I dont consider myself to picky, but for me im still playing Asherons Call 1 so untill a MMO comes out better than that im sticking with what is still best.
and if i want to really get my sandbox on i go play 7days to die. nothing like being dropped off in a infinite destructible world with nothing but some water and a can of beans to start with. Its like mine craft meats zombie survival game, with pvp and pve servers. I highly suggest it to anybody who likes sandbox/crafting/shooter/zombie survival. you have to craft EVERYTHING in that game. or get lucky from loot.
Some players simply confuse badly made, unfinished products that like to hide their incompetence under the umbrella of "sandbox games" with the real thing.
/Thread closed.
Looks pretty real to me
Seriously - there is no exact definition for what makes a "true sandbox game" - but there are accepted aspects of games that are regarded as sandbox features.
So there are degrees of sandbox gameplay - some games are more sandboxy some are less.
At which point a game has enough sandbox features to be deemed a "sandbox game" is entirely subjective.
Awesome graph, what engine is that?
:P
Owait, that's "outside IRL", isn't it? I have played that game, great graph, but the gameplay sux. Grindy as hell, and permadeath is a bug, not a feature.
Yes, we are picky. Everyone wants their favorite sandbox features from every game including those that havent come out yet.
Thing thats still funny to me is, I'd say no less than 80% of the people who talk about sandbox this and that, still don't even understand that sandbox simply means freedom. Things like quests don't necessarily break the sandbox code.
Now truth be told, a decent sandbox game hasn't come out in years. The best one in forever was ArcheAge and it was completely ruined by hacks, bots, dupers and excessive RNG that forced too many players to Pay2Win it. That and there was really nothing to accomplish beyond crafting gear and amassing wealth.
Sandbox does not simply mean freedom - it means complete freedom without any boundaries.
Sandbox gameplay means the players are given tools to create and alter gameplay mechanics.
In a 100% sandbox game - players would have complete control over every variable of gameplay - including things like inverting gravity, HP pools, spawn rates and loot tables, creating completely custom rules.
Do you want to play an invicible dragon god that shoots laser beams out of his butt - in a 100% sandbox game you could be that.
That game is called "Visual Studio Express", it's free from Microsoft.
It would help things if the sandboxer types werent picky over unpopular features.
I am, of course, referring to PvP, specifically free for all and full loot.
For some reason many sandboxer types have it in their heads that sandbox games MUST be PvP. Because if it isnt hardcore PvP then its a crappy carebear hand holding bore fest.
If you want a good example of sandboxers being too picky go to the EQN threads. Doesnt matter how sandbox it is or how good it is, the hardcore sandboxers are constantly bemoaning the graphics.
It would help things if the sandboxer types werent picky over unpopular features.
I am, of course, referring to PvP, specifically free for all and full loot.
For some reason many sandboxer types have it in their heads that sandbox games MUST be PvP. Because if it isnt hardcore PvP then its a crappy carebear hand holding bore fest.
If you want a good example of sandboxers being too picky go to the EQN threads. Doesnt matter how sandbox it is or how good it is, the hardcore sandboxers are constantly bemoaning the graphics.
This.
Ultimately the freedom to do whatever ends up with the game being filled with gankers and griefers and they call it emergent game play.
If anyone uses the term emergent game play it means bullying another player for their enjoyment.
I don't think sandbox players are too picky, but perhaps the sandbox isn't big enough or the players don't like sharing. Every player has something they want to do in a sandbox game and while some will share the same idea, others will not. And most will not share the same method.
Too picky are you serious? Have you seen the crap that's been slung to us over the past 10 years? Most sandbox fans are playing WoW right now because the alternatives are so terrible we have no choice. Even themeparks are having a rough time making anything not gag worthy let alone sandboxes, most of which feel like they're on a 100 dollar budget(aka Darkfall).
Many sandbox fans are even looking to Project Gorgon to save them and if you've ever played that game it will tell you everything you need to know about how low our standards are becoming.....
Creepy insight.
Was the only game on my radar being researched.
Lots of clicking - example was mob death - the person clicked to loot, clicked to do some anatomy thing, clicked to bury the body - that was one mob. All the investigation was clicking. The only thing that happened automagically and acted like the world noticed you was the warning screen that you were entering a dangerous area where the word salad ran across the screen. I played Wurm already - learned about carpal tunnel - no thanks. Forget excessive clicking because of OOP forced by events that can't think ahead or clump.
Saw lots of videos - no one enjoying themselves and laughing unless they turned into a cow then it wore off. I actually had to watch one guy's 3 hour session in 3 sittings over two days because I kept trying to find something that he would be happy about instead of just talking about the game basics. Since I couldn't read his damned text on the screen - again, all I saw was click click - no reading of anything. What's the difference in clicking quests. There was no difference.
Three videos I saw had some of the developers talking and they didn't seem to take it all very seriously. Maybe I expect more out of someone who might get my money. The thought that you want to do this and have some vision instead of just being giggly like - hey ma - I'm on tv. Say something without someone having to ask you a question. Pretend you are bursting with wanting to talk about something that's special. They seemed passive.
They didn't even have a payment model defined - may or may not cost money upfront - may or may not wipe before the game goes beyond alpha - no goals or motives defined. Again it was all just so - whatever, we go with the flow. Then there was the constant copout that they need more money to make the graphics so it was constant apologies - change the style if you can't pull off what you are trying in your budget instead of hoping someone will pay for what you want with a Kickstarter and for goodness sake if you didn't reach one goal - how do you expect to double that goal the next time.
Kickstarter 2 unfunded 317 $23,502 pledged of of $100,000 goal
Kickstarter 1 unfunded 290 $14,449 pledged of $55,000 goal
Again - dreamers personified.
Is that being picky. Those are the true thoughts I had about researching that game.
It would help things if the sandboxer types werent picky over unpopular features.
I am, of course, referring to PvP, specifically free for all and full loot.
For some reason many sandboxer types have it in their heads that sandbox games MUST be PvP. Because if it isnt hardcore PvP then its a crappy carebear hand holding bore fest.
If you want a good example of sandboxers being too picky go to the EQN threads. Doesnt matter how sandbox it is or how good it is, the hardcore sandboxers are constantly bemoaning the graphics.
Thats because games need competition, and the competition afforded by non pvp games becomes stale. Thats why pvp and sandbox are almost interchangeable terms. I don't think a game has to be full loot, or even full pvp. A few recent attempts at sandbox style mmos had neither full-on, no safe zone pvp or item loot (archeage and age of wushu) and both worked aside from their payment models and a lack of meaningful open world content (among other things). Without pvp, those games would be boring to the majority of the people who play them. Sorry, thats just the way it is. Theres always games like Wurm online, but look how few people are really interested in that sort of game.
Originally posted by Bladestrom There is nothing wrong with being picky, its what being part of a niche is all about. It is only an issue if a company is aiming for 17 billion proflt per month.
Not really. Sandboxers are picky even by niche standards. The problem is everyone has a different definition of what a sandbox is. Some think it means open world, some think it means open world no instances, some think open world no instanced PVP anywhere, loot anyone's shit anytime anywhere. etc etc etc.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Originally posted by azzamasin I don't think I'm being picky when I state all I want is a PvE focused, Exploration Centric, Open-World Sandbox in the vein of an Asheron's Call.
I agree with this, I don't want to have to go to a single player game to find what I need, I want to do it in a MMO(RPG). I want to be able to be a blacksmith, miner or farmer from the start and not have to initially progress through the combat elements to get anywhere. The MMOs that try to cater to this make me level via questing before I can do what I want instead of letting me do what I want from the start. Give me what he said from the get go.
I've reached the point were I have to play survival games like Rust, DayZ, Beasts of Prey, etc just to get some semblence of sandboxyness and I hate the permadeath, it feels like zero progression.
It would help things if the sandboxer types werent picky over unpopular features.
I am, of course, referring to PvP, specifically free for all and full loot.
For some reason many sandboxer types have it in their heads that sandbox games MUST be PvP. Because if it isnt hardcore PvP then its a crappy carebear hand holding bore fest.
If you want a good example of sandboxers being too picky go to the EQN threads. Doesnt matter how sandbox it is or how good it is, the hardcore sandboxers are constantly bemoaning the graphics.
Thats because games need competition, and the competition afforded by non pvp games becomes stale. Thats why pvp and sandbox are almost interchangeable terms. I don't think a game has to be full loot, or even full pvp. A few recent attempts at sandbox style mmos had neither full-on, no safe zone pvp or item loot (archeage and age of wushu) and both worked aside from their payment models and a lack of meaningful open world content (among other things). Without pvp, those games would be boring to the majority of the people who play them. Sorry, thats just the way it is. Theres always games like Wurm online, but look how few people are really interested in that sort of game.
Wurm has a terrible interface, if it had a proper client application and not the Java crap I'm sure more people would play it.
I'm not entirely sure we're being too picky and that the problem is really that games just aren't as good as they used to be.
We're continually confronted with tired formulas, the over used WoW clone phrase is much abused but maybe with reason. And it's not just MMO's suffering here. Look at any of the big titles and it's the same. CoD, BF, Halo, FIFA **, Madden **, all these games coming out year after year with little to no difference to previous itterations.
Look at the latest AC Unity and the bullshit over their 30 fps statements and the absolutely god aweful optimisation on PC, added to the fact that it's a return to a very generic AC 2 formula after the excellent developments they'd made in AC Black Flag. Another AAA title falls back on the easy and familiar, or in other words the lazy, been there, done that.
Well I've learned my lessons, I no longer pre-order games; I refuse to buy any game with day 1 DLC. In fact I haven't bought a new game in almost 2 years now. Am I being picky? No, I'm just sick and fucking tired of being ripped off by greedy corporate execs with no souls and no invested interest in games beyond the almighty dollar.
I see this thread has gone back and forth from "on topic", to what the "definition" of sand box. I'm not even going to touch the definition part..
I do think sandbox fans are way too picky, and argue over the definition far too much. How about these MILLIONS of sandbox fans actually get together and pick a place to start? You want companies to go the sandbox game then show them, stop the bickering and stand up for what you want. All of you should pick a sandbox and ALL buy and sub to it. Show developers you want a sandbox, give investors the belief that is what you want. As long as themeparks keep being the games with millions of boxes sold or millons of subs then you will never get your niche game!.
Get together, pick a game and all of you collectively show them with your money. Eve, Darkfall....whatever, just pick one and give it millions of subs. That's what will get the attention you want.
It would help things if the sandboxer types werent picky over unpopular features.
I am, of course, referring to PvP, specifically free for all and full loot.
For some reason many sandboxer types have it in their heads that sandbox games MUST be PvP. Because if it isnt hardcore PvP then its a crappy carebear hand holding bore fest.
If you want a good example of sandboxers being too picky go to the EQN threads. Doesnt matter how sandbox it is or how good it is, the hardcore sandboxers are constantly bemoaning the graphics.
Thats because games need competition, and the competition afforded by non pvp games becomes stale. Thats why pvp and sandbox are almost interchangeable terms. I don't think a game has to be full loot, or even full pvp. A few recent attempts at sandbox style mmos had neither full-on, no safe zone pvp or item loot (archeage and age of wushu) and both worked aside from their payment models and a lack of meaningful open world content (among other things). Without pvp, those games would be boring to the majority of the people who play them. Sorry, thats just the way it is. Theres always games like Wurm online, but look how few people are really interested in that sort of game.
Wurm has a terrible interface, if it had a proper client application and not the Java crap I'm sure more people would play it.
That would probably attract a few more players, but nothing near what a version with decent combat and pvp would attract.
If I wanted a ultra realistic simulated world with a fantasy skin that bad, I'd clear out the woods in my backyard, stop by Lowes for some tools, and order an adventurers costume off Amazon.
I see this thread has gone back and forth from "on topic", to what the "definition" of sand box. I'm not even going to touch the definition part..
I do think sandbox fans are way too picky, and argue over the definition far too much. How about these MILLIONS of sandbox fans actually get together and pick a place to start? You want companies to go the sandbox game then show them, stop the bickering and stand up for what you want. All of you should pick a sandbox and ALL buy and sub to it. Show developers you want a sandbox, give investors the belief that is what you want. As long as themeparks keep being the games with millions of boxes sold or millons of subs then you will never get your niche game!.
Get together, pick a game and all of you collectively show them with your money. Eve, Darkfall....whatever, just pick one and give it millions of subs. That's what will get the attention you want.
Just my opinion.
For me, the closest anyone has come in recent years is ArcheAge. All the duping, hacking and P2W shit aside, I'd play ArcheAge right now if they made just a few simple changes like providing a no marketplace P2P server, adjusted the RNG down to a reasonable level, and opened another 10 castles for guilds to compete over. That formula would pull down 1 million+ subs easily.
It would help things if the sandboxer types werent picky over unpopular features.
I am, of course, referring to PvP, specifically free for all and full loot.
For some reason many sandboxer types have it in their heads that sandbox games MUST be PvP. Because if it isnt hardcore PvP then its a crappy carebear hand holding bore fest.
If you want a good example of sandboxers being too picky go to the EQN threads. Doesnt matter how sandbox it is or how good it is, the hardcore sandboxers are constantly bemoaning the graphics.
Thats because games need competition, and the competition afforded by non pvp games becomes stale. Thats why pvp and sandbox are almost interchangeable terms. I don't think a game has to be full loot, or even full pvp. A few recent attempts at sandbox style mmos had neither full-on, no safe zone pvp or item loot (archeage and age of wushu) and both worked aside from their payment models and a lack of meaningful open world content (among other things). Without pvp, those games would be boring to the majority of the people who play them. Sorry, thats just the way it is. Theres always games like Wurm online, but look how few people are really interested in that sort of game.
Wurm has a terrible interface, if it had a proper client application and not the Java crap I'm sure more people would play it.
That would probably attract a few more players, but nothing near what a version with decent combat and pvp would attract.
If I wanted a ultra realistic simulated world with a fantasy skin that bad, I'd clear out the woods in my backyard, stop by Lowes for some tools, and order an adventurers costume off Amazon.
Now come on, we both know you'll happily click a mouse button to chop down trees but, just like the rest of us, there's no way you're going outside to use an axe or chainsaw, that's just way too much like hard work!!
It would help things if the sandboxer types werent picky over unpopular features.
I am, of course, referring to PvP, specifically free for all and full loot.
For some reason many sandboxer types have it in their heads that sandbox games MUST be PvP. Because if it isnt hardcore PvP then its a crappy carebear hand holding bore fest.
If you want a good example of sandboxers being too picky go to the EQN threads. Doesnt matter how sandbox it is or how good it is, the hardcore sandboxers are constantly bemoaning the graphics.
Thats because games need competition, and the competition afforded by non pvp games becomes stale. Thats why pvp and sandbox are almost interchangeable terms. I don't think a game has to be full loot, or even full pvp. A few recent attempts at sandbox style mmos had neither full-on, no safe zone pvp or item loot (archeage and age of wushu) and both worked aside from their payment models and a lack of meaningful open world content (among other things). Without pvp, those games would be boring to the majority of the people who play them. Sorry, thats just the way it is. Theres always games like Wurm online, but look how few people are really interested in that sort of game.
Wurm has a terrible interface, if it had a proper client application and not the Java crap I'm sure more people would play it.
That would probably attract a few more players, but nothing near what a version with decent combat and pvp would attract.
If I wanted a ultra realistic simulated world with a fantasy skin that bad, I'd clear out the woods in my backyard, stop by Lowes for some tools, and order an adventurers costume off Amazon.
Now come on, we both know you'll happily click a mouse button to chop down trees but, just like the rest of us, there's no way you're going outside to use an axe or chainsaw, that's just way too much like hard work!!
Lol its true (this coming from someone that spent the last week digging a ditch across my yard to run wire - enough RL for me).
Point is though, you can simulate a lot of things to make games interesting but for most people nothing is as engaging as competition. A sandbox game without pvp is like using a Sims game to supplant a real relationship. To most people, both feel like they're missing something.
You can easily have a sandbox game have no PvP(minecraft) and it be a great sandbox experience.
You could also have openworld PvP, full loot incorporated into a themepark game. It's just not a popular mechanic.
I've played PvP FPS games(quake 2) where I lost everything when I died and dropped the weapon I was holding to be looted. Are they sandbox mechanics, no?
People who think sandbox games have to have PvP don't know what they are talking about in regard to sandbox mechanics.
You can easily have a sandbox game have no PvP(minecraft) and it be a great sandbox experience.
You could also have openworld PvP, full loot incorporated into a themepark game. It's just not a popular mechanic.
I've played PvP FPS games(quake 2) where I lost everything when I died and dropped the weapon I was holding to be looted. Are they sandbox mechanics, no?
People who think sandbox games have to have PvP don't know what they are talking about in regard to sandbox mechanics.
Any game or game type is the sum of its parts. None of the parts make it what it is on their own.
People who think sandbox games without PvP are fun to the average MMO player don't know what they are talking about in regard to sandbox mechanics.
I do think sandbox fans are way too picky, and argue over the definition far too much. How about these MILLIONS of sandbox fans actually get together and pick a place to start? You want companies to go the sandbox game then show them, stop the bickering and stand up for what you want. All of you should pick a sandbox and ALL buy and sub to it. Show developers you want a sandbox, give investors the belief that is what you want. As long as themeparks keep being the games with millions of boxes sold or millons of subs then you will never get your niche game!.
Get together, pick a game and all of you collectively show them with your money. Eve, Darkfall....whatever, just pick one and give it millions of subs. That's what will get the attention you want.
Never going to happen because people do want different things and have different definitions of what a sandbox is. For example, some people want to build their own stuff like Minecraft with good graphics. I have no interest at all in that. I hope those people get a game to play but I won't be playing it with them. I also don't mind PVP but will not play any game that's just a pure gankfest, if it doesn't have at least PVP-free safe zones I'm out.
Do sandbox fans agree across the board what a sandbox game is? I think therein lies the problem. So many features/elements can be called "sandboxy."
There are some aspects and "ideals" about sandboxes that I like, and still others that will turn me away. Am I a sandbox fan? I doubt it, but the freedom (within limits) sandbox design gives intrigues me. Every sandbox ever made had a point where the sand stopped. Even the Sahara Desert has limits
@Ket_Villiano: I think the screenshot of DMKano's sandbox is from the newly revealed "Thomas the Engine"
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
The sandbox genre does not have to be niche. If it is, it's because there are either very old games or indie titles with limited funding putting out these games. But ... that some of them hold quite an audience despite full on PVP and/or crappy graphics makes me think there is some sizable following out there.
We will have to see what EQ Next brings, and if they stick to their vision and keep gameplay open and off-the-rails.
It is niche because of the time investment and complexity required in a good sandbox MMO. Most casual players do not have patience to put a lot of effort into something that is a very long term goal (especially for someone playing a few hours a week) and they don't want to put time into learning game mechanics.
Especially since games have trained many players to want and expect instant gratification.
I agree it will be interesting to see what EQ:N does will it be a real sandbox or something tailored to the "I want to accomplish something awesome with my 20 minutes game time." crowd. I don't see how you can have both but maybe they will find a way.
I don't think any developers out there are worried about how they can qualify their games as sandbox.
Chances are if you make a game thats not on rails and allow for multiple forms of progression, accomplished in different ways, you have the makings of a sandbox game.
Sometimes I feel like most of the dispersions being cast on sandbox gameplay is nothing but themepark fanbois trying to rustle jimmies and overcomplicate a really simple issue. The more meta or mini-games within your game and the more forms of progression you have, the more sandbox your game will likely be. If you have a shallow crafting system where very little is dependent on player crafted items or a player-driven economy, chances are everyone will be following the same storyline, quests and dungeons to progress. Can 10 people enjoy the game in 10 very specific but different ways, or do they have the options of doing dungeons and arenas when they log in? This isn't rocket science.
Originally posted by Bladestrom There is nothing wrong with being picky, its what being part of a niche is all about. It is only an issue if a company is aiming for 17 billion proflt per month.
Well, sure you can be picky. IMO what IS WRONG is to be picky then bitch and moan that nothing measures up to your picky standards.
ding ding ding we have a winner.
I 100% agree.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Comments
I dont consider myself to picky, but for me im still playing Asherons Call 1 so untill a MMO comes out better than that im sticking with what is still best.
and if i want to really get my sandbox on i go play 7days to die. nothing like being dropped off in a infinite destructible world with nothing but some water and a can of beans to start with. Its like mine craft meats zombie survival game, with pvp and pve servers. I highly suggest it to anybody who likes sandbox/crafting/shooter/zombie survival. you have to craft EVERYTHING in that game. or get lucky from loot.
build your fort and defend it !
Awesome graph, what engine is that?
:P
Owait, that's "outside IRL", isn't it? I have played that game, great graph, but the gameplay sux. Grindy as hell, and permadeath is a bug, not a feature.
That game is called "Visual Studio Express", it's free from Microsoft.
It would help things if the sandboxer types werent picky over unpopular features.
I am, of course, referring to PvP, specifically free for all and full loot.
For some reason many sandboxer types have it in their heads that sandbox games MUST be PvP. Because if it isnt hardcore PvP then its a crappy carebear hand holding bore fest.
If you want a good example of sandboxers being too picky go to the EQN threads. Doesnt matter how sandbox it is or how good it is, the hardcore sandboxers are constantly bemoaning the graphics.
This.
Ultimately the freedom to do whatever ends up with the game being filled with gankers and griefers and they call it emergent game play.
If anyone uses the term emergent game play it means bullying another player for their enjoyment.
I don't think sandbox players are too picky, but perhaps the sandbox isn't big enough or the players don't like sharing. Every player has something they want to do in a sandbox game and while some will share the same idea, others will not. And most will not share the same method.
LOL awsome post !
Thats because games need competition, and the competition afforded by non pvp games becomes stale. Thats why pvp and sandbox are almost interchangeable terms. I don't think a game has to be full loot, or even full pvp. A few recent attempts at sandbox style mmos had neither full-on, no safe zone pvp or item loot (archeage and age of wushu) and both worked aside from their payment models and a lack of meaningful open world content (among other things). Without pvp, those games would be boring to the majority of the people who play them. Sorry, thats just the way it is. Theres always games like Wurm online, but look how few people are really interested in that sort of game.
Not really. Sandboxers are picky even by niche standards. The problem is everyone has a different definition of what a sandbox is. Some think it means open world, some think it means open world no instances, some think open world no instanced PVP anywhere, loot anyone's shit anytime anywhere. etc etc etc.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
I agree with this, I don't want to have to go to a single player game to find what I need, I want to do it in a MMO(RPG). I want to be able to be a blacksmith, miner or farmer from the start and not have to initially progress through the combat elements to get anywhere. The MMOs that try to cater to this make me level via questing before I can do what I want instead of letting me do what I want from the start. Give me what he said from the get go.
I've reached the point were I have to play survival games like Rust, DayZ, Beasts of Prey, etc just to get some semblence of sandboxyness and I hate the permadeath, it feels like zero progression.
Wurm has a terrible interface, if it had a proper client application and not the Java crap I'm sure more people would play it.
I'm not entirely sure we're being too picky and that the problem is really that games just aren't as good as they used to be.
We're continually confronted with tired formulas, the over used WoW clone phrase is much abused but maybe with reason. And it's not just MMO's suffering here. Look at any of the big titles and it's the same. CoD, BF, Halo, FIFA **, Madden **, all these games coming out year after year with little to no difference to previous itterations.
Look at the latest AC Unity and the bullshit over their 30 fps statements and the absolutely god aweful optimisation on PC, added to the fact that it's a return to a very generic AC 2 formula after the excellent developments they'd made in AC Black Flag. Another AAA title falls back on the easy and familiar, or in other words the lazy, been there, done that.
Well I've learned my lessons, I no longer pre-order games; I refuse to buy any game with day 1 DLC. In fact I haven't bought a new game in almost 2 years now. Am I being picky? No, I'm just sick and fucking tired of being ripped off by greedy corporate execs with no souls and no invested interest in games beyond the almighty dollar.
I see this thread has gone back and forth from "on topic", to what the "definition" of sand box. I'm not even going to touch the definition part..
I do think sandbox fans are way too picky, and argue over the definition far too much. How about these MILLIONS of sandbox fans actually get together and pick a place to start? You want companies to go the sandbox game then show them, stop the bickering and stand up for what you want. All of you should pick a sandbox and ALL buy and sub to it. Show developers you want a sandbox, give investors the belief that is what you want. As long as themeparks keep being the games with millions of boxes sold or millons of subs then you will never get your niche game!.
Get together, pick a game and all of you collectively show them with your money. Eve, Darkfall....whatever, just pick one and give it millions of subs. That's what will get the attention you want.
Just my opinion.
That would probably attract a few more players, but nothing near what a version with decent combat and pvp would attract.
If I wanted a ultra realistic simulated world with a fantasy skin that bad, I'd clear out the woods in my backyard, stop by Lowes for some tools, and order an adventurers costume off Amazon.
For me, the closest anyone has come in recent years is ArcheAge. All the duping, hacking and P2W shit aside, I'd play ArcheAge right now if they made just a few simple changes like providing a no marketplace P2P server, adjusted the RNG down to a reasonable level, and opened another 10 castles for guilds to compete over. That formula would pull down 1 million+ subs easily.
Now come on, we both know you'll happily click a mouse button to chop down trees but, just like the rest of us, there's no way you're going outside to use an axe or chainsaw, that's just way too much like hard work!!
Lol its true (this coming from someone that spent the last week digging a ditch across my yard to run wire - enough RL for me).
Point is though, you can simulate a lot of things to make games interesting but for most people nothing is as engaging as competition. A sandbox game without pvp is like using a Sims game to supplant a real relationship. To most people, both feel like they're missing something.
PvP isn't a sandbox mechanic.
You can easily have a sandbox game have no PvP(minecraft) and it be a great sandbox experience.
You could also have openworld PvP, full loot incorporated into a themepark game. It's just not a popular mechanic.
I've played PvP FPS games(quake 2) where I lost everything when I died and dropped the weapon I was holding to be looted. Are they sandbox mechanics, no?
People who think sandbox games have to have PvP don't know what they are talking about in regard to sandbox mechanics.
Any game or game type is the sum of its parts. None of the parts make it what it is on their own.
People who think sandbox games without PvP are fun to the average MMO player don't know what they are talking about in regard to sandbox mechanics.
Thanks for playing.
Never going to happen because people do want different things and have different definitions of what a sandbox is. For example, some people want to build their own stuff like Minecraft with good graphics. I have no interest at all in that. I hope those people get a game to play but I won't be playing it with them. I also don't mind PVP but will not play any game that's just a pure gankfest, if it doesn't have at least PVP-free safe zones I'm out.
Do sandbox fans agree across the board what a sandbox game is? I think therein lies the problem. So many features/elements can be called "sandboxy."
There are some aspects and "ideals" about sandboxes that I like, and still others that will turn me away. Am I a sandbox fan? I doubt it, but the freedom (within limits) sandbox design gives intrigues me. Every sandbox ever made had a point where the sand stopped. Even the Sahara Desert has limits
@Ket_Villiano: I think the screenshot of DMKano's sandbox is from the newly revealed "Thomas the Engine"
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
It is niche because of the time investment and complexity required in a good sandbox MMO. Most casual players do not have patience to put a lot of effort into something that is a very long term goal (especially for someone playing a few hours a week) and they don't want to put time into learning game mechanics.
Especially since games have trained many players to want and expect instant gratification.
I agree it will be interesting to see what EQ:N does will it be a real sandbox or something tailored to the "I want to accomplish something awesome with my 20 minutes game time." crowd. I don't see how you can have both but maybe they will find a way.
I don't think any developers out there are worried about how they can qualify their games as sandbox.
Chances are if you make a game thats not on rails and allow for multiple forms of progression, accomplished in different ways, you have the makings of a sandbox game.
Sometimes I feel like most of the dispersions being cast on sandbox gameplay is nothing but themepark fanbois trying to rustle jimmies and overcomplicate a really simple issue. The more meta or mini-games within your game and the more forms of progression you have, the more sandbox your game will likely be. If you have a shallow crafting system where very little is dependent on player crafted items or a player-driven economy, chances are everyone will be following the same storyline, quests and dungeons to progress. Can 10 people enjoy the game in 10 very specific but different ways, or do they have the options of doing dungeons and arenas when they log in? This isn't rocket science.
ding ding ding we have a winner.
I 100% agree.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo