at terraria that shifted a lot of copies too, look at dwarf fortress, you can bet your bottom dollar there are several commercial df alikes in the works.
In my view, the main issue between sandbox and themepark designs is how much the developers want one player to be able to impact the play of another. That's what it boils down to.
This goes beyond the simple fact of players killing other players. Player interaction in a sandbox should be felt economically, industrially, and socially.
Unfortunately, as counter-intuitive as it sounds, many MMO players prefer to play these games completely solo, and do not want other players to impact their gameplay at all, do not want to be reliant on other players, etc.
Thus, to gain mass appeal, developers have created multi-player games that are best played solo. This solo-oriented play has killed the entire purpose of a persistent, virtual world, which is the defining feature of an MMO.
As far as I'm concerned, traditional sandbox play, with some themepark elements, has always been the way to go.
I've pretty much come to the conclusion that sand box fans will never be satisfied because they don't really know what they want.
Every time I see this statement, I have 2 thoughts.
1. I don't think it has anything to do with what players want. It's always been about what developers tell us what we want or assume they know what we want.
2. What valid offerings have been available in recent years that anyone can point to and say "There is an awesome example of an MMORPG." ?
There are recent examples that come to mind where a developer promises one thing and well, yeah, maybe they deliver that thing, and while it's tecnically in the game, it fails to deliver the overall game experience that it was said to deliver. And what's more that feature came at a cost. It had a trade off that was extremely steep and thus gamers say the game is "shallow" Then others came back and said "You asked for "X", they gave you "X" and now you complain? Well honestly, did they really deliver "X"? No, not in the way they said they would. It's just something that can loosely be called "X" in a technical term but doesn't really deliver the full experinece.
TLDR: It's not always the gamer's fault for finding current games shallow and boring. Just maybe, they are. I don't think you aren't totally wrong, I just think there is more to it than one side.
There is a difference between solo player game and just not being group dependant. I can build something for sale on my own i should not be forced to have other people there to get everything done. People demand solo progression available not a single player game.
There is no shortage of gamers with programming skills and developers with a vision of the - THE - sandbox MMO. A great idea will be just that - an idea - until it is realized by the way of money. if you invest spare time only on making a game, it will be outdated, abandoned and nobody would be interested by the time it is even close to playable.
Investors. Yeah. Money is good, but which investor will invest in something unless they see profit in it? Unless they are SURE this is what the customers wants, and revolutionary different-from-the-rest titles are in so many eyes a gamble with good money.
That is why I have faith in Kickstarter-funded projects, where the customers are the investors, where its more like making games on popular demand rather than paying people to make a something that will hopefully make you more money.
Personally, I'm a supporter of the Embers of Caerus project. I see a lot of potential for this game, and I just hope they won't get an investor overruling any decisions made by the developers.
TLDR: Kickstarter = messiah to "niche" gaming, such as sandbox games.
How come no one has even mentioned War z. Or atleast i don't think any one has. It's a bit similiar to day z. I'm currently playing the alpha. Yeah it's tough on players i guess. Zombies arn't the biggest threat other players are. But that just makes it more fun imo. I play with a friend or two usually. But since you guys are talking about sand box mmo's o.O just thought war z deserves to be mentioned ;o.
Comments
The particular (potential) sandbox game we're discussing here is run by SOE. In fact, it's an Everquest game.
I'd say you may want to get used to seeing themepark players proposing an idea, from time to time. SOE's gaming properties are, as you say, infested with them.
You're not alone; it's easy to see that traditional sandbox "purists" are going to be in for a tough time, dealing with non-conventional sandbox ideas, particular once Smed is forthcoming with more detail.
Remember those weekly battles that used to take place here at mmorpg.com over "SWG, not a 'true' sandbox"? Yep. Still the same Smed.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I do enjoy Minecraft a lot, except... its not an MMO at all. A full out Sandbox will NEVER work as an MMo due to the way it functions. A sandbox is like capitalism, a few thrive while the others are left in the dust with nothing at all. People don't usual accept this and would be quick to abandon ship.
Also minecraft isn't the only sandbox to get developers thinking, look at terraria that shifted a lot of copies too, look at dwarf fortress, you can bet your bottom dollar there are several commercial df alikes in the works.
In my view, the main issue between sandbox and themepark designs is how much the developers want one player to be able to impact the play of another. That's what it boils down to.
This goes beyond the simple fact of players killing other players. Player interaction in a sandbox should be felt economically, industrially, and socially.
Unfortunately, as counter-intuitive as it sounds, many MMO players prefer to play these games completely solo, and do not want other players to impact their gameplay at all, do not want to be reliant on other players, etc.
Thus, to gain mass appeal, developers have created multi-player games that are best played solo. This solo-oriented play has killed the entire purpose of a persistent, virtual world, which is the defining feature of an MMO.
As far as I'm concerned, traditional sandbox play, with some themepark elements, has always been the way to go.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
Every time I see this statement, I have 2 thoughts.
1. I don't think it has anything to do with what players want. It's always been about what developers tell us what we want or assume they know what we want.
2. What valid offerings have been available in recent years that anyone can point to and say "There is an awesome example of an MMORPG." ?
There are recent examples that come to mind where a developer promises one thing and well, yeah, maybe they deliver that thing, and while it's tecnically in the game, it fails to deliver the overall game experience that it was said to deliver. And what's more that feature came at a cost. It had a trade off that was extremely steep and thus gamers say the game is "shallow" Then others came back and said "You asked for "X", they gave you "X" and now you complain? Well honestly, did they really deliver "X"? No, not in the way they said they would. It's just something that can loosely be called "X" in a technical term but doesn't really deliver the full experinece.
TLDR: It's not always the gamer's fault for finding current games shallow and boring. Just maybe, they are. I don't think you aren't totally wrong, I just think there is more to it than one side.
There is no shortage of gamers with programming skills and developers with a vision of the - THE - sandbox MMO. A great idea will be just that - an idea - until it is realized by the way of money. if you invest spare time only on making a game, it will be outdated, abandoned and nobody would be interested by the time it is even close to playable.
Investors. Yeah. Money is good, but which investor will invest in something unless they see profit in it? Unless they are SURE this is what the customers wants, and revolutionary different-from-the-rest titles are in so many eyes a gamble with good money.
That is why I have faith in Kickstarter-funded projects, where the customers are the investors, where its more like making games on popular demand rather than paying people to make a something that will hopefully make you more money.
Personally, I'm a supporter of the Embers of Caerus project. I see a lot of potential for this game, and I just hope they won't get an investor overruling any decisions made by the developers.
TLDR: Kickstarter = messiah to "niche" gaming, such as sandbox games.