Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Theme Park(new gamers) vs Sandbox(oldschool gamers)

2

Comments

  • gimmesomegimmesome Rancho Cucamonga, CAPosts: 362Member

    I agree with the poster above.   WoW was much less of a themepark at least in the linear sense that it is today.

    old WoW, or "vanilla" wow pretty much isn't what's usually being discussed when people mention WoW in comparison to other games.    Although, most WoW players today weren't even wow players back when it was vanilla, it still seems that if vanilla wow is the topic at hand, "old" or "Vanilla" is always included as to express the blatent differences between what it is now and what it used to be.

  • RefMinorRefMinor MyTownPosts: 3,452Member
    Originally posted by troublmaker

    I disagree with the "us" vs "them" mentality in agism.
    I was a child of the 80s and my friend owned an Atari and my dad had an IBM.
    Playing for me even imaginary playing was structured.  It had rules and it had a path to follow.  You can't play Ninja Turtles or He-Mann at the same time.  It just doesn't make sense and ruins the fantasy.  It was very linear as you were always going after the "bad guy" of the time.
    When you play tag it has rules.  You can't just run anywhere at all or else your parents will get worried and get angry at you.
    Games of the 80s were all linear.  All of those flight simulators, Pacman, and text investigation puzzles.  All of them were designed to be played the exact same way every single time to assure success.  You couldn't just leave the map of Pacman... you'd just re-appear from another corner... like a constant Portal.
    Packaging games in a linear manner is not something generational having to do with the 90s, 2000s, and 2010s.  Everyone has this glorified view of "when I was a kid."  I'm sure we've all heard these stories of our parents walking up hill both ways.  Same shit here.
    The reason why games are being made theme park is simply because the big gaming market right now is 21-35 and these are people who grew up with linear theme-park games.  The 10-21 crowd who you have deemed as the people purchasing theme parks and hating sandboxes are the second highest buying audience.
    I saw a similar argument made about RTS games and RPGs whereas dumb people play RPGs and smart people play RTS'.
    I mean you want that to be true if you play an RTS but there is no data to support that supposition.  All it is, is a grandios claim that makes you feel better about yourself.

     

    I do not mean to troll you or be insulting but I think if your imaginary play was structured, that shows somewhat OCD or autistic tendencies rather than anything to do with the computer games market.

     

    I was born in 1971 and had a console/computer since 79, yes many games were linear back then but there were sandboxes even back then, Elite from 83 or 84 or Lotus Esprit (GTA made in 1986) were pure unstructured sandboxes, you were dumped in a world and you went and had fun, the game didn't tell you what you should be doing.
  • CuathonCuathon University City, NYPosts: 2,211Member

    Originally posted by Loke666

    My first mmo was the themepark Meridian 59 in 1996. Your impact on the world there was about the same as in wow.

    You make it sound like all the old MMOs were sandboxes but that is very far from the truth.

    I think most people just want a good fun game. I don't care if it is a themepark or a sandbox and I have a feeling the majority of the MMO players, new or old feels the same.

    Sandboxes seems to have become a religion.

    You know what? Even the Wow generation play single player sandboxes like Skyrim and enjoy it.

    The reason so few people play sandbox games right now is not because they love themeparks but because most modern sandboxes sucks big time. Right now only Eve have some quality and it is from 2003, that is ancient.

    Preach to the devs and the publishers so they make a good sandbox instead.

    Skyrim is not a sandbox. You cannot change the world aside from killing mobs and only maybe dragon kills are persistent.

    Skyrim is a semi non linear themepark.

  • CuathonCuathon University City, NYPosts: 2,211Member

    Originally posted by RefMinor

    Originally posted by troublmaker

    I disagree with the "us" vs "them" mentality in agism.

    I was a child of the 80s and my friend owned an Atari and my dad had an IBM.

    Playing for me even imaginary playing was structured.  It had rules and it had a path to follow.  You can't play Ninja Turtles or He-Mann at the same time.  It just doesn't make sense and ruins the fantasy.  It was very linear as you were always going after the "bad guy" of the time.

    When you play tag it has rules.  You can't just run anywhere at all or else your parents will get worried and get angry at you.

    Games of the 80s were all linear.  All of those flight simulators, Pacman, and text investigation puzzles.  All of them were designed to be played the exact same way every single time to assure success.  You couldn't just leave the map of Pacman... you'd just re-appear from another corner... like a constant Portal.

    Packaging games in a linear manner is not something generational having to do with the 90s, 2000s, and 2010s.  Everyone has this glorified view of "when I was a kid."  I'm sure we've all heard these stories of our parents walking up hill both ways.  Same shit here.

    The reason why games are being made theme park is simply because the big gaming market right now is 21-35 and these are people who grew up with linear theme-park games.  The 10-21 crowd who you have deemed as the people purchasing theme parks and hating sandboxes are the second highest buying audience.

    I saw a similar argument made about RTS games and RPGs whereas dumb people play RPGs and smart people play RTS'.

    I mean you want that to be true if you play an RTS but there is no data to support that supposition.  All it is, is a grandios claim that makes you feel better about yourself.

     

    I do not mean to troll you or be insulting but I think if your imaginary play was structured, that shows somewhat OCD or autistic tendencies rather than anything to do with the computer games market.

     

    I was born in 1971 and had a console/computer since 79, yes many games were linear back then but there were sandboxes even back then, Elite from 83 or 84 or Lotus Esprit (GTA made in 1986) were pure unstructured sandboxes, you were dumped in a world and you went and had fun, the game didn't tell you what you should be doing.



    Please refrain from being ableist. Lack of imagination or preference for structure is not an OCD trait. You can have those traits without OCD or Autism.

  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo LondonPosts: 3,221Member

    Originally posted by Loke666

    My first mmo was the themepark Meridian 59 in 1996. Your impact on the world there was about the same as in wow.

    You make it sound like all the old MMOs were sandboxes but that is very far from the truth.

    I think most people just want a good fun game. I don't care if it is a themepark or a sandbox and I have a feeling the majority of the MMO players, new or old feels the same.

    Sandboxes seems to have become a religion.

    You know what? Even the Wow generation play single player sandboxes like Skyrim and enjoy it.

    The reason so few people play sandbox games right now is not because they love themeparks but because most modern sandboxes sucks big time. Right now only Eve have some quality and it is from 2003, that is ancient.

    Preach to the devs and the publishers so they make a good sandbox instead.

    Yes, I break it down into 2:



    1. FUN gameplay  eg I'm anticipating GW2 the combat skills should be fun in pve & pvp for even if the experience feels a bit linear or static world.


    2. World with CONSEQUENCES: eg any of: Political factions that break apart, permadeath, a city annexed or a stronghold built and an economy between nations growing etc

    So Fun gameplay can be the core mechanic in a game and that's good enough. But I'd like to see mmorpgs with consequences, which even if the core gameplay is a bit ponderous, the long-term pay-off is worth it.

    TBH, I think most people would like one or the other as well and ideally both, but seems 2) is more tricky to develop and maybe a naturally smaller market (less gamers who enjoy delayed gratification, afterall gaming is often about instant gratification, isn't it?).

    Verdict: I don't think there's a great divide, but a bigger market is satisfied by eg themepark with strong core mechanic + presentation vs a smaller market with more complexity to produce a mmorpg with consequences. : )

  • gimmesomegimmesome Rancho Cucamonga, CAPosts: 362Member

    I think an important aspect of this conversation and many other threads I've read/posted in is being ignored by too many people and causing a rather undeserved stigma onto us "sandboxers"  

    That aspect is that somehow sandboxers think all videogames shouldn't have a 'point' in playing them, and should all be empty deserts where people are expected to design, create, build, code, and structure all the content and rules themselves.

     

    This is so untrue.    I dare say I don't speak for myself, but, sandboxers don't only want sandbox videogames.   Everyone knows Super mario bros, sonic the hedgehog, megaman, contra, castlevania were great games.  legendary.  as well as super linear and themepark-esque (if you have to put one of those labels on them)    -- Sandboxers don't have a problem with that.  

     

    We have a problem with a genre [mmorpg] that flourished BECAUSE of the fact that it offered sandboxy experiences, outside of the norm of linear videogames, is now changing into a genre that has nothing really special about it compared to console titles.   

    We sandboxers instead want the atmosphere to be a little bit more resemblant to how it used to be when MMORPGs were the videogame haven for the creative, imaginitive, social, and critical/analytical thinking gamers to spend their time.  Time to build a community, make friends, adventure/explore the unknown, develop their character and watch them grow and improve, while leaving the rest of the ENTIRE GAMING INDUSTRY to remain linear and themeparkish as always.

    Instead of saying to sandboxers "why don't you shut up and go play your sandboxes then?"   We should say to everyone else:  "Why do you have to leave your themepark just to come ruin our sandbox and turn it into another themepark???"

    You don't see 'purist sandboxers' in the communities of games like Halo or Marvel vs Capcom or Gears of War, voicing how much the games suck because they need more sandbox elements.     

    I wish one day, all console game devs decide to do what MMO devs did in reverse.  I want to see the console community's heads spin in rage as their favorite games are CHANGED and DISREGARDED by the devs and replaced by over-the-top social networking portals.   Gears of War-book.  Add as friend?    -- "Hey what happened to my awesome pew pew game? what is this social media crap?" ->  'Sorry, pal... it makes more money.  Justified, right?"

     

     

  • KuinnKuinn MestaPosts: 2,093Member

    It's not a themepark vs. sandbox issue in my eyes, more like bad games vs. good games. Most of mmorpgs across the board are rubbish imo, but there are a few that are entertaining to me, none of them are sandbox games but I often wish they had more sandboxy features. I'd propably play a sandbox game rather than a themepark but the problem is there's nothing worth playing, and if the game is otherwise good then it's butchered with some stupid mechanics that for some reason are forced on you in about every sandbox game.

  • CuathonCuathon University City, NYPosts: 2,211Member

    Originally posted by gimmesome

    I think an important aspect of this conversation and many other threads I've read/posted in is being ignored by too many people and causing a rather undeserved stigma onto us "sandboxers"  

    That aspect is that somehow sandboxers think all videogames shouldn't have a 'point' in playing them, and should all be empty deserts where people are expected to design, create, build, code, and structure all the content and rules themselves.

     

    This is so untrue.    I dare say I don't speak for myself, but, sandboxers don't only want sandbox videogames.   Everyone knows Super mario bros, sonic the hedgehog, megaman, contra, castlevania were great games.  legendary.  as well as super linear and themepark-esque (if you have to put one of those labels on them)    -- Sandboxers don't have a problem with that.  

     

    We have a problem with a genre [mmorpg] that flourished BECAUSE of the fact that it offered sandboxy experiences, outside of the norm of linear videogames, is now changing into a genre that has nothing really special about it compared to console titles.   

    We sandboxers instead want the atmosphere to be a little bit more resemblant to how it used to be when MMORPGs were the videogame haven for the creative, imaginitive, social, and critical/analytical thinking gamers to spend their time.  Time to build a community, make friends, adventure/explore the unknown, develop their character and watch them grow and improve, while leaving the rest of the ENTIRE GAMING INDUSTRY to remain linear and themeparkish as always.

    Instead of saying to sandboxers "why don't you shut up and go play your sandboxes then?"   We should say to everyone else:  "Why do you have to leave your themepark just to come ruin our sandbox and turn it into another themepark???"

    You don't see 'purist sandboxers' in the communities of games like Halo or Marvel vs Capcom or Gears of War, voicing how much the games suck because they need more sandbox elements.     

    I wish one day, all console game devs decide to do what MMO devs did in reverse.  I want to see the console community's heads spin in rage as their favorite games are CHANGED and DISREGARDED by the devs and replaced by over-the-top social networking portals.   Gears of War-book.  Add as friend?    -- "Hey what happened to my awesome pew pew game? what is this social media crap?" ->  'Sorry, pal... it makes more money.  Justified, right?"

     

     



    This.

  • gimmesomegimmesome Rancho Cucamonga, CAPosts: 362Member

    Originally posted by Cuathon

     

    Skyrim is not a sandbox. You cannot change the world aside from killing mobs and only maybe dragon kills are persistent.

    Skyrim is a semi non linear themepark.

    umm excuse me?

    I really don't mean so sound rude, or pick fights, because I get annoyed with needless bickering, but really?  How is Skyrim not a sandbox?  Because there's a story you can choose to follow?   Because you can't drive a DeLorean through a castle?

     

    You can play Skyrim how you see fit.  That alone puts it in Sandbox status.      

    You can follow a story and do the quests they give you... or you can just kill everyone, including the NPCs giving quests...  you can take over towns.  You can have housing, and decorate the houses as you see fit.   You can progress your character and tailor them to play your way, not some predefined class role.    You can go where you want, when you want, without waiting for a scripted game mechanic to first trigger before you gain access.    you can....     you know what?   is this just a troll reply that i'm falling for and responding to? 

    The more I think about it, the more unreasonable it is to hear "skyrim is not a sandbox but instead a semi non linear themepark" ... 

    I suppose EVE online is a semi non linear themepark because your forced to fly in a spaceship instead of a hot-air balloon?

  • gimmesomegimmesome Rancho Cucamonga, CAPosts: 362Member

    My appologies for assuming you were trolling Cau.

     

    I guess I couldn't help but defend lol

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,761Member Uncommon

    Many of us oldschool gamers from the 80s entered the MMORPG era understanding what good gameplay was.

    Timesinks and tedium are not good gameplay, yet that's what characterized early MMORPGs.  It's what characterizes most sandboxes.

    Themepark games are not the only type of MMORPG capable of having fun moment-to-moment gameplay, but thus far it's been extremely rare for sandboxes to offer that.

    (reading the rest of the replies, seems like Unlight already made this point in a more eloquent way.)

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • troublmakertroublmaker St. George''s, NFPosts: 337Member

    Originally posted by RefMinor

    I do not mean to troll you or be insulting but I think if your imaginary play was structured, that shows somewhat OCD or autistic tendencies rather than anything to do with the computer games market.

     

    I was born in 1971 and had a console/computer since 79, yes many games were linear back then but there were sandboxes even back then, Elite from 83 or 84 or Lotus Esprit (GTA made in 1986) were pure unstructured sandboxes, you were dumped in a world and you went and had fun, the game didn't tell you what you should be doing.

    The metaphor of rules and games is really really common in philosophy.  Witgenstein wrote in Philosophical Investigations (Wiki entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Investigations) about how language is like a game and games have rules.  If you played games without rules that means you are probably socially dysfunctional (based on modern psychology).  Playing with structure is and has always been important to children.  You might go play in the woods, but you never go too far from home in fear of being lost.  When you play hide and seek you don't go hide in Harlem, you stay in your neighborhood.

    Even when children are playing alone with toys, there is a structure to their play.  You can tell this because if you try to play with them and you play in such an awkward way they will tell you "NO" as in, that is not how you play this game.

    The OP is stating that everyone who grew up inthe 80s played sandboxes then and everyone who likes theme-park adventures now is a teenager thus it is a generation thing.  My refutation is simply to say that the vast majority of games in the 80s were theme park adventures.  I also brought up my own childhood experience to say that even growing up as a child is a theme-park adventure controlled by mum or dad.

    The OP's post is entirely to say that older people are better than younger people whe in fact the current trend of theme-parked games is entirely based on the demands of people like me who grew up in the 80s.  Although there were SOME sandbox games in the 80s they are small in number.

    Website: http://www.thegameguru.me / YouTube:

  • CuathonCuathon University City, NYPosts: 2,211Member

    Originally posted by gimmesome

    My appologies for assuming you were trolling Cau.

     

    I guess I couldn't help but defend lol

    Its all about assumptions really. I do not consider skyrim a sandbox because you can't alter the landscape, and you can only really buy premade houses AFAIK. Classless is also possible in themeparks.

    I really think its just a non linear themepark. You can go where you want its true, but isnt that mostly a function of level scaling?

    Different people put the line in the sand, damn you you filthy pun, in different places.

  • GeeTeeEffOhGeeTeeEffOh Newington, CTPosts: 731Member

     

    Someone coined the phrase (I believe with EVE) "The players are the content" Current Sandbox developers saw this as the easy shortcut. They can release something without the same level of production. Instead they create the framework and a few areas and release the game. But just because you don't need to build "quest hubs" doesn't mean you don't need something else instead? You can't just leave it blank  from a development standpoint and expect players are going to buy that. They need as much content and development as any Themepark. But the content needs to be discovered, brought out, built or what have you, but by the players.

     

    P.S. Jeez, MMORPG.com, get a WYSIWYG editor that works huh?

  • fivorothfivoroth LondonPosts: 3,665Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by toddze

    I agree with your example of how kids are raised now as well. Kids expect to be entertained now, and that translates to every part of their life.

    When I was a kid i grew up on a farm, i didnt have cable tv, we had an antenna. The only cartoons I got were saturaday morning on fox. As for toys I only had a few ninja turtles. That was it, the rest of my entertainment came from my imgaination. Hell I had to make my own sandbox on the side of a sandy hill. Id go out and TRY and build my own little forts. I had to build my own play swords out of wood. being on a farm I had all of the tools I need to make my own fun. I would not trade my childhood for anything. Its translated into adulthood. I dont need someone showing me whats fun, because I know how to make my own entertainment. 90% of the time what other people thinks entertainment, I dont. To this day I still dont watch much TV, it seems like every year I watch less and less. The crap on TV just gets stupider (if thats a word haha) and stupider.

    I hear people talking at work about the younger generation being self entitlists. All I can do is grin to myself because its true this has been a major debate in the MMO genre for a long time now. When I hear people not even remotly associated with the MMO genre talking about this upcomming generation being self entitlists it just rings a bell thats so true. That self entitlist generation will be the future of this county one day. We already see where this country is headed, and its not pretty.

    Yes, you are right. I love playing on my phone, computer, console etc. I am an entitlist (is that even a word?). I am selfish and all that stuff. You have the new generation totally figured out.

    Back to being entertained by my themepark games.

    Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.

  • gimmesomegimmesome Rancho Cucamonga, CAPosts: 362Member

    Originally posted by Cuathon

     

    Its all about assumptions really. I do not consider skyrim a sandbox because you can't alter the landscape, and you can only really buy premade houses AFAIK. Classless is also possible in themeparks.

    I really think its just a non linear themepark. You can go where you want its true, but isnt that mostly a function of level scaling?

    Different people put the line in the sand, damn you you filthy pun, in different places.

    buahahahahah....  ;-)

     

    I will agree that it feels a bit limitting that in Skyrim I can't simply build a house ANYWHERE, but, to it's defense, mods are amazing.   I now have many houses in different places, even underground ;D

     

  • DeathofsageDeathofsage Winston, PAPosts: 998Member

    This, and many other threads, stand as constant reminders of what people take "sandboxes" and "themepark" to mean.

    The general defenitions usually seem to be the same but the finer details get a lot of bickering.

    It's sad because modern themeparks tend to act like sandbox elements (like being able to create permanent changes in the world, just aren't doable, like non-instanced housing/guild housing).

    WoW, for instance, has been fighting tooth-and-gryphon-claw against player requests for guild housing or guild airships/zeppelins when--while surely it's a lot of work and something that you'd want to save for a major patch or expansion--it is quite doable.

    Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
    12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
    Placing bets Blizzard's "Titan" will be a wow-clone.

  • CuathonCuathon University City, NYPosts: 2,211Member

    Originally posted by gimmesome

    Originally posted by Cuathon


     

    Its all about assumptions really. I do not consider skyrim a sandbox because you can't alter the landscape, and you can only really buy premade houses AFAIK. Classless is also possible in themeparks.

    I really think its just a non linear themepark. You can go where you want its true, but isnt that mostly a function of level scaling?

    Different people put the line in the sand, damn you you filthy pun, in different places.

    buahahahahah....  ;-)

     

    I will agree that it feels a bit limitting that in Skyrim I can't simply build a house ANYWHERE, but, to it's defense, mods are amazing.   I now have many houses in different places, even underground ;D

     

    True you can mod the game. But that isn't an option for your character. He cannot change the world. You have to exit the game and kick into a mod to change things, and sometimes it won't let you use an old character on a modified world file, although maybe they fixed that for skyrim.

  • ValkaernValkaern OxfordPosts: 512Member

    Originally posted by MMOarQQ

    ArcheAge will save us.

    Maybe...

    Hopefully it'll be worth the wait. I think it's a pretty smart move on their part to integrate the two as a 'Sandpark'. I don't think they have to be mutually exclusive.

    Even the most linear themepark games that I've tried have always felt like there was plenty of room for a multitude of sandbox systems, and what better way to introduce those that have never really been off the rails to sandbox systems than if the themepark was surrounded on all sides by a sandbox that was available to explore but not required? It would have probably kept me playing longer during the clone years. Who wouldn't want more to do and more horizontal growth opportunities?

    Anyway, I just don't see any valid reason why the two haven't been intelligently combined before AA. Although I'm pretty eager to try out ArcheAge, I do hope they take their time as most of the videos do seem to show some rather clunky play (which shouldn't be a huge problem as there isn't even an English publisher yet).

  • RefMinorRefMinor MyTownPosts: 3,452Member
    Originally posted by troublmaker


    Originally posted by RefMinor

    I do not mean to troll you or be insulting but I think if your imaginary play was structured, that shows somewhat OCD or autistic tendencies rather than anything to do with the computer games market.
     
    I was born in 1971 and had a console/computer since 79, yes many games were linear back then but there were sandboxes even back then, Elite from 83 or 84 or Lotus Esprit (GTA made in 1986) were pure unstructured sandboxes, you were dumped in a world and you went and had fun, the game didn't tell you what you should be doing.

    The metaphor of rules and games is really really common in philosophy.  Witgenstein wrote in Philosophical Investigations (Wiki entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Investigations) about how language is like a game and games have rules.  If you played games without rules that means you are probably socially dysfunctional (based on modern psychology).  Playing with structure is and has always been important to children.  You might go play in the woods, but you never go too far from home in fear of being lost.  When you play hide and seek you don't go hide in Harlem, you stay in your neighborhood.

    Even when children are playing alone with toys, there is a structure to their play.  You can tell this because if you try to play with them and you play in such an awkward way they will tell you "NO" as in, that is not how you play this game.

    The OP is stating that everyone who grew up inthe 80s played sandboxes then and everyone who likes theme-park adventures now is a teenager thus it is a generation thing.  My refutation is simply to say that the vast majority of games in the 80s were theme park adventures.  I also brought up my own childhood experience to say that even growing up as a child is a theme-park adventure controlled by mum or dad.

    The OP's post is entirely to say that older people are better than younger people whe in fact the current trend of theme-parked games is entirely based on the demands of people like me who grew up in the 80s.  Although there were SOME sandbox games in the 80s they are small in number.

     

    I see what you mean about the rules better now, but they are still your rules, that you decided in your imaginary play, in the same way, you go into a sandbox and you decide what path to take.

     

    A themepark is like all the children get given a set of rules and all follow them in the correct order, whereas if you stick a load of kids in a sandbox, they will split into different groups playing different things.

     

    Of course one may be a pyscho and throw sand in the others faces and one no doubt will wee in the corner and draw pictures in the wet sand, but they're the ones who no one would form into a group with so they ran off and cried to the teacher who said in the interests of fairness here is the set of rules and everyone should follow them in the correct order.
  • evictonevicton Warren, PAPosts: 398Member

    Originally posted by Cuathon

    Originally posted by gimmesome

    My appologies for assuming you were trolling Cau.

     

    I guess I couldn't help but defend lol

    Its all about assumptions really. I do not consider skyrim a sandbox because you can't alter the landscape, and you can only really buy premade houses AFAIK. Classless is also possible in themeparks.

    I really think its just a non linear themepark. You can go where you want its true, but isnt that mostly a function of level scaling?

    Different people put the line in the sand, damn you you filthy pun, in different places.

    And this is the real reason most companies stay away from making a sandbox title. What is a sandbox title for one person is a non linear themepark for another. Every single feature seems to lower the number of your target audience.

    Story- Add it/ don't add it. Your target audience got smaller, cause some people want it and others don't

    FFA PVP- This is a big one and can potentially cut your target audience in half. 

    Now if you decide to go with ffa pvp you can then decide if you want full loot or not.

    I've kinda convinced myself a pure sandbox mmo target audience may be the most hardest niche market to devolop a game for. On top of all this difficulty where every choice dramaticly affects your products reception you have no real proof even if you make the greatest sandbox every made. You can make as much money as even a f2p themepark. 

     

     

  • gimmesomegimmesome Rancho Cucamonga, CAPosts: 362Member

    @Deathofsage:

    I see what you mean.   Prime example is what was misunderstood between Cua and myself.  I think Skyrim is sandbox, he doesn't.   

    Why he says it isn't:  can't change the terrain/environment

    Why I say it is:  Can choose how to play and what activities to spend your time doing, whenever you want.

     

    I suppose another thing that seems to be a counter-perspective when it comes to defining what a sandbox really is.   

    Videogames still need a theme, or a setting, wouldn't you say?   For instance, let's say a Western, cowboys'n'indians style MMO were to be developed.    But let's say the devs went more towards sandbox instead of themepark, so the players would be expected to build towns, run saloons, set up duels/shootouts, form law enforcement, etc...  well,  given a certain level of tools and freedom, someone is bound to eventually attempt creating something far from western in style.     i.e. someone builds a spaceship saloon that can hover and shoot lazers (shrug)... well, that would pretty much ruin the feel and immersion for many other players, so you have to limit the amount of freedom given to players in their creativity in order to maintain the flavor of the gameworld itself.     So, because of this regulation over "keep it western and low tech and ...brown.." would the game cease to be a sandbox?    

    I think not.    Hence, why I think Skyrim is still a sandbox.   It would be 'more' sandboxy IF there were tools/mechanics in place to let players build where they wanted, or light a forest on fire, or tailor their character to specialize in killing mobs with lazers that shoot out their eyes, but it would probably nullify the purpose of the setting and theme the developers created for you to "play in"  

    this touches on my thoughts on how lately, sandboxers are misunderstood.   

     

  • CuathonCuathon University City, NYPosts: 2,211Member

    Originally posted by evicton

    Originally posted by Cuathon


    Originally posted by gimmesome

    My appologies for assuming you were trolling Cau.

     

    I guess I couldn't help but defend lol

    Its all about assumptions really. I do not consider skyrim a sandbox because you can't alter the landscape, and you can only really buy premade houses AFAIK. Classless is also possible in themeparks.

    I really think its just a non linear themepark. You can go where you want its true, but isnt that mostly a function of level scaling?

    Different people put the line in the sand, damn you you filthy pun, in different places.

    And this is the real reason most companies stay away from making a sandbox title. What is a sandbox title for one person is a non linear themepark for another. Every single feature seems to lower the number of your target audience.

    Story- Add it/ don't add it. Your target audience got smaller, cause some people want it and others don't

    FFA PVP- This is a big one and can potentially cut your target audience in half. 

    Now if you decide to go with ffa pvp you can then decide if you want full loot or not.

    I've kinda convinced myself a pure sandbox mmo target audience may be the most hardest niche market to devolop a game for. On top of all this difficulty where every choice dramaticly affects your products reception you have no real proof even if you make the greatest sandbox every made. You can make as much money as even a f2p themepark. 

     

     

    Themeparks work the same way. Some features are make or break for many people in themeparks too. Besides, I still liked skyrim and paid for and played it. It not being a sandbox didn't stop me.

  • IkisisIkisis Venice, FLPosts: 310Member Uncommon

    http://lifeisfeudal.com/

    Will save us all!!!! 

  • RabiatorRabiator GrobizellPosts: 358Member

    Originally posted by Valkaern

    Originally posted by MMOarQQ

    ArcheAge will save us.

    Maybe...

    Hopefully it'll be worth the wait. I think it's a pretty smart move on their part to integrate the two as a 'Sandpark'. I don't think they have to be mutually exclusive.

    Even the most linear themepark games that I've tried have always felt like there was plenty of room for a multitude of sandbox systems, and what better way to introduce those that have never really been off the rails to sandbox systems than if the themepark was surrounded on all sides by a sandbox that was available to explore but not required? It would have probably kept me playing longer during the clone years. Who wouldn't want more to do and more horizontal growth opportunities?

    Anyway, I just don't see any valid reason why the two haven't been intelligently combined before AA. Although I'm pretty eager to try out ArcheAge, I do hope they take their time as most of the videos do seem to show some rather clunky play (which shouldn't be a huge problem as there isn't even an English publisher yet).

    If you look outside the MMO world, it has been done before with the X series of space sims.

    Those have a storyline to follow like a typical themepark game, but the player is free to ignore it and do something else instead (and come back later). There is something else to do as well, you can explore the universe and build stations that play a part in the game's economy. All in all, those are rather sandboxy games that cover the themepark aspect as well.

    If someone (Arch Age?) will do that kind of  "sandpark" in MMOs too, I'm all for it image

2
This discussion has been closed.