People dont get to change definitions to fit their view of it
The INDUSTRY says it doesnt mean what you think it means
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
And for about the 1,000 time on these forums, with you...
Sandbox = freedom
Themepark = directed game play
Doesn't it concern you that your terms and definitions have nothing to do with one another?
In a real-world themepark there is no direction enforced upon visitors, and in fact you're totally free to ride whatever rides you want (exactly like Skyrim.)
The terms, when taken in the way we mean, are opposites. Freedom to go where you want, like in Skyrim. Directed game play to have to go where the devs direct you, like in WoW zones.
I'm not going through all this again. We've done this so many times before and I don't care anymore. The subs are speaking much louder than anyone here.
Sorry, but this argument reminds me of basketball, who's the better player? MJ or Lebron James?
Lebron's stats surpass MJ in most areas!
MJ has SIX CHAMPIONSHIPS!! SIX!!! CHAMPIONSHIPS DON'T LIE!
While Lebron (sandboxes) hasn't proven himself to that many rings, does it mean he is a bad player?
Maybe MJ (themepark) just got on the right teams at the right times? If given his youth again, COULD HE STILL DO IT!?!?!
Back on topic though
I agree with axehilt's definition, and this is me understanding his words...
Themepark, When you first enter a themepark, like a real one (Think six flags Magic Mountain in Valencia, CA), are you forced onto superman right off the bat? NO! But everything in there is the owners world(the devs), he made it, you are in it, you can't influence what happens around you, but you can jump on any of the rides, at anytime, granted they are open (Or you can find that tank/healer). You can do it alone, or with a group of friends! Hey isn't that great? Yes it is cause you don't get some asshat that blows up one of the rides for you!
Sandbox i see as the owner of that sandbox gives you a theme to play by, maybe some basic ground rules like no camping the entrance, but aside from that the world is yours, and it can/will affect other people gameplay. While IMO a TRUE fully fledged sandbox would allow you to make anything, like a frost giant, or a floating city full of cavemen with magic abilities that shoot faries at each other (intense right?), that wouldn't be very possible in an MMO. So instead they give you that theme to play by, some ground rules, you start at the same or similar place as the others, but pretty much you get kicked in the butt and off you go, making your own adventure.
Sorry for the rant, but thats how i see the definitions between the two, while other disagree, and i know some will, I think it sums it up pretty fair.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
Never thought of it this way (or perhpas more accurately, never so succinctly), and I have to say I tend to like/agree with this definitions. Makes sense.
Curious - based upon this definition, which of the current "main stream" MMORPG's (if any) would you consider to offer primarily sandbox features? EvE? Any others?
EVE definitely, since gameplay largely revolves around player control over space, and the entire fabric of the economy is player-created.
ATITD too, as players have a lot of creation opportunities and settle real-world locations.
H&H is sandbox since you can basically go out and create your own settlement anywhere. (Oh, oops...but this one isn't mainstream and I suppose even ATITD skirts that definition.)
UO too, for the same reason.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Doesn't it concern you that your terms and definitions have nothing to do with one another?
In a real-world themepark there is no direction enforced upon visitors, and in fact you're totally free to ride whatever rides you want (exactly like Skyrim.)
The terms, when taken in the way we mean, are opposites. Freedom to go where you want, like in Skyrim. Directed game play to have to go where the devs direct you, like in WoW zones.
I'm not going through all this again. We've done this so many times before and I don't care anymore. The subs are speaking much louder than anyone here.
Did you fail to read my post?
You're not directed to go anywhere in a real themepark. Direction or linearity have nothing to do with the defintion of a videogame themepark.
They may be loosely related by common association, but they've never been part of the core definition.
Themepark vs. Sandbox is purely a question of who creates the core experience (the thing you log on each session to do.)
In Skyrim you're playing the devs' game.
In Drawception, you're playing and creating the players' game.
In FarmVille, you're creating your own farm.
In EVE, you're creating and controlling the players' economy and territory.
In WOW, you're playing the devs' game.
In Minecraft, you're creating your own world.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Themepark = Directed gameplay + Non Customizable World (Preset Rides)
Sandbox = Non directed gameplay + Customizable World
This may satisfy Axehilt's issue with terminology?
No, because nothing about the word "themepark" implies directed gameplay.
If we're concerned with directed vs. open-world, we'll toss around the terms "linear" or "open-world". Until then, we're only discussing how customizable, player-created, or player-authored the game is.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Doesn't it concern you that your terms and definitions have nothing to do with one another?
In a real-world themepark there is no direction enforced upon visitors, and in fact you're totally free to ride whatever rides you want (exactly like Skyrim.)
The terms, when taken in the way we mean, are opposites. Freedom to go where you want, like in Skyrim. Directed game play to have to go where the devs direct you, like in WoW zones.
I'm not going through all this again. We've done this so many times before and I don't care anymore. The subs are speaking much louder than anyone here.
Did you fail to read my post?
You're not directed to go anywhere in a real themepark. Direction or linearity have nothing to do with the defintion of a videogame themepark.
They may be loosely related by common association, but they've never been part of the core definition.
Themepark vs. Sandbox is purely a question of who creates the core experience (the thing you log on each session to do.)
In Skyrim you're playing the devs' game.
In Drawception, you're playing and creating the players' game.
In FarmVille, you're creating your own farm.
In EVE, you're creating and controlling the players' economy and territory.
In WOW, you're playing the devs' game.
In Minecraft, you're creating your own world.
I agree with you Axe, from a Designer's point of view, but I think that, from aplayer's point of view, we have to consider that the the phrase of " you are creating your own world", implies and translates as freedom, and the phrase "you are playing the dev's game" implies and translates as Direction
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Still wrong. That is not the difference between Sandboxes and Themeparks. In it's simplest form Themebox are linear and Sandboxes aren't. But you can't use the extremes of either and say it has to follow those to a tee to fit one or the other which is what you are doing.
In Skyrim I can be any class I want, I can raise any skill I want, I can go where I want and do what I want within the boundaries of the world and even if I didn't follow any sort of order it still fits the lore and purpose of the world and it's people. The story line does not set limits upon my character. This is a sandbox. Also placed into this category are games like Red Dead Redemption, Assasins Creed II, Fallout, GTA, etc. And those aren't my picks those are picks by the industry of games that are considered 'sandbox' games.
In a Theme park my character is limited to whatever class I choose generally, my skill sets are confined to whatever tree generally, I usually have to complete x quests on whatever planet or area etc. to move to the next place. I usually can't just explore random x place and have quests fall into my lap and still make sense to the overall purpose of the world and it's people or the lore or general story line...which I can do in Skyrim.
If we were discussing linearity, we would say a game is "linear" or "non-linear" (often: "open world").
We're not.
We're discussing sandbox vs. themepark, which is a matter of who creates the content for the game. In a sandbox, a child creates something. In a themepark, the rides' developers create something.
Real themeparks do not involve linearity, so why would that have anything to do with the term as applied to games?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Still wrong. That is not the difference between Sandboxes and Themeparks. In it's simplest form Themebox are linear and Sandboxes aren't. But you can't use the extremes of either and say it has to follow those to a tee to fit one or the other which is what you are doing.
In Skyrim I can be any class I want, I can raise any skill I want, I can go where I want and do what I want within the boundaries of the world and even if I didn't follow any sort of order it still fits the lore and purpose of the world and it's people. The story line does not set limits upon my character. This is a sandbox. Also placed into this category are games like Red Dead Redemption, Assasins Creed II, Fallout, GTA, etc. And those aren't my picks those are picks by the industry of games that are considered 'sandbox' games.
In a Theme park my character is limited to whatever class I choose generally, my skill sets are confined to whatever tree generally, I usually have to complete x quests on whatever planet or area etc. to move to the next place. I usually can't just explore random x place and have quests fall into my lap and still make sense to the overall purpose of the world and it's people or the lore or general story line...which I can do in Skyrim.
If we were discussing linearity, we would say a game is "linear" or "non-linear" (often: "open world").
We're not.
We're discussing sandbox vs. themepark, which is a matter of who creates the content for the game. In a sandbox, a child creates something. In a themepark, the rides' developers create something.
Real themeparks do not involve linearity, so why would that have anything to do with the term as applied to games?
No what we are doing is going by your definition of a term. The term however as it relates to the gaming world and the people within it is quite different. You can stuff everything that isn't the freedom to create everything as Theme Park all day if you want but that doesn't make it what the majority of the industry uses the term as.
When people describe games as "Theme Parks" they are referring more to the actual rollercoasters. You strap into a rollercoaster and go on the tracks until you reach the end. Sandbox means that the devs give you the tools and sand to make your own content. Sandbox games never really do well because the casual gamers (players who are less emotionally invested) tend to shy away from these games. Casual gamers make up a majority of the market now, hardcore gamers used to be the majority.
I played WoW up until WotLK, played RoM for 2 years and now Rift. I am F2P player. I support games when I feel they deserve my money and I want the items enough. I don't troll, and I don't take kindly to trolls.
Originally posted by Suraknar Originally posted by AxehiltOriginally posted by AmarantharOriginally posted by AxehiltDoesn't it concern you that your terms and definitions have nothing to do with one another?In a real-world themepark there is no direction enforced upon visitors, and in fact you're totally free to ride whatever rides you want (exactly like Skyrim.)
The terms, when taken in the way we mean, are opposites. Freedom to go where you want, like in Skyrim. Directed game play to have to go where the devs direct you, like in WoW zones.I'm not going through all this again. We've done this so many times before and I don't care anymore. The subs are speaking much louder than anyone here.Did you fail to read my post? You're not directed to go anywhere in a real themepark. Direction or linearity have nothing to do with the defintion of a videogame themepark. They may be loosely related by common association, but they've never been part of the core definition. Themepark vs. Sandbox is purely a question of who creates the core experience (the thing you log on each session to do.)
In Skyrim you're playing the devs' game.
In Drawception, you're playing and creating the players' game.
In FarmVille, you're creating your own farm. In EVE, you're creating and controlling the players' economy and territory. In WOW, you're playing the devs' game. In Minecraft, you're creating your own world.
I agree with you Axe, from a Designer's point of view, but I think that, from aplayer's point of view, we have to consider that the the phrase of " you are creating your own world", implies and translates as freedom, and the phrase "you are playing the dev's game" implies and translates as Direction
What does any of this have to do with the thread's topic? Anything at all?
What the heck. Games are not 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. The distinction between them is based on a list of features. Each of those features may or may not be 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. It's all a scale between sandbox and theme park. You will not come to a consensus on Skyrim because it contains elements of both and is somewhere between 100% sandbox and 100% theme park.
If you've played Farmville for any length of time because your girlfriend/wife plays it you will realize very quickly that you are playing the dev's game from start to finish.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
When people describe games as "Theme Parks" they are referring more to the actual rollercoasters. You strap into a rollercoaster and go on the tracks until you reach the end. Sandbox means that the devs give you the tools and sand to make your own content. Sandbox games never really do well because the casual gamers (players who are less emotionally invested) tend to shy away from these games. Casual gamers make up a majority of the market now, hardcore gamers used to be the majority.
Interesting definition of a casual gamer, being less emotionally invested. Perhaps accurate also.
I play only sandboxes. I am married,have 2 kids, and a full time job. My playtime is a couple hours a night after I put the kids to bed. That doesnt stop me from logging onto Mortal Online and RP'ing. So even though my playtimes are casual I am pretty attached to my character(s) and role within the world and consider my precious 2 hours a night to be hardcore.
What does any of this have to do with the thread's topic? Anything at all?
What the heck. Games are not 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. The distinction between them is based on a list of features. Each of those features may or may not be 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. It's all a scale between sandbox and theme park. You will not come to a consensus on Skyrim because it contains elements of both and is somewhere between 100% sandbox and 100% theme park.
If you've played Farmville for any length of time because your girlfriend/wife plays it you will realize very quickly that you are playing the dev's game from start to finish.
Yep, the thread has been broken down to a bunch of people arguing others are wrong based on their personal opinions of what they think sandbox means while still arguing semantics.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
I agree with you Axe, from a Designer's point of view, but I think that, from aplayer's point of view, we have to consider that the the phrase of " you are creating your own world", implies and translates as freedom, and the phrase "you are playing the dev's game" implies and translates as Direction
You're stating that because A is always Y, B is always Z. That is not logic.
We might agree that sandboxes translates to freedom (although nothing is ever truly "free", even in a sandbox. You're not walking on planets in EVE.)
However we can't say that in every themepark things are 100% linear. Examples of non-linear themeparks:
Every real-world themepark
Skyrim
Fallout
Grand Theft Auto
(Also Metroid and Zelda have been pretty close to sandbox style play too.)
Basically in these examples the player doesn't manipulate the world, and the game isn't linear -- you can freely roam wherever you want (though admittedly the Skyrim storyline is linear, much like some of the linear aspects of the other games listed.)
Actually the least linear experience listed above is the very word we're talking about: the real world "Themepark"
So to fix your logic:
A is always Y
C can be Y or Z
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
What the heck. Games are not 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. The distinction between them is based on a list of features. Each of those features may or may not be 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. It's all a scale between sandbox and theme park. You will not come to a consensus on Skyrim because it contains elements of both and is somewhere between 100% sandbox and 100% theme park.
If you've played Farmville for any length of time because your girlfriend/wife plays it you will realize very quickly that you are playing the dev's game from start to finish.
I have to agree with this part.
Take one's favorite sandbox game and remove the ability to add a house. It doesn't suddenly become a themepark.
It just becomes a sandbox game where you can't add a house.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
What the heck. Games are not 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. The distinction between them is based on a list of features. Each of those features may or may not be 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. It's all a scale between sandbox and theme park. You will not come to a consensus on Skyrim because it contains elements of both and is somewhere between 100% sandbox and 100% theme park.
If you've played Farmville for any length of time because your girlfriend/wife plays it you will realize very quickly that you are playing the dev's game from start to finish.
I have to agree with this part.
Take one's favorite sandbox game and remove the ability to add a house. It doesn't suddenly become a themepark.
It just becomes a sandbox game where you can't add a house.
What the heck. Games are not 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. The distinction between them is based on a list of features. Each of those features may or may not be 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. It's all a scale between sandbox and theme park. You will not come to a consensus on Skyrim because it contains elements of both and is somewhere between 100% sandbox and 100% theme park.
If you've played Farmville for any length of time because your girlfriend/wife plays it you will realize very quickly that you are playing the dev's game from start to finish.
I have to agree with this part.
Take one's favorite sandbox game and remove the ability to add a house. It doesn't suddenly become a themepark.
It just becomes a sandbox game where you can't add a house.
Bingo!
+2
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT Playing: Skyrim Following: The Repopulation I want a Virtual World, not just a Game. ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
Originally posted by lizardbones What does any of this have to do with the thread's topic? Anything at all?
Well once we nail down a definition of sandbox, we can understand what elements are required to make it a sandbox.
Then we can understand how those elements mesh (or don't) with a game being MMO.
Personally I think the perception that massive sandboxes could never work has more to do with every sandbox MMO being terrible, than with players really opposing the idea.
Although I think a few specific sandbox features definitely don't have synergy with being in an MMO. And these are often the best sandbox features players love, like reshaping terrain or building things wherever they want. These features are fantastic in a singleplayer or small-scale multiplayer environment, but they have a hard time fitting into a MMO environment.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
What the heck. Games are not 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. The distinction between them is based on a list of features. Each of those features may or may not be 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. It's all a scale between sandbox and theme park. You will not come to a consensus on Skyrim because it contains elements of both and is somewhere between 100% sandbox and 100% theme park.
If you've played Farmville for any length of time because your girlfriend/wife plays it you will realize very quickly that you are playing the dev's game from start to finish.
I have to agree with this part.
Take one's favorite sandbox game and remove the ability to add a house. It doesn't suddenly become a themepark.
It just becomes a sandbox game where you can't add a house.
Bingo!
+2
+3
(given that my posts basically said the same thing throughout this thread :P It's a game's core gameplay (what you do most of the time) which determines whether it's considered themepark or sandbox.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
EvE is not a true Sandbox, it has Sandbox elements.
You are still restricted on what you can do in EvE based what the developers allow you to do.
Try fitting guns on a mining ship.
Try fitting certain mods on certain ships
Try to kill a planet.
Try to remove a warp gate.
Try to remove a station in High Sec (not a POS)
EvE has restrictions put in place by the developers and you are playing the game they allow you to play, sure you have alot more freedom to choose how you want to play but you are still limited by what the game designs built.
What does any of this have to do with the thread's topic? Anything at all?
What the heck. Games are not 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. The distinction between them is based on a list of features. Each of those features may or may not be 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. It's all a scale between sandbox and theme park. You will not come to a consensus on Skyrim because it contains elements of both and is somewhere between 100% sandbox and 100% theme park.
If you've played Farmville for any length of time because your girlfriend/wife plays it you will realize very quickly that you are playing the dev's game from start to finish.
Yep, the thread has been broken down to a bunch of people arguing others are wrong based on their personal opinions of what they think sandbox means while still arguing semantics.
except that's where this thread is bound to end up because of it's initial premise.
the premise is "the massive sandbox crowd is a myth".
Well, then during the course of conversation it has to be established what exactly is the sandbox crowd? Maybe it's not small or maybe it's miniscule?
Part of finding out what who is in that crowd is figuring out what games they play. Now comes the argument that x is a sandbox and y isn't.
If it's determined that the sandbox crowd spans all sorts of sandbox games then it might be large. If being a "sandboxer"only means that they only acknowledge 5 games as true sandbox games then indeed the group may be small.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Skyrim is a themepark.It's a bunch of themepark rides (dungeons and quests) set up by the developer. The player doesn't change them (ie it lacks "sand".)
Open world doesn't make something a sandbox. Sandboxes are about player authorship -- the player takes part in creating the experience.
Let me tell you about this thing called MODs and how the TES games have the single largest modding community on the planet with near 1 million people enjoying it...and how Bethesda actually works with them and provides tools and tutorials on how to make them...
See, SWG for example provided no such thing as what you speak of until well after release...it also means that games like City of Heroes and Champions Online are sandbox games because of the tools provided that allow player made content. and if I really really want to take what you said loosely..."the player takes part in creating the experience"...all MMOs and RPGs are sandboxes...because its up to YOU how you take part in the game.
I saw people in WoW doing 100% role playing all the time they are on...even setting up shop in Ogrimarr selling items. Doesnt that make WoW a sandbox for him? Yep...
Being able to create mods for a game does not make that game a sandbox game. A sandbox game is a game in which...
it doesnt matter what your opinion of sandbox games is...I am replying to someone who is giving HIS definition of it which I refuted directly. Deal...
Take it to private messages if you want a private converstation. You made what I believe is an incorrect statement about a game I have played, on a forum of which I am a member. Deal...
You took your PERSONAL opinion of what a sandbox game is to refute something said to someone ELSES OPINION of what a sandbox game is.
If you want to become part of a conversation...read it and stay in context. Deal...
It doesn't matter what anyone's opinion of a sandbox is. The simple fact is if you type in the word "sandbox" in Google, both TES games and GTA games all come up (Eve too). You can find it in developer blogs, wikis, marketing hype, reviews....... everywhere. This is society's "accepted" definition of what a sandbox is. The word itself can mean something different to you, but to the masses, this is what it is. Whether you like it or agree with it or not doesn't really matter. To argue about it is pointless.
Comments
For the 10th time in this thread:
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
Sorry, but this argument reminds me of basketball, who's the better player? MJ or Lebron James?
Lebron's stats surpass MJ in most areas!
MJ has SIX CHAMPIONSHIPS!! SIX!!! CHAMPIONSHIPS DON'T LIE!
While Lebron (sandboxes) hasn't proven himself to that many rings, does it mean he is a bad player?
Maybe MJ (themepark) just got on the right teams at the right times? If given his youth again, COULD HE STILL DO IT!?!?!
Back on topic though
I agree with axehilt's definition, and this is me understanding his words...
Themepark, When you first enter a themepark, like a real one (Think six flags Magic Mountain in Valencia, CA), are you forced onto superman right off the bat? NO! But everything in there is the owners world(the devs), he made it, you are in it, you can't influence what happens around you, but you can jump on any of the rides, at anytime, granted they are open (Or you can find that tank/healer). You can do it alone, or with a group of friends! Hey isn't that great? Yes it is cause you don't get some asshat that blows up one of the rides for you!
Sandbox i see as the owner of that sandbox gives you a theme to play by, maybe some basic ground rules like no camping the entrance, but aside from that the world is yours, and it can/will affect other people gameplay. While IMO a TRUE fully fledged sandbox would allow you to make anything, like a frost giant, or a floating city full of cavemen with magic abilities that shoot faries at each other (intense right?), that wouldn't be very possible in an MMO. So instead they give you that theme to play by, some ground rules, you start at the same or similar place as the others, but pretty much you get kicked in the butt and off you go, making your own adventure.
Sorry for the rant, but thats how i see the definitions between the two, while other disagree, and i know some will, I think it sums it up pretty fair.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
I agree with this.
Classes are a Directed gameplay element.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
EVE definitely, since gameplay largely revolves around player control over space, and the entire fabric of the economy is player-created.
ATITD too, as players have a lot of creation opportunities and settle real-world locations.
H&H is sandbox since you can basically go out and create your own settlement anywhere. (Oh, oops...but this one isn't mainstream and I suppose even ATITD skirts that definition.)
UO too, for the same reason.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I agree as well. However if the game lets us multi-class than I now consider it to be a sandbox element.
Did you fail to read my post?
You're not directed to go anywhere in a real themepark. Direction or linearity have nothing to do with the defintion of a videogame themepark.
They may be loosely related by common association, but they've never been part of the core definition.
Themepark vs. Sandbox is purely a question of who creates the core experience (the thing you log on each session to do.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
No, because nothing about the word "themepark" implies directed gameplay.
If we're concerned with directed vs. open-world, we'll toss around the terms "linear" or "open-world". Until then, we're only discussing how customizable, player-created, or player-authored the game is.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I agree with you Axe, from a Designer's point of view, but I think that, from aplayer's point of view, we have to consider that the the phrase of " you are creating your own world", implies and translates as freedom, and the phrase "you are playing the dev's game" implies and translates as Direction
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
If we were discussing linearity, we would say a game is "linear" or "non-linear" (often: "open world").
We're not.
We're discussing sandbox vs. themepark, which is a matter of who creates the content for the game. In a sandbox, a child creates something. In a themepark, the rides' developers create something.
Real themeparks do not involve linearity, so why would that have anything to do with the term as applied to games?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
No what we are doing is going by your definition of a term. The term however as it relates to the gaming world and the people within it is quite different. You can stuff everything that isn't the freedom to create everything as Theme Park all day if you want but that doesn't make it what the majority of the industry uses the term as.
When people describe games as "Theme Parks" they are referring more to the actual rollercoasters. You strap into a rollercoaster and go on the tracks until you reach the end. Sandbox means that the devs give you the tools and sand to make your own content. Sandbox games never really do well because the casual gamers (players who are less emotionally invested) tend to shy away from these games. Casual gamers make up a majority of the market now, hardcore gamers used to be the majority.
I played WoW up until WotLK, played RoM for 2 years and now Rift.
I am F2P player. I support games when I feel they deserve my money and I want the items enough.
I don't troll, and I don't take kindly to trolls.
Did you fail to read my post? You're not directed to go anywhere in a real themepark. Direction or linearity have nothing to do with the defintion of a videogame themepark. They may be loosely related by common association, but they've never been part of the core definition. Themepark vs. Sandbox is purely a question of who creates the core experience (the thing you log on each session to do.)
I agree with you Axe, from a Designer's point of view, but I think that, from aplayer's point of view, we have to consider that the the phrase of " you are creating your own world", implies and translates as freedom, and the phrase "you are playing the dev's game" implies and translates as Direction
What does any of this have to do with the thread's topic? Anything at all?
What the heck. Games are not 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. The distinction between them is based on a list of features. Each of those features may or may not be 100% sandbox or 100% theme park. It's all a scale between sandbox and theme park. You will not come to a consensus on Skyrim because it contains elements of both and is somewhere between 100% sandbox and 100% theme park.
If you've played Farmville for any length of time because your girlfriend/wife plays it you will realize very quickly that you are playing the dev's game from start to finish.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Interesting definition of a casual gamer, being less emotionally invested. Perhaps accurate also.
I play only sandboxes. I am married,have 2 kids, and a full time job. My playtime is a couple hours a night after I put the kids to bed. That doesnt stop me from logging onto Mortal Online and RP'ing. So even though my playtimes are casual I am pretty attached to my character(s) and role within the world and consider my precious 2 hours a night to be hardcore.
Yep, the thread has been broken down to a bunch of people arguing others are wrong based on their personal opinions of what they think sandbox means while still arguing semantics.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
You're stating that because A is always Y, B is always Z. That is not logic.
We might agree that sandboxes translates to freedom (although nothing is ever truly "free", even in a sandbox. You're not walking on planets in EVE.)
However we can't say that in every themepark things are 100% linear. Examples of non-linear themeparks:
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I have to agree with this part.
Take one's favorite sandbox game and remove the ability to add a house. It doesn't suddenly become a themepark.
It just becomes a sandbox game where you can't add a house.
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
Bingo!
+2
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
Playing: Skyrim
Following: The Repopulation
I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
Well once we nail down a definition of sandbox, we can understand what elements are required to make it a sandbox.
Then we can understand how those elements mesh (or don't) with a game being MMO.
Personally I think the perception that massive sandboxes could never work has more to do with every sandbox MMO being terrible, than with players really opposing the idea.
Although I think a few specific sandbox features definitely don't have synergy with being in an MMO. And these are often the best sandbox features players love, like reshaping terrain or building things wherever they want. These features are fantastic in a singleplayer or small-scale multiplayer environment, but they have a hard time fitting into a MMO environment.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
+3
(given that my posts basically said the same thing throughout this thread :P It's a game's core gameplay (what you do most of the time) which determines whether it's considered themepark or sandbox.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
CCCCCCcccoombooooooo breaker!
I'm out of popcorn guys. See ya Monday. I expect these ruts to be at least a foot wider and two feet deeper when I return.
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
EvE is not a true Sandbox, it has Sandbox elements.
You are still restricted on what you can do in EvE based what the developers allow you to do.
Try fitting guns on a mining ship.
Try fitting certain mods on certain ships
Try to kill a planet.
Try to remove a warp gate.
Try to remove a station in High Sec (not a POS)
EvE has restrictions put in place by the developers and you are playing the game they allow you to play, sure you have alot more freedom to choose how you want to play but you are still limited by what the game designs built.
Sooner or Later
except that's where this thread is bound to end up because of it's initial premise.
the premise is "the massive sandbox crowd is a myth".
Well, then during the course of conversation it has to be established what exactly is the sandbox crowd? Maybe it's not small or maybe it's miniscule?
Part of finding out what who is in that crowd is figuring out what games they play. Now comes the argument that x is a sandbox and y isn't.
If it's determined that the sandbox crowd spans all sorts of sandbox games then it might be large. If being a "sandboxer"only means that they only acknowledge 5 games as true sandbox games then indeed the group may be small.
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
It doesn't matter what anyone's opinion of a sandbox is. The simple fact is if you type in the word "sandbox" in Google, both TES games and GTA games all come up (Eve too). You can find it in developer blogs, wikis, marketing hype, reviews....... everywhere. This is society's "accepted" definition of what a sandbox is. The word itself can mean something different to you, but to the masses, this is what it is. Whether you like it or agree with it or not doesn't really matter. To argue about it is pointless.
sandbox crowd in Mortal Online >>> clicky