Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
with all the pro Sandbox talk over the last decade, no sandbox game really changed the formula
MMOExposed
Member RarePosts: 7,400
This something that bothers me to this day. I been around this forum for a while.
I been here with Sandbox was all the hype and themepark was frowned upon publicly. But one thing I noticed, all the sandbox mmos that were released over the decade pretty much all follow the same formula. This is the same general complaint the MMO community had regarding the age of Themepark WoW Clones which all follow the same EQ/WoW formula over and over.
Pretty much all the hyped up Sandbox games that came out during all of this all were some kind of a grindy unbalance FFA open world death match with little group focused pve elements. They all pretty much PvP MMOs.
We just didnt have a name for this back then like we did for games using the WoW model. People here were more coded on talking about these Sandbox mmos as well. We all knew they were just PvP focused MMOs, but those words would never be whispered or denied outright by the most vigilant sandbox mmo fans. But again we all knew the reality here.
The thing is these games always failed as well. But we never saw an outcry against developers using that same formula, like we did for the WoW Clones.
I been here with Sandbox was all the hype and themepark was frowned upon publicly. But one thing I noticed, all the sandbox mmos that were released over the decade pretty much all follow the same formula. This is the same general complaint the MMO community had regarding the age of Themepark WoW Clones which all follow the same EQ/WoW formula over and over.
Pretty much all the hyped up Sandbox games that came out during all of this all were some kind of a grindy unbalance FFA open world death match with little group focused pve elements. They all pretty much PvP MMOs.
We just didnt have a name for this back then like we did for games using the WoW model. People here were more coded on talking about these Sandbox mmos as well. We all knew they were just PvP focused MMOs, but those words would never be whispered or denied outright by the most vigilant sandbox mmo fans. But again we all knew the reality here.
The thing is these games always failed as well. But we never saw an outcry against developers using that same formula, like we did for the WoW Clones.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Comments
The first "sandbox" MMO (UO) proved that there's no way to successfully mix those players that enjoy PVP and those that don't.
Sandbox has become synonymous with FFA-PVP, because it's the easiest form of "content"...
The problem is that they didn't want just war, they wanted to dominate all the other players.
They said it was "realism." But it's not realistic when you don't die and there's no end to the domination.
Funny thing about those games. When all those "hardcore" PvPers found out that they weren't as "hardcore" as they thought, when they got dominated themselves by the real "Elites" in PvP, they too left.
And the elite PvPers were left on their own, and it wasn't enough to support their own game.
Once upon a time....
And in a deep PvE game, with a great player run economy and politics.
But I'm realizing that even that won't work. Player just won't accept it anymore.
My next best dream is a game with open world WARFARE only. With enlistment.
Once upon a time....
1 Pvp is very easy for a developer to implement,VERY easy.Doing it right is another thing,it cannot be done right in a unbalanced system like a rpg.
2 Devs trying to cater to everyone to make more sales,get more crowd funding,ends up a sloppy game.
3 Players don't know what they want,they support anything and everything and change their mind more often than the weather changes.
So the formula has been to copy each other and try and create 1-2 gimmicks where you can say "we are different"but in reality all the same sloppy designs.
Some aspects looked organized,like creating zones catered to a certain race but overall the game designs have been very sub par.
I want a game designed the way i would design it or hopefully even better,ideas i wouldn't think of more depth than i imagined.I do NOT want more of the same old with a new face.
IMO there is a bigger picture and why all the genres that once were improving by the year have become stagnant.The reason is marketing,way easier to make cheaper less costly,less thought put into games and just get the media and streamers to market your product and PRETEND it is good.OH look popular streamer A is playing this game,it MUST be good.Oh look all the websites are giving this game a 9/10,it MUST be good.
Bottom line,does anyone think for themselves anymore?
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I self identify as a monkey.
I'm having a vision... shh... shh, I need silence...
Someone butchers the term "sandbox"
I see much confusion with the words "open world" and sandbox
Some butt hurts chimes in blaming past PVP from badly done games for all present and future PVP misfortunes
Oooooh... I'm seeing much confusion, salt and pain felt from the gluteal region of so many...
Ahhh... I lost the connection. I must rest.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Lots of developers use that to their advantage in marketing too. "This game is the spiritual successor of (nostalgic 'hardcore' game)." And if they deviate from making a clone the community gets toxic really fast because they want that clone so bad.
- 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
There's only one viable play style if the whole world is FFA-PVP, and that's PVP. Anyone else is just going to be killed and looted, sooner or later, usually on a regular basis. That's why most non-PVP'ers will avoid that rule set, and if they don't realise the implications, they very soon learn them and leave the game. Or become PVP'ers...
EVE walked the middle road by keeping 30% of the game world relatively safe. Not totally safe, but manageable if you were prepared to adapt. CCP vigorously defended that design and modified it whenever the playerbase found "workarounds". A section of the EVE community has endlessly campaigned for the removal or watering-down of the safezone protections, but their arguments have always been ignored by CCP. There's a very good reason why EVE's safezone is by far the highest populated part of that game world !
But PVP still defines everything that happens in EVE, because whatever you do, you have to consider the dangers and calculate the risks.
Theme park games launch and 2 weeks later all we see is crying on forums about no end game... more content...
Then what happened was Trammel. UO had an absolutely steady and rock solid population increase going on over time. When Trammel happened it had a huge surge because of the carebears hearing "Oh wow I will like it now". Wanna know what happened? They all fucking left as well as a ton of the PvP'ers. UO was never able to regain those pre-trammel numbers (or the temporary surge numbers either).
I wasn't into PvP to much in UO and it still stands as my favourite MMO of all time. Not all MMO's have to be for everyone and UO is a shining example of what happens when a game tries to do just that. Now its a bunch of mostly empty servers filled with few people who have multiple accounts in a weird world.
So yeah, UO proved that there is a way to do it. And it did it well.
I do recall one of the devs told bold lies stating that it was dropping in population (no it wasn't, it was increasing... they just stretched the truth about the amount that DIDN'T stay).
UO was steadily increasing players over time. Its an indisputable fact that can be proven with actual data. Did Trammel increase those number significantly? Yes it did. For months. Then it dropped to lower than pre-trammel numbers.
Edit - Wanted to add some numbers to show it was increasing population:
9/1997: UO's launch
-- Start, 0 subs
10/1998: T2A's launch (Lost Lands)
-- ~90,000 subs
5/2000: Renaissance's launch (Trammel)
-- ~130,000 subs
It hit like 190k with Trammel in 2001. Then it dropped. Then the 3D client released which brought it up to 200k, which then dropped again after people realized it was shit. A few other expansions created surges in the population, but none of them created the community and dedicated player base that was steadily growing pre-trammel.