| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (64)

Posted: Nov 2nd 2011 11:33AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Most everybody has already covered the bases I'd comment on, so I'll pick a minor part of the article and reply to that:

I think the reason you see so many sandbox games embracing hardcore PvP is that it's the logical extension of the sandbox philosophy. If the sandbox allows you to do anything, especially if it lets you take out otherwise important NPCs, there's no reason why it shouldn't let you do so to other players as well.

I, too, would like to see a sandbox game without the gankfest and I'm looking forward to how GW2's non-instanced portions with the dynamic events might be able to do it. But I'll be the first to admit that such a thing isn't as 'sandbox' as it could be.

Also, what game is the next-to-last picture? I think I recognize it from that "create an mmo" team that's being quiet and was wondering what happened to them.

Posted: Nov 2nd 2011 12:59PM Anatidae said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) I don't know if world events are sandbox at all. When I think of public events, I think of Warhammer Online. And although I am a big fan of public quests like that - I don't consider them sandbox in the least.

Sandbox - to me - means a game that tries to offer more simulation/emulation in the world play. Often this means travel from place to place does take time - which fosters trade. Crafting usually has a higher value than loot drops. Items wear out and have to be replaced fueling the economy. Player housing is often part of it - and even better if player's can form towns and govern them. And there needs to be just as many non-combat abilities as there are combat ones - ideally with a large selection of them non-crafting as well.

Guild Wars 1 was a great game. Nothing sandbox about it though. If GW2 has instant travel across the world as easy as GW1, then it won't be sandbox either. Although, I expect the quality to be at least as good as GW1 - so it will likely be a great game regardless.

That said - I'd also love to see a sandbox game focused on letting players create societies and develop a virtual world instead of just the focus on PvP. PvP can exist, but there should be ample systems to exact justice so that the act of killing a player becomes a moral choice instead of now - which is just a quicker way to loot.
Reply

Posted: Nov 2nd 2011 12:52PM Anatidae said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
part of the allure of MUDs when I was a kid was the fact that I, a simple player, could affect the world story around me.

Today, the MMO tries and gives me the illusion of me changing the world, but I am just on a scripted path. it isn't like my actions alone or in a group will affect the way the developers modify the entire world storyline.

Although, back in Ultima Online days, individuals players were the story. And Origin would select role players and make them "Seers" with limited power to help create more event-driven stories. Before becoming a Seer myself, I co-founded a "player town" which was mostly just a collection of buildings centered around a tavern. But it attracted attention and the GMs came and locked down additional graphics to flesh out our little area.

That was unique. Everyone who took part in it affected the story and the fate of the town. Player killers and the heroes who fought them off alike. I'll likely never forget the events we created just by living in the UO crazy sandbox - but I often forget modern MMO quest lore almost right after I finished the quest.

Posted: Nov 2nd 2011 6:16PM MMOEating said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I won't sit there for weeks and do the same repitive nonsense for some meaningless dialogue options.


I got story:
Clean my toilet.
Gimme 15$.

Featured Stories

Make My MMO: October 19 - 25, 2014

Posted on Oct 25th 2014 8:00PM

Perfect Ten: My World of Warcraft launch memories

Posted on Oct 25th 2014 12:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW