Howdy, Stranger!

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

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

We dont want games - we want worlds.

12426282930

Comments

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon

    I don't think it's bogus at all.  The evidence is not rock solid but it's not non-existant.  There's actually a couple dozen sandboxes out right now (check out Larsa's thread).  And then there is of course the fact that the first big game in the genre (UO) was a sandbox which was beat by EQ.

    So here are the facts so far:  1.   Sandbox games have never climbed above a population of 357,000 .  While themeparks would give there eye teeth for this in a stable game, most themeparks at one time or another has had significantly more.  (IMO it makes more sense for a publisher to start higher and drop to that number than start lower and hope to rise to that number)

    2.  The genre was started by sandbox and when given a themepark choice more people chose that one (EQ beat all the early sandboxes)

    3.  There are a couple dozen sandbox out right now and Eve has the highest population.  Not going to state why (IMO opinion people will just make an excuse as to why they are not doing well, some are legit, some not but it's happened every time and I expect people will continue that).

    There are several coming out in the future.  We will find out whether sandbox really is more popular however I do expect that many/all of them will not do well and people will continue to come up with excuses.  We will see in the next couple years.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Onomas
    Originally posted by jpnz Originally posted by Caliburn101  
    I think due to market forces, compteition and the glut of F2P short-life themeparks on the market at the moment, an immersive world platform which caters for a wide range of players and charges subs is innevitable. There are too many companies chasing the same pool of customers usng the same short-lived themepark models. Something has to give - and it seems to me that it is less likely that games companies walk away from the genre entirely or become so ultra-specialised they further narrow their customer base. You get more fish with a wider net - even if you have to initially invest in a bigger boat... 
    Most 'sandbox vs themeparks' debate comes down to this single fact. Themeparks makes more $$$ as a whole than Sandbox.   Someone always brings up this mythical 'large sandbox playerbase that'll pay to play' which there is no proof of for the past 7 years. Why would any company throw millions at something that has no factual basis to exists?
    This statement is bogus. How can you compare the two when you only have a handful of sandboxes out there. Besides UO, EVE, and SWG you realy dont have much of a sandbox pool to compare the two. Sure you have some smaller sandbox games, but they went into pvp main stream and neglected the other aspects of a sandbox making them not true sandboxes (mortal, df, etc).

    With a dozen or so new sandboxes coming up, you will see a switch. People are sick and tired of the quarter arcade themepark games. And they throw millions of dollars away every time they release one btw. SWTOR threw away 200+ million alone ;)

    You can only do the same thing over and over and forced down a path so many times even before the most hardcore themepark junkie gets bored. Why many here claim to love their "games" switch to a new one so fast. MMORPG were meant to have longjevity, not be changed up every month.

     




    The statement is valid. Every sandbox has been outperformed by one or more theme park games that released around the time of the sandbox game. Eve has been outperformed by a few games because it took so long to get going. There is no financial reason based on the history of sandbox games to invest in that style of game.

    That doesn't mean there's no reason at all though. One of the reasons is that developers are running out of ideas for theme park style games. Another reason is that theme park games don't retain players as well as developers would like. They have to try something different.

    I don't think you're going to see a sandbox renaissance though. Probably what you'll see is games being primarily theme parks with some sandbox features. Why? I'm so glad you asked. Because theme parks excel at bringing players in. It's easy to get into a theme park game. The sandbox features will be there to keep the players in the game after they've exhausted the theme park content. This may or may not result in games where the worlds feel more alive though. Does WoW's world feel more alive because players can have farms? What about Rift's world having the addition of large scale three way PvP and instanced dimensions where players get to build whatever they want? The worlds aren't appreciably different, even with the addition of 'sandbox' features, but they'll probably retain more players. The features that retain the most players will get used in the next generation of games.

    We might see the opposite happen too, where MMORPGs merge into MOBAs or CoD style games. Heck, there's so much money being pumped into the video game industry that we might see all of the above happen, all at once.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • FoomerangFoomerang Portland, ORPosts: 5,565Member Uncommon

    When it comes to mmorpgs, i prefer a world over a game.

  • ArclanArclan Chicago, ILPosts: 1,494Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    ...And then there is of course the fact that the first big game in the genre (UO) was a sandbox which was beat by EQ..

    This suggests EQ was a themepark in 1999. ROFL. Themeparks tell you where to go; they have quest hubs which shower you with xp and riches for doing mundane tasks.

    EQ in 1999 had nothing in common with themeparks.

    Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
    In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit

  • OnomasOnomas Rock Hill, SCPosts: 1,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Arclan

     


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    ...And then there is of course the fact that the first big game in the genre (UO) was a sandbox which was beat by EQ..

     

    This suggests EQ was a themepark in 1999. ROFL. Themeparks tell you where to go; they have quest hubs which shower you with xp and riches for doing mundane tasks.

    EQ in 1999 had nothing in common with themeparks.

    This

    Back in those days we didnt call them themepark or sandbox. As time went on and the entire genre started to dumb down and become so easy to attract a wider crowd is when these terms popped up. And even so, themeparks back then were nothing like they are today. As i have said trying to compare a game from 10 years ago to one today is just lame. The time, the technology, the amount of people online, the money used all play a huge factor in this. We havent seen a modern true sandbox to compare to modern themeparks. Its the only reason themeparks blow sandbox style games out of the water.

    In the next 2 years you will see a wider variety and things may change.

     

    But i think we all want a better game, but many here want their limited hand held games, and i cant seem to reason why they want these style of games. I want a world, a game, and everything in between. Many of you want linear, single player, eye candy, and being told where to go. 

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by Onomas

    Most 'sandbox vs themeparks' debate comes down to this single fact.

    Themeparks makes more $$$ as a whole than Sandbox.

     

    Someone always brings up this mythical 'large sandbox playerbase that'll pay to play' which there is no proof of for the past 7 years.

    Why would any company throw millions at something that has no factual basis to exists?

    This statement is bogus. How can you compare the two when you only have a handful of sandboxes out there. Besides UO, EVE, and SWG you realy dont have much of a sandbox pool to compare the two. Sure you have some smaller sandbox games, but they went into pvp main stream and neglected the other aspects of a sandbox making them not true sandboxes (mortal, df, etc).

    With a dozen or so new sandboxes coming up, you will see a switch. People are sick and tired of the quarter arcade themepark games. And they throw millions of dollars away every time they release one btw. SWTOR threw away 200+ million alone ;)

    You can only do the same thing over and over and forced down a path so many times even before the most hardcore themepark junkie gets bored. Why many here claim to love their "games" switch to a new one so fast. MMORPG were meant to have longjevity, not be changed up every month.

     

    What a wonderful standard 'sandbox is king' response. Lets go through this step by step and see where we end up! :)

    The first statement is factually false. 'Themeparks make more $$$ than sandbox MMOs'. Just because you don't like that statement doesn't make it 'bogus'.

    Lets not Ignore the fact that the first themeparks blew away the first sandbox games which is why we have so many themeparks, eh?

    Once again, if sandbox were more desirable, why aren't everyone playing them?

    'Same thing over and over' doesn't make sense as sequels outperforms regularly, within the MMO space and outside of MMO space.

    e.g. COD:BLOPS2 is generating more $$$ than any COD before.

    Lastly, longjevity? MMOs (and games in general) is an entertainment product. Like I said in my 'content locust' post, people don't usually think 'longjevity' in an entertainment product. Whether this is good or bad is irrelevant, that's the reality.

    I bought every CIV / SIMCITY game that came out, I don't play the previous version once I have the sequel though.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    Eq was definately a themepark. Everyone in A class was identical, loot based economy-size, trivial crafting, zones designed for specifac levels that got progresively harder the further you got from starting area and no impact on the worlf. Themepark through and through.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    And yes we did call them themepark and sandbox back then.

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    Posted on phone. I apologise for the grammar

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Onomas

    You can only do the same thing over and over and forced down a path so many times even before the most hardcore themepark junkie gets bored. Why many here claim to love their "games" switch to a new one so fast. MMORPG were meant to have longjevity, not be changed up every month.

     

    You seems to be under the impression that a good MMO need to be played for a very long time. I reject that very close minded view.

    I love Dishonored and Deus Ex, and i did not play them for more than a few weeks. Fun is not measured in how long, but how entertaining.

    The same *can* applied to MMO. If a raid is really run, why can't i enjoy it just for a month, and move to, not unlike a SP quest?

    I love the Lich King fight .. but i won't want to play it for 10 years. MMORPG are not "meant" for anything. Each player should decide how they want to play their games .. including MMORPGs.

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    You seems to be under the impression that a good MMO need to be played for a very long time. I reject that very close minded view.

    I love Dishonored and Deus Ex, and i did not play them for more than a few weeks. Fun is not measured in how long, but how entertaining.

    The same *can* applied to MMO. If a raid is really run, why can't i enjoy it just for a month, and move to, not unlike a SP quest?

    I love the Lich King fight .. but i won't want to play it for 10 years. MMORPG are not "meant" for anything. Each player should decide how they want to play their games .. including MMORPGs.

    And then you wake up and realize you payed 2000 bucks for the fun you could have had for 300 if the game you played in january would have the longevity to entertain you for a year.

    It all has its pros and cons.

    Flame on!

    :)

  • CecropiaCecropia Posts: 3,472Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Banaghran
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    You seems to be under the impression that a good MMO need to be played for a very long time. I reject that very close minded view.

    I love Dishonored and Deus Ex, and i did not play them for more than a few weeks. Fun is not measured in how long, but how entertaining.

    The same *can* applied to MMO. If a raid is really run, why can't i enjoy it just for a month, and move to, not unlike a SP quest?

    I love the Lich King fight .. but i won't want to play it for 10 years. MMORPG are not "meant" for anything. Each player should decide how they want to play their games .. including MMORPGs.

    And then you wake up and realize you payed 2000 bucks for the fun you could have had for 300 if the game you played in january would have the longevity to entertain you for a year.

    It all has its pros and cons.

    Flame on!

    :)

    Excellent point.

    The fact that we even have MMO hoppers and the disposable MMOs that have come with this bizarre new trend is a tell tale sign of just how stagnant and damaged this industry has become. What a shame, and sadly, not the first time something great has been completely fucked by the hurricane known as the mainstream.

    Shame, shame, shame.

    "Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb

  • itgrowlsitgrowls newport news, VAPosts: 2,951Member

    WEEEEELLL unfortunately, it's a reality that they will continue to make games with a grind disguised or not because somewhere along the way, someone will complain in an official forum somewhere and then something will be adjusted the wrong way the first time causing more problems and it cascades from there.

    Once the people who love the grinds move on to some other medium to entertain themselves the rest of us can get back to enjoying the virtual environment again.

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 20,008Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas

    You can only do the same thing over and over and forced down a path so many times even before the most hardcore themepark junkie gets bored. Why many here claim to love their "games" switch to a new one so fast. MMORPG were meant to have longjevity, not be changed up every month.

     

    You seems to be under the impression that a good MMO can be fun to play for a very long time. I reject that very close minded view.

    Had to fix that for you. Not going to disagree that most MMORPG's are not fun to play over the long haul, but the good ones are  worthy of doing so.

     

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • CecropiaCecropia Posts: 3,472Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Onomas

    You can only do the same thing over and over and forced down a path so many times even before the most hardcore themepark junkie gets bored. Why many here claim to love their "games" switch to a new one so fast. MMORPG were meant to have longjevity, not be changed up every month.

     

    You seems to be under the impression that a good MMO can be fun to play for a very long time. I reject that very close minded view.

    Had to fix that for you. Not going to disagree that most MMORPG's are not fun to play over the long haul, but the good ones are  worthy of doing so.

    Maybe this attitude stems from some folks having never found a good MMO that was worth sticking around for. Otherwise, I can't really understand this MMO hopper mentality. It's nutsy coo coo, I tell ya.

    "Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb

  • ArclanArclan Chicago, ILPosts: 1,494Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Eq was definately a themepark. Everyone in A class was identical, loot based economy-size, trivial crafting, zones designed for specifac levels that got progresively harder the further you got from starting area and no impact on the worlf. Themepark through and through.

    Your definition of sandbox is:

    1. character progression through a skill system (not classes)
    2. all loot is made by players
    3. player actions affect the game world

    That's not my definition.

    For your information, crafting was a large part of the EQ economy in 1999; and it was quite expensive, difficult, and time consuming. Clicking combine without ensuring you had the right ingredients resulted in loss of all materials you tried to combine.

    Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
    In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Arclan

     


    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Eq was definately a themepark. Everyone in A class was identical, loot based economy-size, trivial crafting, zones designed for specifac levels that got progresively harder the further you got from starting area and no impact on the worlf. Themepark through and through.

     

    Your definition of sandbox is:

    1. character progression through a skill system (not classes)
    2. all loot is made by players
    3. player actions affect the game world

    That's not my definition.

    For your information, crafting was a large part of the EQ economy in 1999; and it was quite expensive, difficult, and time consuming. Clicking combine without ensuring you had the right ingredients resulted in loss of all materials you tried to combine.

     

     No that isn't the only definition of sandbox.  However those are all significnat portions of a sandbox.  EQ doesn't meet any of those.   Classes can be in a sandbox but there must be a way to customize it.  All loot doesn't have to be made in a sandbox however crafting should be significant.  Player actions DO need to affect the world in some way in a sandbox.

    Failing to make a product does not make a sandbox.  The only difficult thing about EQ's crafting was getting the material, it was all dropped loot and there was a chance of failure on combine. 

    EQ - a game where all players of a class were identical, where loot drove the economy, where crafting was not important and completely overshadowed by loot, a zoned designed world based on level and  NO impact on the world - that is a themepark.

    Heck WoW - the most hated themepark has more options than EQ did.  EQ was actually a very restrictive game - and restrictions are the opposite of sandboxiness (if thats a word).

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • FearumFearum Cinnaminson, NJPosts: 1,166Member Uncommon

    I think a world might keep me playing longer if its fun but I can't ever see myself playing the same game for years and years eventually I always hit a wall that never goes away. Even expansions do not interest me when they release them after that wall shows up, unless they change the game in some major way than I usually check it out. I just can't really ever go back to the same game once that wall shows up (some also call this burnt out).

    I see alot of people saying back in da ol' days games had longevity, these new games are crap now. If I recall back when EQ had just hit the shelves it was the only 3d mmorpg option that we had. When I first heard about DAoC I couldnt wait to play it instead of EQ because I was so bored of it, than the same thing happend to DAoC after a few years and I moved onto to WoW...etc the cycle is still happening up until today and will continue until they stop releasing new games.

    I havent found ONE game since I started gaming as a child in the 80's. I'am not sure what a game has to do for me to actually keep me playing it for years. I doubt there will be a game that will ever keep me playing for years, once I stop enjoying it and the fun is gone so am I. I do like to have a variety with alot of things in life, entertainment being one of them. Does not matter if the game or the world is huge and never ending, they all eventually hit that wall and the fun is gone.

    I'am puzzled by some of you people that can play the same game for years and years. Its like watching the same movie over and over for years. After a few months you eventually do not even need to pay attention because you know what to do when to do it and how its going to look for 1 millionth time you press 1,2,3 or4, run your L33T figure 8 around someone to kill them then call them a noob or max out everything you can max out.

     

    tl;dr 

    What games have longevity?

    Is it new things in general that you don't like or is it that most people don't stick around for years in the same games?

    All entertainment eventually gets boring

    Years and years is a very long time to play the same game

    Knowing whats going to happen or when to use the right abilites before you even need too is not fun

    Staring at the same stale graphics and animations are not fun for me, its like watching the same movie for years

     

  • CecropiaCecropia Posts: 3,472Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Fearum

    ...I'am puzzled by some of you people that can play the same game for years and years. Its like watching the same movie over and over for years... No it's not. You just haven't met the right MMO that quenches your particular thirst. 

    tl;dr 

    What games have longevity?

    She's on the brink of her second decade and still truckin'. Her name is EVE.

     

     

     

    "Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by jpnz
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
     

    I think due to market forces, compteition and the glut of F2P short-life themeparks on the market at the moment, an immersive world platform which caters for a wide range of players and charges subs is innevitable.

    There are too many companies chasing the same pool of customers usng the same short-lived themepark models.

    Something has to give - and it seems to me that it is less likely that games companies walk away from the genre entirely or become so ultra-specialised they further narrow their customer base.

    You get more fish with a wider net - even if you have to initially invest in a bigger boat... 

    Most 'sandbox vs themeparks' debate comes down to this single fact.

    Themeparks makes more $$$ as a whole than Sandbox.

     

    Someone always brings up this mythical 'large sandbox playerbase that'll pay to play' which there is no proof of for the past 7 years.

    Why would any company throw millions at something that has no factual basis to exists?

    Yes indeed - no-on EVER puts money up for innovation do they?

    We are all still living in caves and hunting dinner using tried and trusted fire-hardened sticks... but BOY we took a risk on that 'fire' thing - could have cost us a fortune in shiny rocks if we had backed that one and it had misfired!

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,769Member Uncommon

    I have to say for all my support of MMO's having more sandbox elements in them, no one should think such games will take over the MMO market. But I am not sure that many of us think that, I think once again this opinion which some sandbox fans have has been made into one all sandbox fans have.

    Conversely sandbox is not a niche, there are too many players interested in sandbox MMO's for it to be called that. What is a success in the MMO world? How big do you really have to be? ROI with a significant profit and sustained revenue down the years is all you can ask for. Many themeparks don't get that these days, so it is hardly surprising that a sandbox like PE struggled.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Cecropia
    Originally posted by Fearum ...I'am puzzled by some of you people that can play the same game for years and years. Its like watching the same movie over and over for years... No it's not. You just haven't met the right MMO that quenches your particular thirst.  tl;dr  What games have longevity? She's on the brink of her second decade and still truckin'. Her name is EVE.    
     


    You're assuming that everyone operates the same way you do. If that were true, then everyone would at some point find a game that they play for years, because that's what they want to do...play the same game for a very long time. Since that doesn't happen, it makes sense to think that there are people who do not want to play the same game for years, even if it's a good game.

    Some people don't even want to play the same game for months, much less years.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 20,008Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Cecropia

    Originally posted by Fearum ...I'am puzzled by some of you people that can play the same game for years and years. Its like watching the same movie over and over for years... No it's not. You just haven't met the right MMO that quenches your particular thirst.  tl;dr  What games have longevity? She's on the brink of her second decade and still truckin'. Her name is EVE.    
     

    You're assuming that everyone operates the same way you do. If that were true, then everyone would at some point find a game that they play for years, because that's what they want to do...play the same game for a very long time. Since that doesn't happen, it makes sense to think that there are people who do not want to play the same game for years, even if it's a good game.

    Some people don't even want to play the same game for months, much less years.

     

    Yeah, very true, weird isn't it? Wonder what's wrong with them? image

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • BanaghranBanaghran HuisoPosts: 869Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     

    You're assuming that everyone operates the same way you do. If that were true, then everyone would at some point find a game that they play for years, because that's what they want to do...play the same game for a very long time. Since that doesn't happen, it makes sense to think that there are people who do not want to play the same game for years, even if it's a good game.

    Some people don't even want to play the same game for months, much less years.

     

    "I like the game soo much that i want to play it as lttle as possible" is a bit outlandish even for these discussions, dont you think?

    Flame on!

    :)

  • EhliyaEhliya Washington, DCPosts: 199Member

    I agree that what we have today is what the mass market demands.  Most people are not "old school" in the sense they expect or want virtual worlds.  Instead, they want something they can jump into and out of, low stress and moderate challenge, that can be consumed in bites.

    That said...

    It would be a shame if the current trend continues.  It would be as if we decided not to make Michelangelo works of art and instead just mass produced Justin Bieber posters because they made money.  

    Like the old masters, I suspect progress towards virtual worlds will come because a patron steps forward, whether a company or individual, and takes the risk of reaching for something higher and riskier.  If they succeed, the reward will be the sort of devoted subscriber base that they dream of.  Not WOW-sized, but enough to keep the engines turning.   And they will get something intangible that money can't buy....a reputation for creating something new and special.

     

Sign In or Register to comment.