---

Originally posted by Vanpry

Sorry but you did sound like my assumptions.  As far as all your comments and ideas they aren't bad.  I have kicked similar ideas myself, but they will never happen.  Before trammel was created they kicked around different ideas to lessen the ramped pking and all the manly pkers cried like little girls.  They don't want a system where they have as much risk as a pver.

---

I doubt it will ever happen as well but we are not talking about that, we are debating whether a true sandbox requires open PvP and loot or not. =P
I think it does because of the people that have a murderer-like play-style. This should be just as viable as everything else. The problems is those griefer carebears that want to kill everyone with no consequences.

Originally posted by bustaj

 

---

Originally posted by Vanpry

 

Sorry but you did sound like my assumptions.  As far as all your comments and ideas they aren't bad.  I have kicked similar ideas myself, but they will never happen.  Before trammel was created they kicked around different ideas to lessen the ramped pking and all the manly pkers cried like little girls.  They don't want a system where they have as much risk as a pver.

---

 

I doubt it will ever happen as well but we are not talking about that, we are debating whether a true sandbox requires open PvP and loot or not. =P
I think it does because of the people that have a murderer-like play-style. This should be just as viable as everything else. The problems is those griefer carebears that want to kill everyone with no consequences.

Ok I'll give you that point.  In a perfect world a perfect sandbox would have ffa pvp with consequences for both sides.

A "true sandbox" (whatever that actually means) should ofc have FFA combat and full loot. But to be a "true" sandbox it should also have equal development emphasis on non-combat activities. It's all very well the devs saying "you're free to do anything you like" if there are only tools present to do a few categories of activity.

As for "consequences", ie: NPC/Game mechanic inflicted penalties, they should be consistent with the theme of the game. Is the game set in a highly developed, technically advanced, politically unified civilisation? Consequences for law breaking should be severe and difficult to evade. Is the game set in a post-apocalyptic wasteland infested with roaming cannibal plague-zombies? NPC consequences should be minimal. However whatever those consequences are, they should be consequences. They should be applied after the fact; players wherever possbile should not be prevented by the game from actually doing something.

People who dont like the idea of maximum player freedom of action - including being horrible to other players - shouldn't be playing a sandbox game to start with.

Originally posted by Malcanis

A "true sandbox" (whatever that actually means) should ofc have FFA combat and full loot. But to be a "true" sandbox it should also have equal development emphasis on non-combat activities. It's all very well the devs saying "you're free to do anything you like" if there are only tools present to do a few categories of activity.

As for "consequences", ie: NPC/Game mechanic inflicted penalties, they should be consistent with the theme of the game. Is the game set in a highly developed, technically advanced, politically unified civilisation? Consequences for law breaking should be severe and difficult to evade. Is the game set in a post-apocalyptic wasteland infested with roaming cannibal plague-zombies? NPC consequences should be minimal. However whatever those consequences are, they should be consequences. They should be applied after the fact; players wherever possbile should not be prevented by the game from actually doing something.

People who dont like the idea of maximum player freedom of action - including being horrible to other players - shouldn't be playing a sandbox game to start with.

Well a true sandbox to me is a sandbox game that allows for all types of play equally within the scope of the game world.  I agree with you statement for the most part except the consequences and the maximum freedom.

Is the "true sandbox" still worthy of being called "true" if the aspects of one person's play-style totally disrupts and breaksdown the play-style of another?  To me it doesn't because now someone's play-style loses viability. They lose room in the "world" to fulfill the role they had in mind successfully.  Obviously I'm talking mainly about pking with little to no consequences.  I think that the non-PK people should expect to be pked every now and then in the "true" sandbox but not so much that they have to be watching their back constantly nor have to invest in tons of fighting skills to survive.  If they did then it would be more of a FFA PVP sandbox and not the "true" sandbox.  That's not to say that there shouldn't be places for true anarchy in the game world, but the whole world should not be this way.

Also consequences for PvP are needed for the griefers that have a play-style beyond the scope of the game world.  What do I mean by this?

Simply put, griefers are not killing for the loot, or that this person killed their clan mate; they are killing people just to annoy them as a player.  They just want to annoy and in essence attempt to make someone's play-style not viable anymore.  That's not playing the game, that's a personal attack to the individual.

I'll end by saying that I do not think the "true" sandbox  allows "maximum player freedom of action" but rather maximum play-style viability across the board.

Originally posted by Malcanis

People who dont like the idea of maximum player freedom of action - including being horrible to other players - shouldn't be playing a sandbox game to start with.

Keep that open minded thinking and we will never see a quality sandbox game.  It's a shame people would rather keep playing these theme park mmo or nothing at all  instead of giving a little bit to create a sandbox game with wider appeal.

PvP has nothing to do with a game being sandbox..

No. Only people who think that gaming is all about killing people and taking their stuff require open pvp and full looting. Truthfully all a sandbox requires is non-linear gameplay. A sandbox doesn't even require complete freedom to do as one pleases. as long as wha they are able to do is non-linear. At the end of the day a sand box is a box filled with sand. The edges of that box outlay the restrictions and the sand is there for the player to shape as one sees fit, throw in a few handy tools and you will have a recipe for some fun IMO.

PvP is a style of play, sandbox is a style of MMO. I think we have some confusion from the OP here.

How can dying or lost inventory not be a risk?

Permadeath is a risk, definetly. No one stops you from not role-playing this, there are some guilds in L2 or DDO (and others I guess) that play this way.

If you have a lot of time and simply don't mind,then yes, it isn't a risk to loose your stuff. For me, with limited time, if I need to invest a week or more to replace my stuff, now that would be a great "risk". Wouldn't have time, nor nerves to do that.

Dying is the same. Loosing XP which has to be replaced e.g., again a time-factor only, but if you don't have it... You might think the death-run in WoW is carebear, but running for 5 or 10 minutes to your corpse isn't my idea of fun really. Sure, it's not like UO where you have to corpse run, and you need to get your gear back. WoW is more hardcore than Warhammer in that aspect, no corpse run, only little gear damage.

You want sandbox and pvp? go to Mortal Online. but if it is enough for the OP, I wonder....

Originally posted by Scot

PvP is a style of play, sandbox is a style of MMO. I think we have some confusion from the OP here.

No confusion at all, Scot.

Originally posted by docminus

How can dying or lost inventory not be a risk?

Permadeath is a risk, definetly. No one stops you from not role-playing this, there are some guilds in L2 or DDO (and others I guess) that play this way.

If you have a lot of time and simply don't mind,then yes, it isn't a risk to loose your stuff. For me, with limited time, if I need to invest a week or more to replace my stuff, now that would be a great "risk". Wouldn't have time, nor nerves to do that.

Dying is the same. Loosing XP which has to be replaced e.g., again a time-factor only, but if you don't have it... You might think the death-run in WoW is carebear, but running for 5 or 10 minutes to your corpse isn't my idea of fun really. Sure, it's not like UO where you have to corpse run, and you need to get your gear back. WoW is more hardcore than Warhammer in that aspect, no corpse run, only little gear damage.

You want sandbox and pvp? go to Mortal Online. but if it is enough for the OP, I wonder....

Docminus, my comment about risk was for the PKer. You, acting as a harvester/tradesman, certainly have risk of losing the fruits of your labors. To the PKers, acting as a PKer, there is no downside. Death means nothing and lost loot is easily replaced from the loot they've taken from players like you.

 Mortal online does have a penalty for PKing. At least at this point, it may change and at least one of their developers wants to reduce it. If you go red for PKing, you lose 10% of stats (whatever they mean by that as in stats vs. skills) if you resurrect withing 5 hours of the PKing act. The 5 hours accumulate with each act of PKing, 3 acts of this nature means they have to wait 15 hours to res or lose the 10% stats. Uncertain if those are real hours or game play hours. Depending on how exactly they do this, it may be some deterrent or may be none at all. But that's not "wide open" in the way most of us take that to mean.

"True Sandbox requires wide open PvP and loot? "

No, a true sandbox is the sum of its end user tools. Anything else, is irrelevant.