It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Ramonski7
There are no "goals" in sandbox games:
I would say that the goals are your own so there are goals.
And yes, one CAN do many of those things in a thempark game. I should know as that's how I tend to play them.
However, the thing about theme park games of any type is that it usually is a linnear experience with appropriate walls to keep you from certain areas and limited amounts of things to do. Though I would also say that any type of sandbox game can have limited things to do. As per a real sandbox you really are limited to what the sand can allow and what toys you can put in there.
Since we are talking about Elderscrolls games and sandbox mmo's one should at least look at things in the correct contenxt. Terraria, minecraft and sims are not mmo's. Multiplayer components not withstanding. I would go as far as to say that the SIMS is a toy. I don't have sufficient experience in the other two games to make any useful comment other than they aren't mmo's.
There is quite a difference between a UO and a LOTRO or WoW. This difference has been generally divided into "sandbox" and "thempark" so we look toward games that embody attributes that one or the other might have.
In an elderscrolls game I can do what I want. I can kill a town, I can collect things, I can read, I can follow any number of given quests, I can explore, I can gather things and throw them off of bridges, I can lead npc's to their deaths I can role play and pretend I'm a wandering minstrel, etc.
However, if a game is one event after another, such as Dark Messiah, there is very little one can do but go from one event to another.
Originally posted by sandboxy Originally posted by Ramonski7 There are no "goals" in sandbox games:
That means dick, endgoal is just one more option on what you can do in the game. Or do you feel that adding "a goal" to Minecraft would somehow diminish its sandboxiness?
Adding a goal would not, adding a endgoal (as you call it) or a final goal like I mentioned above would. That is what I meant by goal, pardon me for misleading you
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Originally posted by Ramonski7 Originally posted by sandboxy Originally posted by Ramonski7 There are no "goals" in sandbox games:
No, I understood what you meant. I just think that alone is very a peculiar way to define a sandbox.
Originally posted by rygard49 The hate for this game started the moment it was announced with the tag 'Online', and described as an MMO. No other features known and it was considered by many on this website to immediately be a failed project. Regardless of reality, those people are just upset that the game will be an online adaptation of one of their favorite SPRPG titles.
Nobody had a problem with it being online, in fact people have asked for it for a long time. The immediate problem though was that when they announced the game, they announced it also wont play anything like an Elder Scrolls game and combat will basically be close to what we see in games like WoW with the tab targetting, etc..
Elder Scrolls fans wanted them to make Elder Scrolls, with all of the features that make the games great, and attach the MMO part to it.
What theyre getting instead is your standard MMO with the same features and mechanics used in many of them, completely leaving out the playstyle & mechanics of the Elder Scrolls games, and attaching the Elder Scrolls name to it.
Originally posted by Sovrath Originally posted by Ramonski7
Clever, but still you're off a little. I will further clarify "goals" as I mention. If I were to buy an ES game (we are still talking about games here not mmos). There are a set number of static goals that exist for all owners of the game. Not so with the sandbox games I mentioned above. So if you compare game to game (take your pick) it is clear what games have static goals and those that have fabricated ones. I'll say this much: all games can have fabricated goals.
By our very nature we tend to fabricate goals in these games to either get the most out of them or because we enjoy them so much. Whether that be collecting every piece of armor, maxing stats or killing every npc we can. But sandbox games very rarely have static goals beyond the tutorials.
And for that part in orange I think you might have meant rpgs, because if you meant mmos, neither is any elder scroll game to date. But if you did mean rpgs, the nI beg to differ. Where does it say anywhere that an sandbox game has to have fantasy based rpging? If anything those three games that a mentioned still allow you to role play.
You mentioned that in Elderscrolls you can do what you want, but I cannot. I can't kill key story related npcs, I cannot write a book, I cannot own a town and govern it's populace.
Originally posted by Ramonski7 Originally posted by Sovrath Originally posted by Ramonski7
Obviously no game can let you do everything you want. But giving you choices and letting you roam and explore, and play the game in what order you want is nice.
Originally posted by sandboxy Originally posted by Ramonski7 Originally posted by sandboxy Originally posted by Ramonski7 There are no "goals" in sandbox games:
Look at it this way, in a sandbox game you are dropped in the game, lead through a short tutorial and then left to your own devices. In a open world/free roaming game you are presented with the same choices but you are also introduced as the protagonist of the story with set number of obstacles created by the antagonist with a final goal that can be accomplished to bring the story to an end.
That's true and is a new wrinkle in the Elderscrolls games. In Oblvion and Skyrim, key people can't be killed. In Morrowind that was possible. This might have been possible in earlier ES games, I can't say for sure.
As far as not being able to take over a town, well, I don't believe one can take over a town in the SIMS. But that might be dependent on the expansion pack. I also can't go to the moon in the SIMS.
It's expected that any game is going to have limitations. Minecraft is definitely a sandbox where you can build things but it's no an mmo.
What sandbox mmo's do we have? Well, there is a list of them on this site. I imagine some things are possible in one that aren't possible in another.
So when we talk about an Elder Scrolls game, then "yes" there are fabricated goals but these fabricated goals are possible because of the sandbox nature of the game. I can't make collections in Neverwinter nights nor can I ignore the main story or play how I want.
In EVE, which is considered a sandbox mmo, I can't do anything and everything I want because there is only so much I can do. I can't land on those planets and walk around. I can't build structures on those planets or take one over and become extremem overlord. That's because it's just not a feature.
er, more later I have to get ready for a meeting.
Originally posted by Ramonski7 Look at it this way, in a sandbox game you are dropped in the game, lead through a short tutorial and then left to your own devices. In a open world/free roaming game you are presented with the same choices but you are also introduced as the protagonist of the story with set number of obstacles created by the antagonist with a final goal that can be accomplished to bring the story to an end.
Yes, again, I got it the first time. I just find your definition wierd and do not agree with it. I simply don't understand how adding a feature (endgoal) somehow takes away from the games freedom (sandboxiness). If it would somehow restrict gameplay, or force you to follow a certain path, then yes it would obviously work against sandbox.
Originally posted by Ramonski7
You also can't steal a car or dock a starship. What's the point?
Ok I'll say this and I'll leave it at that until we both can continue (I have work in 20 minutes, you have your meeting). People tend to equate The Elder Scroll series to sandbox (or sandbox-like) because they can more or less pick up a cup, kill a few harmless npcs and ignore the main story. I do not.
And the reason I don't is because you might as well say the same thing about Reckoning, Fable, GTA, Fallout 3 and host of other open world/free roaming SPRPGs that offer similar pseudo freedoms. Those in the camp of believing that TES is a sandbox-like single player game are going to be slightly disappointed when TESO comes out. It will have more in common with themepark mmos than it will with sandbox mmos.
And as far as the examples I gave that you quoted me on. I intentionally avoided hyperbolic examples of taking over a town or going to the moon because I was drawing examples from your own examples of what you said you can do in a ES game. Basically staying in the context of the game you mentioned. In TES I can kill npcs but I cannot kill ALL npcs. I can read books but I cannot write them. And I can own a house but I cannot own all of them.
I understand that you are only allowed to do pretty much what the developers allow you to do. But allowing you more options does not automaticly make a game a sandbox. Even if it's as big as Six Flags/Great America and you can ride any rides in the order that you see fit. It's still a themepark. But going on a camping trip? Now that's a sandbox.
Originally posted by Zylaxx Originally posted by kishe The appeal of Elder Scrolls games are the fact they're sandbox type rpgs. Now what are we getting? Linear Themepark wow-clone using same engine as SWTOR. In Elder Scrolls games you are free to do what you want, where you want, at your own pace...I just cant see that translating to traditional themepark setting that the zenimax is aiming for.
First off have you played the game? Second have you even researched any of the concepts that will be in the game?
As a fan of the upcomming title I can honestly say you have done either.
Since when did linear means freedom to go anywhere? You do realize the selling point of TES games is the freedom, and msot of that freedom is being carried over to the MMO version. Freedom to go anywhere, freedom to pick what weapon you want to use (Mage with a 2h sword or a Warrior with a bow *Yummy*), freedom to choose different guilds (TES versions) to swear allegiance to, and freedom to adventure how you see fit. Nothing about TESO "on rails" or linear except for the fact you cant kill whatever NPC you want (which is an idiotic thing to do anyway). In fact the only feature that isnt being parlayed over to the online MMO is the freedom of class and freedom of picking your friends (its a 3 faction game) but both of those are being integrated into the MMO version via freedom of which weapon you choose and freedom of joining NPC sub-factions like the Thieves Guild or Bards College.
And dont even start about combat, first TESO is using a hybrid hotbar/tab targetting combat system similar to GW2 but with active blocking and secondly the FPS and left click to attack/cast combat system is possibly the most boring unimaginitive combat system to ever graced an RPG.
In one of the links posted above by Nadia it states that factions will be limited to exploring their faction area. Maybe I understood it wrong but that would mean that 2/3 of the playable world is inaccessable. I hope they change their minds on that if it is true.
Originally posted by Scorp2778 Originally posted by Zylaxx Originally posted by kishe The appeal of Elder Scrolls games are the fact they're sandbox type rpgs. Now what are we getting? Linear Themepark wow-clone using same engine as SWTOR. In Elder Scrolls games you are free to do what you want, where you want, at your own pace...I just cant see that translating to traditional themepark setting that the zenimax is aiming for.
In one of the links posted above by Nadia it states that factions will be limited to exploring their faction area. Maybe I understood it wrong but that would mean that 2/3 of the playable world in inaccessable. I hope they change their minds on that if it is true.
Truth, as a person who HATES alts, this game is going to force me to have at least 2 if I want to see everything.
I would say that Fable is not even close to an elderscrolls game or from what I read, GTA.
I would say that a sandbox role playing game allows a player to pursue his/her interests within the context of what the world offers.
Since the game must revolve around the player, the player is always the protagonist. Whether or not you are a character in a storyline or the person who decides that "x" goes "there" the player is the center of the game.
For a game like Morrowind, Oblviion and Skyrim, the player is set up to "possibly" be the protagonist in the story. Since the game is an adventure game and the developers want to have a clear story arch should the player choose to participate, they start the player off as a prisoner. This is always the case and something the developers use as their common starting point. despite what some roleplayers might have others believe, it is perfectly acceptable to establish rules and guidelines and then have the player use those rules and guidlines to build their character. Heck, a coworker who is honing his improv craft by taking classes indicated that he had several performances for his "graduation" but only one of those performances was completely dependent on what he wanted to do. The rest had various guidlines.
So, the player starts off as a prisoner and then gets out.
In morrowind you are told to visit Caius Cosades (or whatever his name is) because he was instrumental in getting you out.
In Oblvion you are asked to find the head of the blades
In Skyrim you are asked to go to Whiterun and warn the Jarl. Then...
In Morrowind you get a pop up saying the tradehouse is on the left good luck you are on your own. Same with Oblvioin (sans tradehouse) and in skyrim they make it a bit more organic where you are invited to accompany either the guard or the stormcloak rebel but they both then say "it could be good if we just went our own ways".
You then can ignore the main quest (as it has nothing to do with your character) and fish, hunt, cook what you get, mine for minerals you can sell, etc.
You are always going to be an adventurer of some sort but the sandbox part comes by how you define yourself as an adventurer. Fable and Amulur/reckoning doesn't really have these choices. Amulur is closest as I beleive one of the lead designers designers worked on morrowind.
In the end, I don't know of any rpg that allows for one to completely have an open experience. Meaning, I can't set up shop in these games but I can travel the world and do what I want in the context of an open game world.
Conversely, games like the SIMS, which as I mentioned is more like a toy, doesn't really give us a world so much as as stage to wind up our mechanisms and watch them go.
So, if Elderscrolls isn't a sandbox, by your definition, then it probably falls into a "Sandbox RPG" category as it gives us the closest thing to free world "be what adventurer you want" experience that you can get. It gives the player enough toys and sand to choose their role in the world with obvious limitations.
As far as TESO, it is not meant to be an "Elder Scrolls" experience a la the solo games but is meant to be an mmo that is crafted around the Elderscrolls lore and stories. So sure, any person who buys the game expecting a sandbox or "sandboxy" experience will be highly dissapointed.
To be fair wiki still lists this game as using the failed hero engine.i myself lost intrest in this game when it still was apparently using the hero engine.
Originally posted by hercules To be fair wiki still lists this game as using the failed hero engine.i myself lost intrest in this game when it still was apparently using the hero engine.
I can imagine that this new engine is just HeroEngine with a lot of new code, just like the "all-new" creation engine still used GameBryo as a base.
I read the "why we're not using the hero engine" article and I'm still not 100% convinced.