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!

Best sandbox game ever = Ultima Online

2

Comments

  • DarkVergilDarkVergil Memphis, TNPosts: 73Member

    [mod edit]

    Back on topic, yeah UO is the best sanbox ever with Star wars galaxies being a close second. You actually have the idea of "freedom" while playing those games [mod edit]

    Archeage better not dissapoint that I do kno

  • madazzmadazz A town, ONPosts: 1,564Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DarkVergil

    [mod edit]

    Back on topic, yeah UO is the best sanbox ever with Star wars galaxies being a close second. You actually have the idea of "freedom" while playing those games [mod edit]

    Archeage better not dissapoint that I do kno

    HAhahah that was harsh, but you are right about the sense of freedom. I didn't feel it as much in AoW

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,281Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Draron
    Originally posted by mindw0rk
    EVE Online > Age of Wushin > Darkfall: UW > UO > other sandboxes

    UO (only because it actually offers content that doesn't revolve around combat and supplying those combatants unlike EVE) > EVE > Darkfall >>>>>>>>>>> Age of Wushu

    You mistaken about Wushu. I'm fortune telling as we speak. After that I will do some calligraphy.  The cool thing about it is. It's not just click a button and produce. 

  • mindw0rkmindw0rk St-petersburgPosts: 1,351Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
     
    We'll start there. :)
     

    See? All you could name is few standard for any sandbox features. UO has nowhere near as much PvP options as in AoW or EVE. I wont even start how horrible and outdated combat in UO feels now.

    Your nostalgy makes you loose objectivity.

     

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,672Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by mindw0rk
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
     
    We'll start there. :)
     

    See? All you could name is few standard for any sandbox features. UO has nowhere near as much PvP options as in AoW or EVE. I wont even start how horrible and outdated combat in UO feels now.

    Your nostalgy makes you loose objectivity.

    I like how you threw EVE in there in order to give some level of validity to your argument. I also like how you ignored the majority of my post, too.

    I guess UO has outdated combat. It has collision detection, mounted combat, naval combat, no contrived taunt system, complete freedom to what skills/weapons you want to use, co-op spells and many other combat features that have long since disappeared as MMOs have gotten shallower and shallower. However, that wasn't the point being questioned, was it?

     

     

    "Your nostalgy makes you loose objectivity."

    Actually, none of what I presented in my post was subjective. It was a list of features of the game. If you lack a counterpoint that's fine, but resorting to ad hominems is just a really cheesy out. 

     

    Happy New Year!

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • mindw0rkmindw0rk St-petersburgPosts: 1,351Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    I like how you threw EVE in there in order to give some level of validity to your argument. I also like how you ignored the majority of my post, too.

    I guess UO has outdated combat. It has collision detection, mounted combat, naval combat, no contrived taunt system, complete freedom to what skills/weapons you want to use, co-op spells and many other combat features that have long since disappeared as MMOs have gotten shallower and shallower. However, that wasn't the point being questioned, was it?

     

    And what did I miss in majority of your post? I asked you about PvP, and after you realised you cant name many options in UO, you started on home decoration and smelling flowers. Believe me, there are plenty of flowers in AoW. And if you say "UO is the best sandbox EVAR!", why cant I take examples from EVE which is also sandbox? Much deeper sandbox then UO tbh.

    About combat. On paper it has this, and has that, and even all these. But in reality here is your combat:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FugqmDp_wdQ

    ps/ Happy New Year you too.

  • Got_Game_TVGot_Game_TV Mayfield Heights, OHPosts: 262Member Uncommon

    To act like UO combat wasn't awesome is just silly. (pre noto patch)

     

    1) Field of View

    Let's start at the beginning.  The view used in the game.  UO used a 3/4 view which allowed players to see any player who was capable of attacking them.  You couldn't sneak up behind someone (without sneaking/hiding skills) and ambush them (thus determining the end result of the battle before it began).  

     

    2) Precasting

    Precasting allowed a more strategic flow to combat based on reading your opponents moves and reacting accordingly.  It also allowed a person to prep a heal in preparation for a combo being landed.  Group fighting was heavily coordinated and a difference in the ability to time your spells would lose you the battle, as it should.

     

    3) Magery system

    The magic system in UO allowed for a fairly skill-based (strategy,timing) back and forth during battles between even skilled opponents.  The battle could swing either way until someone swung home their advantage into the kill.  

     

    4) Full loot

    Dying had consequences.  As such, combat had consequences, typically making it a more intense experience.  Side Note: even looting was something of a mini game with the most manually dextrous players getting the most loot.

     

    5) Thievery

    The thievery system in UO, though not THAT useful in combat, was amazingly fun.  There was nothing more hilarious then stealing a mages regs and watching them just stand there as they figure out that they are now screwed.

     

    Don't get me wrong.  I don't play UO anymore but the game they call UO is not much like the versions I played and enjoyed.  There's probably a bit of nostalgia affecting my opinion but the aforementioned are straight up facts, JACK!

     

    Is UO the best game at being a sandbox or just the best game that had sandbox qualities, I dunno...but it sure was fun while it lasted. :P

     

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,672Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by mindw0rk
    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    I like how you threw EVE in there in order to give some level of validity to your argument. I also like how you ignored the majority of my post, too.

    I guess UO has outdated combat. It has collision detection, mounted combat, naval combat, no contrived taunt system, complete freedom to what skills/weapons you want to use, co-op spells and many other combat features that have long since disappeared as MMOs have gotten shallower and shallower. However, that wasn't the point being questioned, was it?

     

    And what did I miss in majority of your post? I asked you about PvP, and after you realised you cant name many options in UO, you started on home decoration and smelling flowers. Believe me, there are plenty of flowers in AoW. And if you say "UO is the best sandbox EVAR!", why cant I take examples from EVE which is also sandbox? Much deeper sandbox then UO tbh.

    About combat. On paper it has this, and has that, and even all these. But in reality here is your combat:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FugqmDp_wdQ

    ps/ Happy New Year you too.

    I think you're confusing me with another poster at this point. I never said UO was the best, only that it had more freedom and sandbox features than Age of Wushu. As for EVE... you'd be hard pressed to find any post or article by me in the past ten years that wasn't praising the game, so you're preaching to the choir there. EVE would be up there with UO in games that offer far more sandbox gameplay than AoW.

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,058Member Uncommon

    I played on Tram for about 2 weeks and didnt find the game particularly "all-that".  It was ok but the graphics and 2d really were a put off for me.

     

     

    Now Asheron's Call was the best Sandbox ever IMO.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • ArglebargleArglebargle Austin, TXPosts: 1,418Member Uncommon

    [mod edit]

     

    Although it does point out the perenial confusion:  People mistaking what their preferences are for the one true way of absolute rightness. 

     

    The devs changed UO because it had ... (gasp!) ....  Problems!   I mean, what can you say about a game where you can besiege a town by piling old furniture around it.   They had to change things in the game constantly, because the greifers, ganksters, and tricksters were so good at finding way to use and abuse things in a very, very, gamey way.   Not quite the World of Immersion everyone likes to pretend it was all the time.

     

    Glad you all had a fun time with it. 

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • maccarthur2004maccarthur2004 SPosts: 510Member

    As a MMO, i think UO is the best already made until the present date and explored the most the possibilities of the genre. Archeage seens the closest of it that a AAA mmo will reach in the near future.

     

    "What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

    image
  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,672Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Arglebargle

    [mod edit]

    Although it does point out the perenial confusion:  People mistaking what their preferences are for the one true way of absolute rightness. 

    The devs changed UO because it had ... (gasp!) ....  Problems!   I mean, what can you say about a game where you can besiege a town by piling old furniture around it.   They had to change things in the game constantly, because the greifers, ganksters, and tricksters were so good at finding way to use and abuse things in a very, very, gamey way.   Not quite the World of Immersion everyone likes to pretend it was all the time.

    Glad you all had a fun time with it. 

    Yes, UO had problems. And the 'problem' you describe is the result of emergent behaviour - the desired outcome of a sandbox environment. If your players aren't doing unexpected things with the tools and toys you gave them, then either your sandbox isn't doing well or your tools and toys weren't all that fun to play with.

    But, to stick with that 'problem'... does it really break the immersion so much for you that people use solid wooden objects as barriers? Barriers that another player can use an axe to smash? That breaks immersion for you?

    ...but game worlds where you can only keep object in egg-carton style bags and pockets, and where placing an object on the ground is impossible... that works for you?

    Yes, I found myself immersed in the world of Britannia. A world where people didn't magically pull an invulnerable horse out of their ass and where proximity to other players meant something. A world where the various niches and communities were more than just IRC-style chat windows but were actual player venues in the game world itself. The game was flawed and far from perfect, yet still leaps and bounds ahead of what many of the sandbox style games of what a decade and a half later has to offer.

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • RaysheRayshe London, ONPosts: 1,284Member
    Sorry but Face of Mankind in its prime still sits as my #1 Sandbox. A game that when i look back at it. i get a emotional responce. There has been no sandbox as deep as what Face of Mankind had. Unfortunately it has been ruined last i checked.

    Because i can.
    I'm Hopeful For Every Game, Until the Fan Boys Attack My Games. Then the Knives Come Out.
    Logic every gamers worst enemy.

  • MavolenceMavolence Appleton, WIPosts: 612Member Uncommon
    Hands down UO is tje best sandbox ive played with EVE avery very close second.
  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by chomite
    If it wasn't for that horrible update, and god forsaken retarded route that developers suddenly wanted to take the UO into pile of trash, it would still be the best mmo out there - granted once it brings its graphics and controls up to date. 

    So if it weren't for x, y, and z...it'd be keen?

    That IS a ringing endorsement!

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • makiimakii noPosts: 280Member

    i remember when a friend of mine gave me the cd to play UO. Back in the days i didnt have internet so i had to play it offline- god, i hated that shet game. You didnt knew where you went- zombies 1 hitted you that isometric perspectiv was just bad.

  • AbloecAbloec Las Vegas, NVPosts: 315Member
    Originally posted by mindw0rk
    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    I like how you threw EVE in there in order to give some level of validity to your argument. I also like how you ignored the majority of my post, too.

    I guess UO has outdated combat. It has collision detection, mounted combat, naval combat, no contrived taunt system, complete freedom to what skills/weapons you want to use, co-op spells and many other combat features that have long since disappeared as MMOs have gotten shallower and shallower. However, that wasn't the point being questioned, was it?

     

    And what did I miss in majority of your post? I asked you about PvP, and after you realised you cant name many options in UO, you started on home decoration and smelling flowers. Believe me, there are plenty of flowers in AoW. And if you say "UO is the best sandbox EVAR!", why cant I take examples from EVE which is also sandbox? Much deeper sandbox then UO tbh.

    About combat. On paper it has this, and has that, and even all these. But in reality here is your combat:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FugqmDp_wdQ

    ps/ Happy New Year you too.

     

    Ok seriously, this is just getting retarded. This post is stating UO is the best sandbox ever. I would have to agree if they didn't fuck it up, it would be.

     

    Anyway, you keep on about PvP, sandbox includes all features within the game.

     

    To this day I have not seen any MMO's get close to UO's

    Taming system

    (When I was still playing I was walking around as a mage with a Frost Wyrm, I can only count one MMO where it is possible to actually walk around with a dragon as your pet, and that is UO. Not to mention you can sell them off to other players if you wished.

    Housing System

    (I dont even need to go into this considering others have already talked about it)

    Combat System

    (I am just going to tell you a story about when I used to play that I still remember to this day. Me and a guy were having a duel, I was a fencer/poisoner/thief, I cannot remember what he was but anyway. We continued to fight and when it got close to time to pot to heal up for him, I stole his healing potion out of his bag before he could heal. People who look at combat systems and do not take into account other skills have linear thinking. There is plenty of things you can do in a skill based game vs games with lvls.

     

    Anyway back to you, stop talking about nothing but PvP as you arguement, this is about all features included in a Sandbox game. Not how many ways can you go around killing people, because in all honesty PvP is just that PvP.  The basis of a sandbox game is to allow players to do what they want. You could easily have guild battles in UO, there just weren't any "features" that made the guild battle server known.

     

    Here is the list you provided -  school battles, clan battles, head bounties, spying, patrolling, caravan grabbing, offline players stealing, prison breaking, etc.

    1. School Battles and Clan Battles are pretty much one in the same, a martial arts school is the same thing as a clan. A group of people.

    2. Head Bounties - There were bounties in UO.

    3. Spying - There was spying in UO, you want to spy on your neighbor or a clan you were at war with you could.

    4. Patrolling - You mean walking back and forth from point a to b, seriously this is one of your "features" WTF?

    5. Caravan grabbing - UO had all loot, every person was their own caravan.

    6. Offline Players stealing - Wheres the fun in that, if I am going to steal I want to be online stealing, and UO had that. Hell you could steal someones house key and steal their shit.

    7. Prison Breaking - This is the only thing I cannot really say anything about because in UO if you did something wrong you didn't go to prison you were hunted and killed, or you would have to go into hiding.

     

    It proves my point that you don't grasp the point of sandbox gaming because you think linearly in terms of features and not what can I accomplish with the game I have been given.

     

    Also this is all based on my recollection of when I played probably 10 years ago. I do not know what features it has presently.

    image

    Damnant quod non intellegunt
  • ArglebargleArglebargle Austin, TXPosts: 1,418Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Arglebargle

    [mod edit]

    Although it does point out the perenial confusion:  People mistaking what their preferences are for the one true way of absolute rightness. 

    The devs changed UO because it had ... (gasp!) ....  Problems!   I mean, what can you say about a game where you can besiege a town by piling old furniture around it.   They had to change things in the game constantly, because the greifers, ganksters, and tricksters were so good at finding way to use and abuse things in a very, very, gamey way.   Not quite the World of Immersion everyone likes to pretend it was all the time.

    Glad you all had a fun time with it. 

    Yes, UO had problems. And the 'problem' you describe is the result of emergent behaviour - the desired outcome of a sandbox environment. If your players aren't doing unexpected things with the tools and toys you gave them, then either your sandbox isn't doing well or your tools and toys weren't all that fun to play with.

    But, to stick with that 'problem'... does it really break the immersion so much for you that people use solid wooden objects as barriers? Barriers that another player can use an axe to smash? That breaks immersion for you?

    ...but game worlds where you can only keep object in egg-carton style bags and pockets, and where placing an object on the ground is impossible... that works for you?

    Yes, I found myself immersed in the world of Britannia. A world where people didn't magically pull an invulnerable horse out of their ass and where proximity to other players meant something. A world where the various niches and communities were more than just IRC-style chat windows but were actual player venues in the game world itself. The game was flawed and far from perfect, yet still leaps and bounds ahead of what many of the sandbox style games of what a decade and a half later has to offer.

     

    Yes, UO had problems.  Problems with some of that emergent behavior being used to cause problems for other players, which lead them to quit playing, and not supporting the game with their money.  I knew several Origin employees at the time, and they were constantly scrambling to fix various bits of the game that were driving away subscribers, and where the game mechanics caused issues.

     

    The furniture issue, if I remember the story correctly,  happened because breakable furniture was being used to grief players, so the furniture was made unbreakable, thus allowing it to be used (inappropriatly) for beseiging cities.  Unbreakable furntiure....no axe useable.  I would be happy to hear of an instance of this tactic being used in a real world siege. 

     

    All games are built on abstraction.   Everyone's tastes and feelings of immersion can differ.    I never begrudge fans of UO, Eve, or SWG their enjoyment of those games.   But there were serious problems with each, and there are problems that come from the base concept and design of them, as sandboxes.  Sometimes those very things are both strengths and weaknesses of the game.

     

     

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    I loved UO back in the day. I still have my subscription to this day just to keep my keep and vet rewards going, lol. There was so much to do. If I didn't want to do anything combat related I could make potions, kegs,armor, weapons,tinkering, mining, lumberjacking,taming,treasure hunting,decorating my house, waiting for idocs...just to name a few.. There was lots of fun to be had in UO.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

  • jamigrejamigre New York, NYPosts: 283Member
    Originally posted by Coldren
    Originally posted by apb2011

    Ultima Online = Best sandbox game ever.

     

    Have to agree with this.. Certainly the best one so far. But we can always hope.

    I'll sign in /support of this as well. 

    everything else afterwords has been mediocre at best in terms of the sandy box. 

    -------
    Check out http://partyupgamer.com - and meet people you actually want to play with.
    -------

  • daltaniousdaltanious waPosts: 2,145Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    UO was a horrible game. I was in the beta.

    Bad combat mechanics .. too much griefing (some toons died within second spawning in the game), leveling up skills is as bad as today's themepark crafting (remember clicking on a rock again and again?).

    Oh .. and tank mage everywhere (at least in the beginning).

    Thank god other MMORPGs came along. 

    Exactly, horrible game. But at same time kinda fun, but mainly because was ONLY available to play.

  • MavolenceMavolence Appleton, WIPosts: 612Member Uncommon
    Delete this post?
  • MavolenceMavolence Appleton, WIPosts: 612Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Arglebargle
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Arglebargle

    [mod edit]

    Although it does point out the perenial confusion:  People mistaking what their preferences are for the one true way of absolute rightness. 

    The devs changed UO because it had ... (gasp!) ....  Problems!   I mean, what can you say about a game where you can besiege a town by piling old furniture around it.   They had to change things in the game constantly, because the greifers, ganksters, and tricksters were so good at finding way to use and abuse things in a very, very, gamey way.   Not quite the World of Immersion everyone likes to pretend it was all the time.

    Glad you all had a fun time with it. 

    Yes, UO had problems. And the 'problem' you describe is the result of emergent behaviour - the desired outcome of a sandbox environment. If your players aren't doing unexpected things with the tools and toys you gave them, then either your sandbox isn't doing well or your tools and toys weren't all that fun to play with.

    But, to stick with that 'problem'... does it really break the immersion so much for you that people use solid wooden objects as barriers? Barriers that another player can use an axe to smash? That breaks immersion for you?

    ...but game worlds where you can only keep object in egg-carton style bags and pockets, and where placing an object on the ground is impossible... that works for you?

    Yes, I found myself immersed in the world of Britannia. A world where people didn't magically pull an invulnerable horse out of their ass and where proximity to other players meant something. A world where the various niches and communities were more than just IRC-style chat windows but were actual player venues in the game world itself. The game was flawed and far from perfect, yet still leaps and bounds ahead of what many of the sandbox style games of what a decade and a half later has to offer.

     

    Yes, UO had problems.  Problems with some of that emergent behavior being used to cause problems for other players, which lead them to quit playing, and not supporting the game with their money.  I knew several Origin employees at the time, and they were constantly scrambling to fix various bits of the game that were driving away subscribers, and where the game mechanics caused issues.

     

    The furniture issue, if I remember the story correctly,  happened because breakable furniture was being used to grief players, so the furniture was made unbreakable, thus allowing it to be used (inappropriatly) for beseiging cities.  Unbreakable furntiure....no axe useable.  I would be happy to hear of an instance of this tactic being used in a real world siege. 

     

    All games are built on abstraction.   Everyone's tastes and feelings of immersion can differ.    I never begrudge fans of UO, Eve, or SWG their enjoyment of those games.   But there were serious problems with each, and there are problems that come from the base concept and design of them, as sandboxes.  Sometimes those very things are both strengths and weaknesses of the game.

     

     

     Actually the thing with the "unbreakable furniture" never rembered that but you could always just go up and pick up the furniture once its been dropped on the ground by whoever is "Besieging" your player town and put it in your pack and walk away lol. I remember people tried to do that to us with Candlebras and we just put a bunch of DP poison blade spirits in there with them and they all died.

  • UNH0LYEV1LUNH0LYEV1L Summerville, SCPosts: 412Member Uncommon
    Ultima Onlne always looked fun.  I never had the pleasure to play it.  I do play EVE quite extentivey alsong with DAYZ and I love what sandboxes have to offer.  I've tried playing UO but the graphics are so insanely outdated.  EVE is fun but i'll be honest I like the traditional skill use/hotkey skill type of games way better.  I'm mostly placing hope in Archage.  Themeparks can be fun but they grow boring because the content is always the same.  Even ones as good as TSW.  And P.S. GW2 is not a sandbox.  Its 400000% themepark.


    Spiritsever - AR/Ele - The Secret World
    Ashmaker - Ranger < Prophets > - Age of Conan - #1 in Kills
    Sweety - Sorceress < Infinite Darkeness > - SWTOR - 2.6K PvP Rating
    ??? - Pilot - ??? - EVE
    Symir - Swordmaster - Warhammer - RR100
    Dreadnaught - Rogue - Rift
  • bunnyhopperbunnyhopper LondonPosts: 2,751Member
    Yes, indeed it was.

    "Come and have a look at what you could have won."

2
Sign In or Register to comment.