Looking at so many games over the years, why aren't more sandbox MMORPG's being made over the number of linear MMORPG's?  

Because people dont want to roleplay anymore , seems that people like to have every detail laid out for them. This was brought up in another thread, the last spans of mmo's play more like a platform game with content added every so often an mmo but not a true mmorpg, the way it is looking the mmo's are being made so people dont have to use there imagination to create a virtual identity and roleplay as it is all written down in the game how it is and will be for you, little to no choice except to make yer toon and follow the story arc, there are few games left that create a world and leave you to make the storyline for yerself.

cause the devs are lazy and they dont have time to get them right and also because of WOW

and also there publishers seem to push it out hte door ready or not

darkfall is are last hope not sure if fallen earth or tcos is sandbox

  Because everyone has become WoWified.  Developers included............

because they rely on smaller communities to work, and that's just not something devs will accept.

2 years after the SWG mess up, i'm still looking for a game that has the freedom and flexibility of that particular game. i wish these damn devs would start providing players with something besides the constant crappy quests, and leveling, and give us skill trees and many many professions to choose from and mix around.

i also loved in swg, that if you didnt feel like hunting, you could find resources for crafting, lounge with friends at the cantina, get together with imperial/rebel friends and attack the opposite bases, decorate your house, and pretty much anything you wanted to do. i want a game that provides feedom again. Hopefully one day the devs will understand that there are many players that are looking for open-ended gameplay.

Originally posted by privatep37

i also loved in swg, that if you didnt feel like hunting, you could find resources for crafting, lounge with friends at the cantina, get together with imperial/rebel friends and attack the opposite bases, decorate your house, and pretty much anything you wanted to do. i want a game that provides feedom again. Hopefully one day the devs will understand that there are many players that are looking for open-ended gameplay.

Whoa whoa whoa. Hold it right there! You can do that in just about any game... In World of Warcraft, "if you didnt feel like hunting, you could find resources for crafting, lounge with friends at " any damn where, "get together with [allied] friends and attack the opposite bases"... You don't get the Barbie houses, but you still get the other stuff. (*Note - This isn't anything meant to insult or offend anyone. Think of it as a fun/silly jab)...

From Wikipedia, "A sandbox game (or a video game with an optional sandbox mode) is a video game with an open-ended and non-linear style of gameplay, or a mode of gameplay within a game that is more often played in a goal-directed manner." ...

So... what's up with all of the examples that exists in these "linear" games as well... As far as I see, the only thing differentiating them at the moment is the location in which characters are allowed to go/do due to level restrictions and the linear way in which it's done (in other words, the "level"/difficulty maps aren't scattered, but instead are presented linearly from one to the next)... I don't see anyone even mentioning this. Instead, people seem to be mentioning stuff that's just about in any game. So, what's the deal?

Originally posted by LackeyZero

 

Originally posted by privatep37

i also loved in swg, that if you didnt feel like hunting, you could find resources for crafting, lounge with friends at the cantina, get together with imperial/rebel friends and attack the opposite bases, decorate your house, and pretty much anything you wanted to do. i want a game that provides feedom again. Hopefully one day the devs will understand that there are many players that are looking for open-ended gameplay.

 

Whoa whoa whoa. Hold it right there! You can do that in just about any game... In World of Warcraft, "if you didnt feel like hunting, you could find resources for crafting, lounge with friends at " any damn where, "get together with [allied] friends and attack the opposite bases"... You don't get the Barbie houses, but you still get the other stuff. (*Note - This isn't anything meant to insult or offend anyone. Think of it as a fun/silly jab)...

From Wikipedia, "A sandbox game (or a video game with an optional sandbox mode) is a video game with an open-ended and non-linear style of gameplay, or a mode of gameplay within a game that is more often played in a goal-directed manner." ...

So... what's up with all of the examples that exists in these "linear" games as well... As far as I see, the only thing differentiating them at the moment is the location in which characters are allowed to go/do due to level restrictions and the linear way in which it's done (in other words, the "level"/difficulty maps aren't scattered, but instead are presented linearly from one to the next)... I don't see anyone even mentioning this. Instead, people seem to be mentioning stuff that's just about in any game. So, what's the deal?

Well, I'd say that the difference between MMO's like SWG compared to MMO's like WOW is the amount of depth/complexity built into those activities and how viable these "paths" actually are in the game.  Sure, you can gather resources and craft in WOW or LOTRO, but neither of those activities has much depth to it and theres not enough of a player driven economy to make it worth while.  Not to mention, both of these are on a secondary advancement ladder, so you can't progress through the game as just a gatherer or crafter.  Attacking enemy bases isn't as deep or as entertaining, since players can't build their own bases and since theres no open world PvP.  Instanced housing will also never be as interesting as player built housing.  And, true, you can hang out in the cantina in any MMO, but some MMO's go much further to "encourage" this by adding social features/skills.

You're right on in your last paragraph though, linear maps are a big restriction when it comes to an open ended type of feel.  Thats actually one of my biggest gripes with level based systems, that everything is strictly segmented.  Although, I don't think you could change just that one feature and turn a game like WOW into more of a sandbox game.  

Sandbox games are difficult to make, assuming "sandbox" means minimal boundaries and limitations. With more linear games, you can predict what players will do because you set more concrete boundaries.

That's pretty much it. Sandbox games are notoriously complex and packed with all kinds of systems and dynamic content. The more complex something is, the more difficult it is to maintain and entertain people with.

The reason why so many games are "linear" is because they're naturally easier to manage and debug when problems arise.

To me the difference is right there in the name.  Sandbox.  When you think of the creation of an actual sandbox there are only so many things the builder does.  The dimensions of the sandbox are chosen, perhaps the type of sand, and perhaps a few toys/tools are added and that is about it.  Most MMORPGs are much more  like an amusement park.  The things to actually do are built in.  This means that the goals, the reasons, the why, the how, are all put in by the developers.  The motivation is handed to you.  Why do you crawl into this dungeon and kill these monsters?  To get that item the devs said might be dropped.  Why do you want that?  To crawl the next dungeon of course, because that is all there is to do.  Any attempts at putting crafting systems and such into these linear games really only goes towards furthering this basic built in goal of monster bashing and leveling up.  Maybe there will even be some cheap PvP arenas to keep the players happy while the next bit of track is laid down for an expansion to takes things along a bit more. 

In a sand box, there may be a similar dungeon and it may have similar monsters in it, but there is absolutely no reason to go in there and kill them unless a reason arises out of player actions.  If YOU build a town near the dungeon and the monsters start to attack it, then YOU want to go get rid of them all.  If YOU want to build a secret base in that dungeon so that you can run your secret thieves guild then YOU decide to go clear that dungeon.  If you are having trouble with a certain disease or illness and hear that the scales of those monsters have curative properties, then YOU decide to go in there and see if you can collect some.

And that is just the beginning.  These are only interactions with the environment, but who wants to play in a sandbox alone?  Just think of all the interactions and conflicting/cooperating goals of thousands of players playing together simultaneously.  In fact contrary to what paulscott said about a sandbox not supporting a large player base, I think that a big population is just what is needed to sustain such a game over time.  However he is right in saying that a strong community is needed and that this arises from small player bases.  What you need is both, and the way to do it is to have a diverse world that is large and has meaningful travel distances (no portals or teleportation or stuff like that to get you around a useless map to pre-designed points of content).  This creates small communities within larger ones.

Indeed the true reason holding many devs back is the complexity of the design the the possibility for utter failure.  Still the rewards for success would revolutionize the genre and draw in an audience far larger than MMOs currently have or even video games in general.  What is strange to me is why these large and successful companies don't get together with some of the good ideas out there and run some small-scale low-tech tests and simulations with just a tiny fraction of their resources so that they can work towards something that will be viable for future use when the market is about to fall apart due to the stagnant clone games and lack of innovation.  I mean how much does a cheap back-room server cost and the hours of a few extra personnel?  Even just providing that much could take many ideas a long long way.

Checklist for why sandbox games are rarer:

• Sandbox games are harder to make.
• There are more successful linear games than successful sandbox games.
• Investors are drawn to areas of big success.
• Nobody wants to invest 8 figures on a "maybe".

That really is about it. The best thing sandbox fans can really hope for is a left-field indie title; And even then, no indie title is going to have as high production values as an 8-figure AAA title, so it'd have to win out of innovation alone. But hey, anything is possible.

i was wondering the same thing because old swg was my favorite mmo of all time and have always wanted another sandbox game like that but closest you get now days is talent systems but in most cases the talent systems dosent even really change play style just gives you an extra skill or 2

An ambitious world simulation such as someone here suggested would need super computers or thousand high end PCs cluster to do the job. NASA may have several out-dated super computers for sale..

The world is divided by those who understand and those who don't understand.

Raw processing power isn't the most used thing on a MMO server, it's data access either RAM or Database.

processors can actually sit reletivly idle depending on your game mechanics.  A NASA super computer probably wouldn't be the tool for the job.

most sandbox AI logic does not need to happen in real time,  the AI is going to move in a complex way to a new location you could litterly take weeks plotting it's path if you wanted to (during uneventful times of course) and no player would be the wiser.    trees grow sure but they don't need to grow in real time, same goes for buildings decaying.

even the modern PC can run some very nice simulations.

Originally posted by Diross

Looking at so many games over the years, why aren't more sandbox MMORPG's being made over the number of linear MMORPG's?  

I suspect that most of the folks that cry for 'sandbox' MMORPGs do not actually work a 40+ hour week at a real salary paying job.  One that actually demands that they 'create content' for the real world.   For me, I have no desire to reprise my work day in-game.

Originally posted by Shoal

 

Originally posted by Diross

Looking at so many games over the years, why aren't more sandbox MMORPG's being made over the number of linear MMORPG's?  

If by 'sandbox' you mean MMORPGs that require the customer to create much of the content?  Well the reason I do not play those sorts of games is because they are way to much work.  I pay a subscription fee to be entertained, not engage in a second job. 

 

I suspect that most of the folks that cry for 'sandbox' MMORPGs do not actually work a 40+ hour week at a real salary paying job.  One that actually demands that they 'create content' for the real world.   For me, I have no desire to reprise my work day in-game.

However, I also want to "have fun" do some quests, maybe some raids or pvp. A completely open world would take too much time and I have other things to do. I don't want to travel across a vast land only to have to travel back just to do something. Some open elements are great, but I want to play a game, not live my life in a virtual world.

Originally posted by Shoal

 

Originally posted by Diross

Looking at so many games over the years, why aren't more sandbox MMORPG's being made over the number of linear MMORPG's?  

If by 'sandbox' you mean MMORPGs that require the customer to create much of the content?  Well the reason I do not play those sorts of games is because they are way to much work.  I pay a subscription fee to be entertained, not engage in a second job. 

 

I suspect that most of the folks that cry for 'sandbox' MMORPGs do not actually work a 40+ hour week at a real salary paying job.  One that actually demands that they 'create content' for the real world.   For me, I have no desire to reprise my work day in-game.

I guess I am the exception then.  I work 40+ hours a week as an aerospace engineer.  Yet I want sandbox MMORPGS.  I want a next generation version of Ultima Online or something along the lines of the original SWG.  

Sandbox style games produce good communities.  Good player communities make the game more fun.  Devs simply can't compete with a good player community and player run events.  UO is STILL the template showing how this model of sandbox MMO is not only possible, but very popular and entertaining.   Similarly, the original SWG was the template for Sci-fi sandbox successes. 

To me, going out and killing a bunch of mobs to level up (Rule Number 1, repeat this 10 times - "LEVELS SUCK!!!") and find the next tier of gear seems like work.  Running from point A to pint B to point C delivering tokens for a quest giver seems like work.  Running around spamming LFG so I can find others to help me hit a dungeon seems like work.

What is fun are things like hosting a treasure map hunt, running a merchant shop and stocking vendors, attending a live auction at some guidlhouse, watching (perhaps participating even) two factions battle it out on the streets of a city, decorating my custom built house, and defending a city being overrun by orcs or some other creatures.  

I wonder how many non-sandbox style gamers got started in EQ (or more recently WoW)?  To me that seems to be a consistent dividing line between the two camps.  Those who played UO as their first MMO tend to prefer sandbox games, while those that played EQ & WoW as their first MMOs like more linear games.  It's how they were "raised" in games so to speak.  I know sandbox gamers have been exposed to the linear MMOs (I've been living through that for 2 years or more now), but I wonder how many non-sandbox gamers have been exposed to real sandbox style games?  What portion of EQ style gamers played the original SWG and actually disliked that gaming style?  How many have even ever considered trying UO? 

This isn't meant to rip on the non-sandbox gamers.  I just felt I needed to really push the point that sandbox games offer exactly what a lot of gamers are looking for today.  It may be harder to make a sandbox game.  It may seem more risky to investors.  But the payoff can be suitably higher if you do it well too.  Sandbox gamers tend to be pretty loyal and will be dedicated to a good sandbox MMO for years and years. 

You must be one of the lucky ones then aerograd because I played UO right when it launched off and on for years and it was one of the worst gaming experiences in my entire life.  Gemstone3 a MUD was more fun and entertaining and with a rather friendly community.  UO had the worst community ever, granted when it got Trammelized it cleaned out some of the jerks but then there just wasn't much to do because you couldn't actually create your own quests in game infact playing in UO was basically like living a second life insted of playing a game like you'd expect.   Infact there was no such thing as a 'quest' you never got more 'popular' with the cities and housing was just an added lag feature.     UO was a failed experiment which is why its regulated to its rather small community and the expansions that release for it are simply attempts to attract back players or destroy what originality UO actually did have.   

When I was finally tired of going back and forth to UO I tried EQ1 and it was one of the best MMO experiences I've ever had.  It has its share of problems but the community was strong and the basic everyday player was far friendlier than the "hey come out here with me and die' trickster of UO.     I was able to create my character, give him a history and set out on my great quest to see beyond the boundaries of my home land.  I felt immersed in this great adventure because there were mechanics in game to give my mind food for thought.    I learned orcs aren't just the said enemy of wood elves but they really are great bastardly opponents, I learned that just because they are my allies that not all humans are friendly, infact alot of them suck.   Games are what you make of it.    You have to go in with a clean slate or no game will ever compare to your first or atleast make you happy. 

Communities in games where they have the freedom to be a complete asshats or one that fosters greed thanks to development features (cough wow) often have the worst communities.   A MMO Game without any boundaries or atleast world reactions to Player Actions is just an experiment in seeing what humans will resort too in order to show off their epeens.    (UO came so close but they just couldn't get it right and Trammel was a bad way to curb the PK problem)   SWG had the potential to be a great sandbox game but bad development and meddling hands of evil via Lucas Arts ruined it.  They tried to do to much to fast and all at one time.     

When it all comes down to it I guess I can honestly say I'm glad developers are discovering ways to make MMO GAMES that keep in the fun game factor  in mind instead of the 'lets see what happens' experiment that nearly destroyed MMO's right from the bat.    Boundaries are good, they just would be even better if the devs were able to make them less noticable or gave a bigger degree of freedom without being a sandbox lawless funless nightmare.

Originally posted by aerograd

 

I guess I am the exception then.  I work 40+ hours a week as an aerospace engineer.  Yet I want sandbox MMORPGS.  I want a next generation version of Ultima Online or something along the lines of the original SWG.  

 

Sandbox style games produce good communities.  Good player communities make the game more fun.  Devs simply can't compete with a good player community and player run events.  UO is STILL the template showing how this model of sandbox MMO is not only possible, but very popular and entertaining.   Similarly, the original SWG was the template for Sci-fi sandbox successes. 

To me, going out and killing a bunch of mobs to level up (Rule Number 1, repeat this 10 times - "LEVELS SUCK!!!") and find the next tier of gear seems like work.  Running from point A to pint B to point C delivering tokens for a quest giver seems like work.  Running around spamming LFG so I can find others to help me hit a dungeon seems like work.

What is fun are things like hosting a treasure map hunt, running a merchant shop and stocking vendors, attending a live auction at some guidlhouse, watching (perhaps participating even) two factions battle it out on the streets of a city, decorating my custom built house, and defending a city being overrun by orcs or some other creatures.  

I wonder how many non-sandbox style gamers got started in EQ (or more recently WoW)?  To me that seems to be a consistent dividing line between the two camps.  Those who played UO as their first MMO tend to prefer sandbox games, while those that played EQ & WoW as their first MMOs like more linear games.  It's how they were "raised" in games so to speak.  I know sandbox gamers have been exposed to the linear MMOs (I've been living through that for 2 years or more now), but I wonder how many non-sandbox gamers have been exposed to real sandbox style games?  What portion of EQ style gamers played the original SWG and actually disliked that gaming style?  How many have even ever considered trying UO? 

This isn't meant to rip on the non-sandbox gamers.  I just felt I needed to really push the point that sandbox games offer exactly what a lot of gamers are looking for today.  It may be harder to make a sandbox game.  It may seem more risky to investors.  But the payoff can be suitably higher if you do it well too.  Sandbox gamers tend to be pretty loyal and will be dedicated to a good sandbox MMO for years and years. 

I don't see why theres this assumption that sandbox games require more play time?  I really don't think thats the case.  Most of the time, it seems like the linear MMO's are the ones with the massive time requirement, since you always need to level or grind for gear just to keep up with everyone.  So, I'd probably say that play time is almost completely dependant on the progression system. 

Play time has nothing to do with mechanics it comes down to how badly you want something.   If you want to be first at everything, top at everything, or just show off or keep up with people who have no lives then any and every game requires you (except maybe eve from what I hear) to spend a large amount of time in game.     I could never play UO enough to keep up with the PK's or even my own RL friend.   In EQ the only person I worried about keeping up with was no one absolutely no one.   I managed to make friends with similiar play styles or they were accepting and helped me out on occasion when I wanted to play catch up.    Granted I went through an EQ1 addiction and spent obscene amounts of time playing that game but half the time it was just to hang out and adventure not accomplish levels and some huge dungeon goal (i did do that stuff but it was secondary to fun).

Games and play time are what you make of them.  If your only goal is to compete then every game is a time sink.