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.
ok fine, I also disagree with this.
having freedom to do whatever one wants doesn't constitute a sandbox. If you want to/have to be literal then let's go there...
In a real sandbox (with sand) any structure you make is subject to collapsing at a moment's notice. You are also limited to how large/high you can build due to the properties of sand. There is no "power" in a sandbox so no lights or motors or "whatever".
You have limited space in a sandbox. you can only go "so deep" in a sandbox.
allowing players to do whatever they want whatever they want is just bad design. This goes back to desing itself. Throwing every idea that you can conceive into a game pretty much makes a mess. Giving restrictions and then allowing participants to work within those restrictions is more freeing because it allows for a "spine" of ideas from which to work from.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
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.
Should we start talking about the differences between a virtual world and a sandbox next? Or should we begin another thread entirely?
Mods have certainly been gracious to let this go so far from the original topic although I don't mind at all.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
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.
ok fine, I also disagree with this.
having freedom to do whatever one wants doesn't constitute a sandbox. If you want to/have to be literal then let's go there...
In a real sandbox (with sand) any structure you make is subject to collapsing at a moment's notice. You are also limited to how large/high you can build due to the properties of sand. There is no "power" in a sandbox so no lights or motors or "whatever".
You have limited space in a sandbox. you can only go "so deep" in a sandbox.
allowing players to do whatever they want whatever they want is just bad design. This goes back to desing itself. Throwing every idea that you can conceive into a game pretty much makes a mess. Giving restrictions and then allowing participants to work within those restrictions is more freeing because it allows for a "spine" of ideas from which to work from.
Your wrong.
Example - Entropia Universe. That is a Sandbox. A player can do anything they want, when they want and how they want. Zero restrictions. That is a Sandbox. EvE has Sandbox elements but it is not a sandbox.
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.
ok fine, I also disagree with this.
having freedom to do whatever one wants doesn't constitute a sandbox. If you want to/have to be literal then let's go there...
In a real sandbox (with sand) any structure you make is subject to collapsing at a moment's notice. You are also limited to how large/high you can build due to the properties of sand. There is no "power" in a sandbox so no lights or motors or "whatever".
You have limited space in a sandbox. you can only go "so deep" in a sandbox.
allowing players to do whatever they want whatever they want is just bad design. This goes back to desing itself. Throwing every idea that you can conceive into a game pretty much makes a mess. Giving restrictions and then allowing participants to work within those restrictions is more freeing because it allows for a "spine" of ideas from which to work from.
Your wrong.
Example - Entropia Universe. That is a Sandbox. A player can do anything they want, when they want and how they want. Zero restrictions. That is a Sandbox. EvE has Sandbox elements but it is not a sandbox.
Well actually no. You cant' do anything you want. If you want something in the game, the devs have to code it on. If the devs dont' want to code it in, you dont' get it.
There are always limits - just like an actual sandbox.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Example - Entropia Universe. That is a Sandbox. A player can do anything they want, when they want and how they want. Zero restrictions. That is a Sandbox. EvE has Sandbox elements but it is not a sandbox.
Probably what Venge said.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
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.
Should we start talking about the differences between a virtual world and a sandbox next? Or should we begin another thread entirely?
Mods have certainly been gracious to let this go so far from the original topic although I don't mind at all.
Actually why not?
Are the playes who want to play in a virtual world different from the players who want to play in a sandbox?
if a virtual world and a sandbox aren't one in the same do the "sandboxers" realize this? do they agree?
And if they are completely different and those who only want to play sandbox games were to hypothetically agree then does the group suddenly become even smaller?
If one is to say that the hue size of the sandbox crowd is a myth then one kind of needs to determine who exatctly the sandbox crowd really are.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
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.
ok fine, I also disagree with this.
having freedom to do whatever one wants doesn't constitute a sandbox. If you want to/have to be literal then let's go there...
In a real sandbox (with sand) any structure you make is subject to collapsing at a moment's notice. You are also limited to how large/high you can build due to the properties of sand. There is no "power" in a sandbox so no lights or motors or "whatever".
You have limited space in a sandbox. you can only go "so deep" in a sandbox.
allowing players to do whatever they want whatever they want is just bad design. This goes back to desing itself. Throwing every idea that you can conceive into a game pretty much makes a mess. Giving restrictions and then allowing participants to work within those restrictions is more freeing because it allows for a "spine" of ideas from which to work from.
Your wrong.
Example - Entropia Universe. That is a Sandbox. A player can do anything they want, when they want and how they want. Zero restrictions. That is a Sandbox. EvE has Sandbox elements but it is not a sandbox.
Well actually no. You cant' do anything you want. If you want something in the game, the devs have to code it on. If the devs dont' want to code it in, you dont' get it.
There are always limits - just like an actual sandbox.
Well Actually yes as the Devs will code in almost anything into the game for the players. Just check the games website out.
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.
Should we start talking about the differences between a virtual world and a sandbox next? Or should we begin another thread entirely?
Mods have certainly been gracious to let this go so far from the original topic although I don't mind at all.
I'm going to assume that the reason for this is because one first has to define what a "sandbox" is before determining a crowd for one. That being said, Google or Bing 'sandbox games' and see which games come up in almost every top 10 list. Skyrim is one of them.
So point is you can sit here and define what is sandbox and what isn't from your own personal perspectives all day. Not going to change what's already been accepted as the industry standard or definition.
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.
ok fine, I also disagree with this.
having freedom to do whatever one wants doesn't constitute a sandbox. If you want to/have to be literal then let's go there...
In a real sandbox (with sand) any structure you make is subject to collapsing at a moment's notice. You are also limited to how large/high you can build due to the properties of sand. There is no "power" in a sandbox so no lights or motors or "whatever".
You have limited space in a sandbox. you can only go "so deep" in a sandbox.
allowing players to do whatever they want whatever they want is just bad design. This goes back to desing itself. Throwing every idea that you can conceive into a game pretty much makes a mess. Giving restrictions and then allowing participants to work within those restrictions is more freeing because it allows for a "spine" of ideas from which to work from.
Your wrong.
Example - Entropia Universe. That is a Sandbox. A player can do anything they want, when they want and how they want. Zero restrictions. That is a Sandbox. EvE has Sandbox elements but it is not a sandbox.
Well actually no. You cant' do anything you want. If you want something in the game, the devs have to code it on. If the devs dont' want to code it in, you dont' get it.
There are always limits - just like an actual sandbox.
Well Actually yes as the Devs will code in almost anything into the game for the players. Just check the games website out.
So you agree with me. Almost is not anything. That is the limit.
@mmaize. The industry has not accepted that Skyrim is a sandbox, many yes, but not all, possibly a majority though. I did what you suggested and did a search on "Is Skyrim a sandbox" and the 2nd link stated it wasn't. So there is no univeral acceptance yet.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
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.
ok fine, I also disagree with this.
having freedom to do whatever one wants doesn't constitute a sandbox. If you want to/have to be literal then let's go there...
In a real sandbox (with sand) any structure you make is subject to collapsing at a moment's notice. You are also limited to how large/high you can build due to the properties of sand. There is no "power" in a sandbox so no lights or motors or "whatever".
You have limited space in a sandbox. you can only go "so deep" in a sandbox.
allowing players to do whatever they want whatever they want is just bad design. This goes back to desing itself. Throwing every idea that you can conceive into a game pretty much makes a mess. Giving restrictions and then allowing participants to work within those restrictions is more freeing because it allows for a "spine" of ideas from which to work from.
Your wrong.
Example - Entropia Universe. That is a Sandbox. A player can do anything they want, when they want and how they want. Zero restrictions. That is a Sandbox. EvE has Sandbox elements but it is not a sandbox.
Well actually no. You cant' do anything you want. If you want something in the game, the devs have to code it on. If the devs dont' want to code it in, you dont' get it.
There are always limits - just like an actual sandbox.
Well Actually yes as the Devs will code in almost anything into the game for the players. Just check the games website out.
Except that players can't do anything they want. they need to peitiion to add it into the game and wait until it is coded and tested and then it's added.
But let's, for argument's sake, say you are correct. that in this game one can do anything they want whenverver they want as long as some time has gone by to add it into the game.
one point doesn't equal a line. This would then be the only game I know where this would be true. Or, the only mmo I know where this would be true.
IN which case how can an argument be made where only one game is in existence that supports the true mmo sandbox ideal? Because if this game is the only game that is a true mmo sandbox then how many players play it? That number would then be the answer to the thread.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
VengeSunsoar - I agree that most is not all but that is a true sandbox.
Also Skyrim is not a Sandbox because no matter how many times you play through it, you will still do the same main story line which makes it linar. It does have Sandbox elements but it is not a true sandbox.
Also alot of games have Sandbox elements but are not true Sandboxes.
I agree that EvE is one of the cloest of all the MMORPGs to a true sandbox but it is not.
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.
ok fine, I also disagree with this.
having freedom to do whatever one wants doesn't constitute a sandbox. If you want to/have to be literal then let's go there...
In a real sandbox (with sand) any structure you make is subject to collapsing at a moment's notice. You are also limited to how large/high you can build due to the properties of sand. There is no "power" in a sandbox so no lights or motors or "whatever".
You have limited space in a sandbox. you can only go "so deep" in a sandbox.
allowing players to do whatever they want whatever they want is just bad design. This goes back to desing itself. Throwing every idea that you can conceive into a game pretty much makes a mess. Giving restrictions and then allowing participants to work within those restrictions is more freeing because it allows for a "spine" of ideas from which to work from.
Your wrong.
Example - Entropia Universe. That is a Sandbox. A player can do anything they want, when they want and how they want. Zero restrictions. That is a Sandbox. EvE has Sandbox elements but it is not a sandbox.
Well actually no. You cant' do anything you want. If you want something in the game, the devs have to code it on. If the devs dont' want to code it in, you dont' get it.
There are always limits - just like an actual sandbox.
Well Actually yes as the Devs will code in almost anything into the game for the players. Just check the games website out.
Except that players can't do anything they want. they need to peitiion to add it into the game and wait until it is coded and tested and then it's added.
But let's, for argument's sake, say you are correct. that in this game one can do anything they want whenverver they want as long as some time has gone by to add it into the game.
one point doesn't equal a line. This would then be the only game I know where this would be true. Or, the only mmo I know where this would be true.
IN which case how can an argument be made where only one game is in existence that supports the true mmo sandbox ideal? Because if this game is the only game that is a true mmo sandbox then how many players play it? That number would then be the answer to the thread.
The thing is most players do not want a true sandbox even if they say they do because most players have never played a true sandbox game, they have played hybrids and think they are Sandbox games.
Same reason some people keep calling EvE a sandbox game, it is very close but it is not a true sandbox.
We have a lot of MMOs are that have a ton of Sandbox Elements but nothing that is a true sandbox.
Ever played any of the X space games like X3: Terran Conflict? I think that is the closest I have ever seen to a true sandbox in a video game.
VengeSunsoar - I agree that most is not all but that is a true sandbox.
Also Skyrim is not a Sandbox because no matter how many times you play through it, you will still do the same main story line which makes it linar. It does have Sandbox elements but it is not a true sandbox.
Also alot of games have Sandbox elements but are not true Sandboxes.
I agree that EvE is one of the cloest of all the MMORPGs to a true sandbox but it is not.
I"m not sure i agree with your skyrim assessment.
for intance, my roommate doesn't do most of the quests adn really is more interested in exploring, vanquishing enemies and selling their pants to vendors. He only did the main quest once because he wanted to see some new content and I badgered him to do the main quest.
But as far as any quests he pretty much just sticks to minor quests.
He plays the game completely on his terms.
I've seen others use the elderscrolls games more as a sandbox/toy. collecting things or experimenting with the physics or luring npc's to gruesome deaths.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
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.
Should we start talking about the differences between a virtual world and a sandbox next? Or should we begin another thread entirely?
Mods have certainly been gracious to let this go so far from the original topic although I don't mind at all.
I'm going to assume that the reason for this is because one first has to define what a "sandbox" is before determining a crowd for one. That being said, Google or Bing 'sandbox games' and see which games come up in almost every top 10 list. Skyrim is one of them.
So point is you can sit here and define what is sandbox and what isn't from your own personal perspectives all day. Not going to change what's already been accepted as the industry standard or definition.
QFT! I wouldn't even waste my breath if I were you. These people are the Cliff Clavins of this site. They would argue with you that the sky really isn't blue and go off on some technical explanation as to it being a reflection of the ocean. The rest of the world just wants to say, "Bro...it's blue," and not worry about such trivial crap. They can fight it all they want, but the industry and society already have an accepted definition.
A real sandbox which could be considered a virtual world or a real life simulation would have to be able to change and grow forever, otherwise the limited complexity would lead to bordom sooner or later. In order to create such a game of neverending change and growth the current ways of updating a game needs to be changed completley. Such a game have to be made of modules which can be easly replaced by newer versions. The graphics must be a seperate module, the landscape, the movement, the ways to interact and so on. To create such a game woud require a totaly new way of game design, which currently simply isnt available, especially not in the heads of the producing companies. But I am 100% sure, one day it will come. One day someone will come and realize the potiental to make money with such a game and invests a billion dollars to realize it.
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 lack of other people doesnt make skyrim a themepark. No matter how much you wish. Add 10 people and its sandbox would shine and the themepark fails because there are no rides in skyrim. There is only the world, and the role playing game.
Skyrim is a VW game. thats how it works and why it's so successful. Single player or multiplayer. Immersion is king and VW's are the king of immersion.
Problem people seem to have conflict with in Skyrim is whether ot not the modding content is considered part of the game.
If not, then the game is more finite in player control. If it is, then there's really not much you can't do.
Inevitably a large amout of this, like prior commented on, seems to be semantics and personal preference.
Like when people comment on themeparks. From my point of view I may not use linear, but I do consider them to be inherently much more finite and controlled experiences even outside the rides. Namely because while you can free roam, that is only within the confined and often circular structure of the pathways built for you. On top of that many rides tend to be gates with some for of restriction or requirement at the whim of the park management (developer).
Disneyland is a great example using the ticket rides as the comparison. Sure, they aren't used any more, but the mechanics they do have of fast-pass and how lines are managed or stacked up still ends up with a similar approximation.
I do agree with many others that sandbox more than anything else defines it's player experience through creative control. Whether or not it's the player capable of designing and implementing elements into the game that influences how others will experience that game, be it through influence on environments, implementation of different kinda of game mechanics, or overhauls of the game's flow and/or narrative.
I'd also consider other aspects like a sandbox game inherently can't have a very linear expereince, or it pans out very swiftly, due to how most the value of the games tends to be on the player's control. Like how Spore introduces editors in tiers during gameplay or terraria and minecraft trickles in things for you to do as available resources and tools expand.
There's also dynamic and static aspects to consider, but that would be mushing a third argument into the pot.
EDIT: I should note too that in the case of skyrim, the game really doesn't have many qualms with how you handle the quests or world beyond hitting the major points in it. That's also a sticking point on how one tries to define the 'rides'. Sure, there has to be some degree of control when it comes to going through a narrative, otherwise it's not a narrative. Beyond that though there's a good degree of flexibility and even player choice on the outcome of the narrative. Perhaps not in the main campaign or all the missions, but certainly in some it's displayed.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
So this is the weekly sandbox / themepark dictionary war huh? Well I guess I better throw my hat into the arena!
To Axehilt...
You are basing your defintion for sandbox and themepark off of the analogy fairly strictly. And heck, that would seem to make sense right? But the problem is that society by and large does not use a strict analogy-derived definition for these two terms. So you're really just going on and on about your personal opinion for these terms that differs from everyone else.
If you don't believe me...then I present exhibit A from here:
The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by his ability to play creatively and with there being "no right way"[5] of playing the game.
So there yah go, sandbox is about there being "no right way" to play the game. That, very much, sounds like "non-linear" to me. I see absolutely zero mention of player-generated content versus developer-generated content in there.
And really, even if it were in there, how could you reconcile the fact that games like Skyrim and GTA ARE sandboxes despite the fact that they have no player generated content in them?
In the end, player-generated content is just an OPTION that can be included in a sandbox game. Player generated content definitely can make a game more non-linear, so it is supportive of the sandbox design, but in no way is it REQUIRED for a game to be non-linear (sandbox).
VengeSunsoar - I agree that most is not all but that is a true sandbox.
Also Skyrim is not a Sandbox because no matter how many times you play through it, you will still do the same main story line which makes it linar. It does have Sandbox elements but it is not a true sandbox.
Also alot of games have Sandbox elements but are not true Sandboxes.
I agree that EvE is one of the cloest of all the MMORPGs to a true sandbox but it is not.
I"m not sure i agree with your skyrim assessment.
for intance, my roommate doesn't do most of the quests adn really is more interested in exploring, vanquishing enemies and selling their pants to vendors. He only did the main quest once because he wanted to see some new content and I badgered him to do the main quest.
But as far as any quests he pretty much just sticks to minor quests.
He plays the game completely on his terms.
I've seen others use the elderscrolls games more as a sandbox/toy. collecting things or experimenting with the physics or luring npc's to gruesome deaths.
I understand what you are saying but you Skyrim and other Elderscroll games, you can "Beat the game".
I am playing Diablo 3 right now, no question Diablo 3 is NOT a sandbox game but once I beat the game on infurno I rarely play to the end of the game now. I just jump into the quests that give the best loot drops and farm them to see what Items my roommate and I can get.
So this is the weekly sandbox / themepark dictionary war huh? Well I guess I better throw my hat into the arena!
To Axehilt...
You are basing your defintion for sandbox and themepark off of the analogy fairly strictly. And heck, that would seem to make sense right? But the problem is that society by and large does not use a strict analogy-derived definition for these two terms. So you're really just going on and on about your personal opinion for these terms that differs from everyone else.
If you don't believe me...then I present exhibit A from here:
The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by his ability to play creatively and with there being "no right way"[5] of playing the game.
So there yah go, sandbox is about there being "no right way" to play the game. That, very much, sounds like "non-linear" to me. I see absolutely zero mention of player-generated content versus developer-generated content in there.
And really, even if it were in there, how could you reconcile the fact that games like Skyrim and GTA ARE sandboxes despite the fact that they have no player generated content in them?
In the end, player-generated content is just an OPTION that can be included in a sandbox game. Player generated content definitely can make a game more non-linear, so it is supportive of the sandbox design, but in no way is it REQUIRED for a game to be non-linear (sandbox).
Using Wiikipedia as your source is just fail on your part. Its not like Wikipedia can be wrong ever, right?
VengeSunsoar - I agree that most is not all but that is a true sandbox.
Also Skyrim is not a Sandbox because no matter how many times you play through it, you will still do the same main story line which makes it linar. It does have Sandbox elements but it is not a true sandbox.
Also alot of games have Sandbox elements but are not true Sandboxes.
I agree that EvE is one of the cloest of all the MMORPGs to a true sandbox but it is not.
I"m not sure i agree with your skyrim assessment.
for intance, my roommate doesn't do most of the quests adn really is more interested in exploring, vanquishing enemies and selling their pants to vendors. He only did the main quest once because he wanted to see some new content and I badgered him to do the main quest.
But as far as any quests he pretty much just sticks to minor quests.
He plays the game completely on his terms.
I've seen others use the elderscrolls games more as a sandbox/toy. collecting things or experimenting with the physics or luring npc's to gruesome deaths.
I understand what you are saying but you Skyrim and other Elderscroll games, you can "Beat the game".
I am playing Diablo 3 right now, no question Diablo 3 is NOT a sandbox game but once I beat the game on infurno I rarely play to the end of the game now. I just jump into the quests that give the best loot drops and farm them to see what Items my roommate and I can get.
I think the problem is that you're trying to classify games as "sandbox" or not in a binary fashion, when "sandbox" is really more of a continuum. There are games that are extremely "sandboxy" (Minecraft), games that very sandboxy (Elder Scrolls), and games that are just slightly sandboxy (Guild Wars 2).
If you try to draw a "hard line" between what is and what is not a sandbox, then you're just going to get in endless arguments over where that line should be. And whenever different games come out that change the playing field, you're just going to have to "reposition" your hard line all over again.
It's much better to just consider the situation as it really is...there are "degrees" of sandboxness.
So this is the weekly sandbox / themepark dictionary war huh? Well I guess I better throw my hat into the arena!
To Axehilt...
You are basing your defintion for sandbox and themepark off of the analogy fairly strictly. And heck, that would seem to make sense right? But the problem is that society by and large does not use a strict analogy-derived definition for these two terms. So you're really just going on and on about your personal opinion for these terms that differs from everyone else.
If you don't believe me...then I present exhibit A from here:
The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by his ability to play creatively and with there being "no right way"[5] of playing the game.
So there yah go, sandbox is about there being "no right way" to play the game. That, very much, sounds like "non-linear" to me. I see absolutely zero mention of player-generated content versus developer-generated content in there.
And really, even if it were in there, how could you reconcile the fact that games like Skyrim and GTA ARE sandboxes despite the fact that they have no player generated content in them?
In the end, player-generated content is just an OPTION that can be included in a sandbox game. Player generated content definitely can make a game more non-linear, so it is supportive of the sandbox design, but in no way is it REQUIRED for a game to be non-linear (sandbox).
Using Wiikipedia as your source is just fail on your part. Its not like Wikipedia can be wrong ever, right?
This is an internet forum not a thesis...and really, if you're trying to find a source that represents what the "majority" of people think, then Wikipedia is an excellent source. After all, if the majority of folks disagreed with that definition, then it would have been changed.
EDIT:
And if you really want another source because Wikipedia isn't good enough...look here:
I understand what you are saying but you Skyrim and other Elderscroll games, you can "Beat the game".
I am playing Diablo 3 right now, no question Diablo 3 is NOT a sandbox game but once I beat the game on infurno I rarely play to the end of the game now. I just jump into the quests that give the best loot drops and farm them to see what Items my roommate and I can get.
Well, you can beat one part of the game true.
But how do you explain me playing morrowind and Oblvion for over two years each? Some of that was finishing the main quest on different characters but some of that was me just wandering through the ruins and caves.
I would even say that though I would add adventure/quset mods, I didn't just go to the area where those mods started and complete them and log off. Those mods acted as incentive to further my adventures but I would still go off the beaten track and do other things.
but maybe that answers the question of sandbox/Virtual worlds. Maybe virtuial worlds are different than sandboxes?
all I know is that me finishing the main quests in skyrim doesn't keep me from continuing to play skyrim.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
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
I understand what you are saying however, I see themeparks as Linear still and here is why:
Example WoW.
You may posit that it has rides and that the rides do not follow a lnear approach since these can be accessed in any order but that is not true.
The linearity of WoW (and all themeparks of its style) lies in the Progression of the Character.
You start at level 1, in one of the starting areas, you cannot go and do Molten Core at level one, you cannot do it at level 20 nor 30 etc, you have to be lvl 60+.
the Character Progression is Linear and Directed. Even if you may have at certain levels the option of 2-3 different Quest hubs or 2-3 different instances to go to, these are Groupings that follow still a linear Progression.
You need the Gear from moletn Core in order to be able to be successfull in to Blackwinglair...etc etc etc..
So from a player's point of view, it is a game on rails it is directed, or in your terminology it is linear. Therefore, there is no freedom.
Converselly, in a Sanbox Game such as UO when I played it, I could go in to any City any Dungeon any Area at any point from the moment I started Playing and have fun, my experience was free, non directed, and non linear.
Housing maybe a feature that goes well with such a non linear type of game, and deemed unecessary for a linear game, but it is not what defines the Sandbox really for me. WoW could have Housing or we could remove Housing From UO and WoW would remain a Themepark and UO would Remain Sandbox.
For me this is the "Core Gameplay" as permited by the Core Systems of the game, which define, how Players Interact with the world, in the World amongst Eachother and also in relation to their own Character.
Free does not imply that you can land on Planets in EVE, Freedom implies that you can choose to Interact with the world your character and other players as you see fit and set your own Path, as opposed a Path defined for you by the Devs of a Themepark.
The Sand for me is the capacity to be able to set my own path for my Character in the World of the game, it is also the tools provided to me as a player by the Design of the game to be able to set my own path, and Housing is but one of these tools yet not the only tools that would define the type.
I know we are debating semantics, but there is no other way to express this in words.
Eventually I would call Skyrim from the descriptions I am getting here, rather a Themepark with Open Ended gameplay.
And All I am trying to posit is that a Sandbox MMO must at the same time incorporate Open Ended gameplay, as opposed to Directed or Linear Gameplay.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Comments
ok fine, I also disagree with this.
having freedom to do whatever one wants doesn't constitute a sandbox. If you want to/have to be literal then let's go there...
In a real sandbox (with sand) any structure you make is subject to collapsing at a moment's notice. You are also limited to how large/high you can build due to the properties of sand. There is no "power" in a sandbox so no lights or motors or "whatever".
You have limited space in a sandbox. you can only go "so deep" in a sandbox.
allowing players to do whatever they want whatever they want is just bad design. This goes back to desing itself. Throwing every idea that you can conceive into a game pretty much makes a mess. Giving restrictions and then allowing participants to work within those restrictions is more freeing because it allows for a "spine" of ideas from which to work from.
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
Should we start talking about the differences between a virtual world and a sandbox next? Or should we begin another thread entirely?
Mods have certainly been gracious to let this go so far from the original topic although I don't mind at all.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Your wrong.
Example - Entropia Universe. That is a Sandbox. A player can do anything they want, when they want and how they want. Zero restrictions. That is a Sandbox. EvE has Sandbox elements but it is not a sandbox.
Sooner or Later
Well actually no. You cant' do anything you want. If you want something in the game, the devs have to code it on. If the devs dont' want to code it in, you dont' get it.
There are always limits - just like an actual sandbox.
Probably what Venge said.
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
Actually why not?
Are the playes who want to play in a virtual world different from the players who want to play in a sandbox?
if a virtual world and a sandbox aren't one in the same do the "sandboxers" realize this? do they agree?
And if they are completely different and those who only want to play sandbox games were to hypothetically agree then does the group suddenly become even smaller?
If one is to say that the hue size of the sandbox crowd is a myth then one kind of needs to determine who exatctly the sandbox crowd really are.
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
Well Actually yes as the Devs will code in almost anything into the game for the players. Just check the games website out.
Sooner or Later
I'm going to assume that the reason for this is because one first has to define what a "sandbox" is before determining a crowd for one. That being said, Google or Bing 'sandbox games' and see which games come up in almost every top 10 list. Skyrim is one of them.
So point is you can sit here and define what is sandbox and what isn't from your own personal perspectives all day. Not going to change what's already been accepted as the industry standard or definition.
So you agree with me. Almost is not anything. That is the limit.
@mmaize. The industry has not accepted that Skyrim is a sandbox, many yes, but not all, possibly a majority though. I did what you suggested and did a search on "Is Skyrim a sandbox" and the 2nd link stated it wasn't. So there is no univeral acceptance yet.
Except that players can't do anything they want. they need to peitiion to add it into the game and wait until it is coded and tested and then it's added.
But let's, for argument's sake, say you are correct. that in this game one can do anything they want whenverver they want as long as some time has gone by to add it into the game.
one point doesn't equal a line. This would then be the only game I know where this would be true. Or, the only mmo I know where this would be true.
IN which case how can an argument be made where only one game is in existence that supports the true mmo sandbox ideal? Because if this game is the only game that is a true mmo sandbox then how many players play it? That number would then be the answer to the thread.
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
VengeSunsoar - I agree that most is not all but that is a true sandbox.
Also Skyrim is not a Sandbox because no matter how many times you play through it, you will still do the same main story line which makes it linar. It does have Sandbox elements but it is not a true sandbox.
Also alot of games have Sandbox elements but are not true Sandboxes.
I agree that EvE is one of the cloest of all the MMORPGs to a true sandbox but it is not.
Sooner or Later
The thing is most players do not want a true sandbox even if they say they do because most players have never played a true sandbox game, they have played hybrids and think they are Sandbox games.
Same reason some people keep calling EvE a sandbox game, it is very close but it is not a true sandbox.
We have a lot of MMOs are that have a ton of Sandbox Elements but nothing that is a true sandbox.
Ever played any of the X space games like X3: Terran Conflict? I think that is the closest I have ever seen to a true sandbox in a video game.
Sooner or Later
I"m not sure i agree with your skyrim assessment.
for intance, my roommate doesn't do most of the quests adn really is more interested in exploring, vanquishing enemies and selling their pants to vendors. He only did the main quest once because he wanted to see some new content and I badgered him to do the main quest.
But as far as any quests he pretty much just sticks to minor quests.
He plays the game completely on his terms.
I've seen others use the elderscrolls games more as a sandbox/toy. collecting things or experimenting with the physics or luring npc's to gruesome deaths.
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
QFT! I wouldn't even waste my breath if I were you. These people are the Cliff Clavins of this site. They would argue with you that the sky really isn't blue and go off on some technical explanation as to it being a reflection of the ocean. The rest of the world just wants to say, "Bro...it's blue," and not worry about such trivial crap. They can fight it all they want, but the industry and society already have an accepted definition.
A real sandbox which could be considered a virtual world or a real life simulation would have to be able to change and grow forever, otherwise the limited complexity would lead to bordom sooner or later. In order to create such a game of neverending change and growth the current ways of updating a game needs to be changed completley. Such a game have to be made of modules which can be easly replaced by newer versions. The graphics must be a seperate module, the landscape, the movement, the ways to interact and so on. To create such a game woud require a totaly new way of game design, which currently simply isnt available, especially not in the heads of the producing companies. But I am 100% sure, one day it will come. One day someone will come and realize the potiental to make money with such a game and invests a billion dollars to realize it.
The lack of other people doesnt make skyrim a themepark. No matter how much you wish. Add 10 people and its sandbox would shine and the themepark fails because there are no rides in skyrim. There is only the world, and the role playing game.
Skyrim is a VW game. thats how it works and why it's so successful. Single player or multiplayer. Immersion is king and VW's are the king of immersion.
Problem people seem to have conflict with in Skyrim is whether ot not the modding content is considered part of the game.
If not, then the game is more finite in player control. If it is, then there's really not much you can't do.
Inevitably a large amout of this, like prior commented on, seems to be semantics and personal preference.
Like when people comment on themeparks. From my point of view I may not use linear, but I do consider them to be inherently much more finite and controlled experiences even outside the rides. Namely because while you can free roam, that is only within the confined and often circular structure of the pathways built for you. On top of that many rides tend to be gates with some for of restriction or requirement at the whim of the park management (developer).
Disneyland is a great example using the ticket rides as the comparison. Sure, they aren't used any more, but the mechanics they do have of fast-pass and how lines are managed or stacked up still ends up with a similar approximation.
I do agree with many others that sandbox more than anything else defines it's player experience through creative control. Whether or not it's the player capable of designing and implementing elements into the game that influences how others will experience that game, be it through influence on environments, implementation of different kinda of game mechanics, or overhauls of the game's flow and/or narrative.
I'd also consider other aspects like a sandbox game inherently can't have a very linear expereince, or it pans out very swiftly, due to how most the value of the games tends to be on the player's control. Like how Spore introduces editors in tiers during gameplay or terraria and minecraft trickles in things for you to do as available resources and tools expand.
There's also dynamic and static aspects to consider, but that would be mushing a third argument into the pot.
EDIT: I should note too that in the case of skyrim, the game really doesn't have many qualms with how you handle the quests or world beyond hitting the major points in it. That's also a sticking point on how one tries to define the 'rides'. Sure, there has to be some degree of control when it comes to going through a narrative, otherwise it's not a narrative. Beyond that though there's a good degree of flexibility and even player choice on the outcome of the narrative. Perhaps not in the main campaign or all the missions, but certainly in some it's displayed.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
So this is the weekly sandbox / themepark dictionary war huh? Well I guess I better throw my hat into the arena!
To Axehilt...
You are basing your defintion for sandbox and themepark off of the analogy fairly strictly. And heck, that would seem to make sense right? But the problem is that society by and large does not use a strict analogy-derived definition for these two terms. So you're really just going on and on about your personal opinion for these terms that differs from everyone else.
If you don't believe me...then I present exhibit A from here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_world
The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by his ability to play creatively and with there being "no right way"[5] of playing the game.
So there yah go, sandbox is about there being "no right way" to play the game. That, very much, sounds like "non-linear" to me. I see absolutely zero mention of player-generated content versus developer-generated content in there.
And really, even if it were in there, how could you reconcile the fact that games like Skyrim and GTA ARE sandboxes despite the fact that they have no player generated content in them?
In the end, player-generated content is just an OPTION that can be included in a sandbox game. Player generated content definitely can make a game more non-linear, so it is supportive of the sandbox design, but in no way is it REQUIRED for a game to be non-linear (sandbox).
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I understand what you are saying but you Skyrim and other Elderscroll games, you can "Beat the game".
I am playing Diablo 3 right now, no question Diablo 3 is NOT a sandbox game but once I beat the game on infurno I rarely play to the end of the game now. I just jump into the quests that give the best loot drops and farm them to see what Items my roommate and I can get.
Sooner or Later
Using Wiikipedia as your source is just fail on your part. Its not like Wikipedia can be wrong ever, right?
Sooner or Later
I think the problem is that you're trying to classify games as "sandbox" or not in a binary fashion, when "sandbox" is really more of a continuum. There are games that are extremely "sandboxy" (Minecraft), games that very sandboxy (Elder Scrolls), and games that are just slightly sandboxy (Guild Wars 2).
If you try to draw a "hard line" between what is and what is not a sandbox, then you're just going to get in endless arguments over where that line should be. And whenever different games come out that change the playing field, you're just going to have to "reposition" your hard line all over again.
It's much better to just consider the situation as it really is...there are "degrees" of sandboxness.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
This is an internet forum not a thesis...and really, if you're trying to find a source that represents what the "majority" of people think, then Wikipedia is an excellent source. After all, if the majority of folks disagreed with that definition, then it would have been changed.
EDIT:
And if you really want another source because Wikipedia isn't good enough...look here:
http://www.giantbomb.com/sandbox/92-453/
A sandbox style game is any game were you can choose to not further the main storyline at will. Most popular of this topic would be the Grand Theft Auto series, but games such as SaGa, Legend of Mana, Shenmue, Monster Hunter, Fallout 3, The Elder Scrolls, Assassin's Creed, Xenoblade, Dark Souls, and even technically Burnout Paradise, are examples of this concept as well.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Rule of thumb: if you find yourself in an argument over defintions of words, any hope for productive discussion has passed.
Well, you can beat one part of the game true.
But how do you explain me playing morrowind and Oblvion for over two years each? Some of that was finishing the main quest on different characters but some of that was me just wandering through the ruins and caves.
I would even say that though I would add adventure/quset mods, I didn't just go to the area where those mods started and complete them and log off. Those mods acted as incentive to further my adventures but I would still go off the beaten track and do other things.
but maybe that answers the question of sandbox/Virtual worlds. Maybe virtuial worlds are different than sandboxes?
all I know is that me finishing the main quests in skyrim doesn't keep me from continuing to play skyrim.
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
I understand what you are saying however, I see themeparks as Linear still and here is why:
Example WoW.
You may posit that it has rides and that the rides do not follow a lnear approach since these can be accessed in any order but that is not true.
The linearity of WoW (and all themeparks of its style) lies in the Progression of the Character.
You start at level 1, in one of the starting areas, you cannot go and do Molten Core at level one, you cannot do it at level 20 nor 30 etc, you have to be lvl 60+.
the Character Progression is Linear and Directed. Even if you may have at certain levels the option of 2-3 different Quest hubs or 2-3 different instances to go to, these are Groupings that follow still a linear Progression.
You need the Gear from moletn Core in order to be able to be successfull in to Blackwinglair...etc etc etc..
So from a player's point of view, it is a game on rails it is directed, or in your terminology it is linear. Therefore, there is no freedom.
Converselly, in a Sanbox Game such as UO when I played it, I could go in to any City any Dungeon any Area at any point from the moment I started Playing and have fun, my experience was free, non directed, and non linear.
Housing maybe a feature that goes well with such a non linear type of game, and deemed unecessary for a linear game, but it is not what defines the Sandbox really for me. WoW could have Housing or we could remove Housing From UO and WoW would remain a Themepark and UO would Remain Sandbox.
For me this is the "Core Gameplay" as permited by the Core Systems of the game, which define, how Players Interact with the world, in the World amongst Eachother and also in relation to their own Character.
Free does not imply that you can land on Planets in EVE, Freedom implies that you can choose to Interact with the world your character and other players as you see fit and set your own Path, as opposed a Path defined for you by the Devs of a Themepark.
The Sand for me is the capacity to be able to set my own path for my Character in the World of the game, it is also the tools provided to me as a player by the Design of the game to be able to set my own path, and Housing is but one of these tools yet not the only tools that would define the type.
I know we are debating semantics, but there is no other way to express this in words.
Eventually I would call Skyrim from the descriptions I am getting here, rather a Themepark with Open Ended gameplay.
And All I am trying to posit is that a Sandbox MMO must at the same time incorporate Open Ended gameplay, as opposed to Directed or Linear Gameplay.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard