Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Would EvE still be a sandbox without PvP?
Zinnabun
Member Posts: 9
I am trying to find what the definition is of a sandbox. What games are sandbox? What games aren't? Why is it ok for people to use the word "sandbox" to describe both EQ and EvE when they are both completely different?
I've been thinking a lot about this, ever since smedley said that EQN will be "the largest sandbox ever". People really love to spew that EQ was a sandbox, especially in the EQN forum in this site, but I don't think it was. I think it was the original themepark. The only competition that EQ back then was UO, the one I think was the original sandbox.
This is my conclusion thus far (you are more than welcome to try to change it) that in order for a game to be a true sandbox it has to be.... open world PvP like EvE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now this is the experiment, please, only people that play EvE try to answer this.
Before you answer, read this article as to why EQ is not a sandbox. http://syncaine.com/2011/05/16/everquest-the-first-themepark/ and this video from this really smart guy in youtube that pretty much defines what a sandbox is and should be. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvK8fua6O64&feature=c4-overview&list=UUI3GAJaOTL1BoipG41OmfyA
Now, here is a list of things that would no longer happen in EvE without PvP.
- No more ganking
- No more bounties on people
- No more gate camping
- No more piracy
- No more ways to take unwanted people out from your base system (This one would piss me off, there is to many people trying to mine in our system in the past few weeks, we keep killing all of them but they just keep coming, bastards.)
- No more danger hulling things
- No more great stories about GOONS, TEST, or anyone else because those type of large alliances would no longer be needed to keep control over territories.
- No more spies, they would no longer be needed.
- Pretty much all danger from other players is gone....
Now answer it, eve players.
If EvE had no PvP, none, just PvE. Would it still be a sandbox? (Be as detailed as you possibly can, please.)
(I am going to go spend time with my family, so I won't be able to check this for a while, but still, try to answer the question as best you can. I will check on this tomorrow. Good night. )
Comments
Yes!
PvP never has been part of the definition for a Sandbox game. Although to Developer's credit it is something easily implemented to give longevity to a game. However I am looking for a truly epic PvE sandbox game with many game systems to create this same longevity we all seek. IMO the best way to do this is through long progression times and hugely massive worlds that takes a long time to traverse.
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!!!
If EvE didn't have any PvP it would be either F2P or shutdown by now, like most PvE based games. It would be a completely different game with no PvP.
Most of the sandbox elements within EvE do rotate around Players interacting with one another. That's not to say you have to have PvP for sandbox elements to exist.
Kind of weird to discuss, considering that the game would simply crumble apart. Eve upholds quite a basic principle:
Create > Destroy > Create > Destroy
That said, I think we all agree that a sandbox doesn't NEED PvP. But personally, it makes it that much more interesting.
Sandbox has nothing to do with pvp at all. Many sandbox games have limited or NO pvp at all.
Sandbox is about all the other stuff like exploration, crafting, building, social interaction, chatting, house decoration, and much, much more.
This post to me just shows that the OP has no clue what a sandbox is. And the misconceptions that hurt a true sandbox.
The essence of a "sandbox" is being able to effect change in the elements of the game world. The players are part of a multiplayer game world. A reduction of my ability to interact with those elements is a reduction in the "sandboxiness" of the game.
PvP is one "sandbox" element in a game. I'm not saying it's absolutely required to call a game a sandbox, but it does seem to me as if it's a huge mechanically imposed reduction in the degree of freedom to not have it.
Consider two otherwise identical "sandbox" games; one has non-consensual PvP and the other doesn't. How can we call the second more of a sandbox than the first?
Give me liberty or give me lasers
I'm going to say no on the basis that I don't think the game would still be live and active as without the pvp i'm not sure it would work.
I can't even fathom what the economy would be like. I just don't think EVE would work without the pvp and therefore I vote "No, the game wouldn't be a sandbox because the game wouldn't still be around."
pure speculation, but anyone who knows anything about the game knows you can't just remove something as big as the pvp from eve online and not have huge repercussions.
I get that this deviates somewhat from the spirit of the question, but that is as much as i'm going to contribute to a sandbox definition thread.
edit: BizkitNL and immodium pretty much summed it up, but i'm watchign my D-Scan so didn't notice it. As i'm very close to being on the "destroyed" part of the spectrum as we speak.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
First to answer the question you need to have a base ground for what is sandbox?
I bet every person that has ever read a post on forum about this being sandbox or that being sandbox will have different ideas.
So, prior to answer the question should be the "what is sandbox" regardless of game - A quick google of the term comes up with this
Definition - What does Sandbox mean?
Sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish.
source - http://www.techopedia.com/definition/3952/sandbox
So if you use techopedia version of sandbox then it would lead onto the fact that unless a game HAD PvP then it could never be sandbox, because, how can you say to players that you can do such a fundemental thing as shoot each other and then try and claim that your a sandbox.
To me eve is about 90% sandbox, there are some restrictions (all games need restrictions) but its about as close as yo can get to sandbox However, remove the PvP and as i said then no game in my opinion can be sandbox with out it.
But a stage further, having PvP alone isn't enough, the PvP has to allow non - consensual because allowing consent is not sandbox,
FTR my understanding of sandbox is that it is an attempt to make a game as open as you wish it to be. If you want to do something then you can do it - or at least attempt to do it. for instance, If i want to murder someone in a game then i can, and the game should not have constraints to stop me.
Finally ,this leads me onto why its only 90% - the fact is there are some strict rules (for the good of the game ) such as no n00b bashing in starter systems - but for eg this rule only counts in that exact system IE Chaven - once that player jumps out then he has basically said "yes i am happy to be killed by anyone for any reason they feel like" however inside charen they have the 'shield of GM' around them. But even this is not a permanent shield, it is in fact only 28days, after the 29th day your game where ever you are in EvE.
I want to point out the bold bit and underlined. this is all my opinion, but i of course welcome debate on anything i have put, personal slander / name calling belongs in game
were of course your welcome to call me names after all its a sandbox.
This post is all my opinion, but I welcome debate on anything i have put, however, personal slander / name calling belongs in game
where of course you're welcome to call me names im often found lounging about in EvE online.
Use this code for 21days trial in eve online https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=d385aff2-794a-44a4-96f1-3967ccf6d720&action=buddy
OP,
I feel as this question is sort of a bait question to take us further down the rabbit hole of..."without PvP, sandbox games could exist but gankers need it." Or maybe I'm just a jaded old vet of games like EvE. If you read any of my previous posts about sandbox vs anything else games, I have always stood by the tacit that unless the game developers give me the tools to enforce the rules, then it really isn't a sandbox.
Of course, this is my definition. I would assume there are exceptions to the rule, i.e., A Tale in the Desert, but c'est la vie. As I look over your list of what wouldn't happen w/o PvP in EvE..no ganking, no piracy, no bounties, no gate camping..it reminds me of some of my favorite experiences in that game.
Further down the list is what kept me in EvE for as long as I played..the ability to control space. As I was part of several alliances in my time, I was on the winning and losing sides of this. Nothing I have done in an MMO has rivaled this experience. Setting alarm clocks to get up for CTA's, watching the ventrillo log in go from 10-20 players to 75 in a matter of mins, the weight of FC'ing and knowing that our space was under attack.
Darkfall had some of this as well, but I didn't care for the clunky combat system. DF, like EvE was all about the people you were with. Again, PvP was the tent pole in the whole gaming experience.
Ganking, general asshattery, all the bad is worth it to be able to control assets. I guess that's why LOTRO, and several other MMO's didn't do it for me. Once you have experienced the rush of PvP that has consequence, everything else pales in comparison.
Playing: BF4/BF:Hardline, Subnautica 7 days to die
Hiatus: EvE
Waiting on: World of Darkness(sigh)
Interested in: better games in general
Horrible premise. PvP doesn't create sandboxes, nor does it define them.
Look at what sandbox games are named after . . . sandboxes. They are titled that way because you get the sand, you get the tools (shovel, bucket, whatever else your parents bought you) and you get to play in the sand doing whatever you want with the tools available.
That's it. That's the whole definition of sandbox. Developers give you the game, they give you the tools and let you interact with the world (the sand) however you see fit within the tools parameters.
PvP is not a tool, nor is it sand. PvP is something gamers like to do - some of them like to do it all the time, some of them like to do it none of the time and lots like to mix'n'match.
The reason EVE would suck without PvP is because it's actually a bad game and has very little sandbox to it. Outside of choosing your skills there really isn't much customization in EVE. You can't make up ships by piecing together whatever parts you want to come up with a unique ship. CCP designs and puts the ships in the game. Yes, you can fiddle with how they function in combat, but there's not much else you can do.
You can't affect the game world either. PvP is only an illusion of changing the game world because it's impacting players and their "control" of any particular system. The world is the sand, the players are not the sand. You can mess with other people all you want, but it has nothing to do with sandbox.
Think of it this way, in WoW if a large group of people were dedicated enough they could "control" an enemy faction zone by killing NPC's and camping the area. It's exactly the same thing. No matter how long they stay there, they have not had an effect on the game world, just on other players. Does WoW become a sandbox if a group of players chooses to do that? No.
If players in EVE could develop systems into something, then yes they are affecting the game world and are engaging in sandbox gameplay. As it stands now, fighting over resources is not related to sandbox game player at all. It's just PvP - it can feel a bit like freedom, but it's really an illusion because if you asked the question the OP asked which is "what happens if you remove the pvp?" and you find out that the game fall flat without it, then you didn't really have a sandbox in the first place.
Does minecraft have pvp? I'm sure there's a mod, but it's pretty much a literal version of a sandbox. You get the sand, you get the tools, you go sandboxing.
If you can mess around with the sand, then you're not playing a sandbox. People are never the sand, they are the players. This is why EVE is the biggest myth of MMO's, it's great fun to speculate about how awesome it is, but it's really not awesome, it's a shallow game that requires encyclopeadic knowledge to participate in. Take away the pvp, all that knowledge is meaningless, the game doesn't stand up on its because there is no game.
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
Pretty much. This game is designed to have pvp from the get-go. Removing pvp and the risks associated with it would make this a very dull game overtime. It has nothing to do with pvp->sandbox, but because this one revolves around pvp.
I've played EVE, not anymore, but I've also played UO as my first.
For the most technical answer, it's just what it is. Think about playing (IRL) in a sand box. What can you do? Whatever you want to, really. If you have the right tools along with you, you can build stuff in the sand.
A theme park is just that. You have rides, you try them out, and if you like it you can keep riding it. It's a lot of repitition because it gets old fast, and doesn't have as much freedom. You have a lot of people telling you what to do, or how to play a game involving a couple of golf balls.
A sandbox constitues that you can do whatever you like, and still have fun and feel like you're doing something. There is no particular direction, because you can go at the pace you like, and your 'story' is unique to others, everyone has a very different story and it will NEVER be the same.
UO was the original sandbox, and EQ was the original themepark. Anyone who says otherwise, cannot call themselves an MMORPG expert.
In regards to EQNext, I have my speculations... Especially coming from people who ONLY know Themeparks. 'Open world' is different from 'sandbox'. PvP is not an element to make something 'Themepark' or 'Sandbox'. It's just an attribute to a game, like having mounts vs. teleport system is. That's it.
Good answer. Because the funny part is create > Destroy > Create > Destroy is more or less the pinnacle of sandbox gaming. This very process is changing the world. And sandbox is all about building up things and for rehashing destroy all of them, to be able to build up again.
With other words a sandbox without pvp would be possible. (although it is limited about the pvp aspect, because pvp in itself is just another sandbox tool.. but what sandbox is not limited in one aspect or the other)
But you have to look how you(the system, the environment) destroys stuff, to be able for players to build up again. Minecrafts solution to this is server reset every few weeks.
Some pve mmorpg sandboxes tried to increase the world every time the world is full.. but in all honestly that is not a solution.. and they all failed in the end.
Let destory the weather, wandering mobs, evil empire faction, whatever destroy the world from time to time, so that you can build everything up again.. and you may get a working pve sandbox game. Nevertheless pvp is the easier, and maybe better solution for destruction.
PS: My definition for a sandbox in its core. One sentence.
The ability to create, modify, use and destroy persistent objects in a persistent world.
Examples:
Housing: (would apply to farming or almost anything else)
- Build house
- use that house like opening the door, lock down door
- modify like decoration
- destroy.. like burn it down
Items(Armor, Weapon, Tools)
- craft item
- use item (take sword use it on the head of mob or player)
- modify (is a little bit difficult here, but like enchanting, like dying, like salvaging)
- destroy (breaks down by use, salvaging, etc.)
Terraforming
- create hill
- modify hill to tower
- use tower to live in it
- destroy tower/hill
And as much objects you enhance this ways, as more sandboxy it will be, and as more emergent gameplay can occur. And by the way, the player is just another of those objects in some way.
I don't think so. a limitation like that would really send the whole concept of 'sandbox' down the tubes.
It would still be a PVE MMO with a strong player economy.
If someone gives you sand, a shovel, and bucket.. you should be able to knock someone over the head with the bucket and bury them in the sand with the shovel. I don't know why this is even a question though. I'm not sure EVE retains as much of it's player base if they go PVE, which I doubt they would do in the first place.
Yes, absolutely it would.
I've played EVE's sandbox world for months without PvP'ing. Is it a great PvE game? Probably not. SWG was a much better sandbox MMO when it comes to PvE.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
A Tale In The Desert is a sandbox game, and it doesn't have combat at all. If you turn PvP off on a Minecraft server, it's still a sandbox building game. Garry's Mod is a sandbox game whether you are playing a mod with combat or not. If not having PvP was a requirement for a sandbox game, then there could be no single player sandbox games.
Requiring PvP for a game to be a sandbox game doesn't make sense. Not if you look at all the games out there that are sandbox games and don't even have combat, much less PvP.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Pointless question.
Without PvP Eve would not be Eve and it wouldn't matter if it was sandbox or not.It's like asking if a hotdog without a sausage is still food.
That is not the question the OP asked. He asked if EVE would still be a sandbox without PvP and the answer is unequivocally yes.
. good troll 7/10 would read again
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Nop it wouldn't.
It would turn out to be pretty mediocre and grindy pve game which definitely wouldn't earn the title sandbox.