Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

 Sorry I didn't see your post when I typed this. 

Again WoW has territory warfare systems - players just choose not to do this. 

Player based economy - according to many wow has this,  Everything in the economy is because a player put it there, decides the price, and has to alter it due to competition.....  but crafted gear being the best - I'll give you that WoW doesn't have this at end-game

In eve, nothing is sold by NPCs sans skillbooks. The economy is ENTIRELY player based. WoW has basic gear and ammunites for sale from NPCs, giving them a set price. That's a game changer.

Tools for exploration - a wormhole is just fast travel?  or is that going to a completely new area never seen before.  If the former than it is not different than a mage port, if the lattter that is interesting.

You have to level scanning skills and use probes to find hidden areas, or it could be a fast jump to a system that would normally take hours to get to. Players can live there in private, and some hold dungeons and rare items.

No limits on player battles - Wow does not have this, your right.  Does a sandbox need this?   If there are no player battles does that make it not a sandbox?

True, it's not needed, but it only adds to the freedom. Most sandbox MMO's go this route or no parties at all for that reason.

That, and everything WoW has (territorial control, crafting, etc) seems to be watered down/half baked versions compared to the norm from sandbox MMO's.

Meh. This whole 'my favorite themepark MMO has all the features that sandbox MMO's have' is kind of a silly argument.

Nice argument for baiting though

Although it also maybe shows a lack of experience/knowledge of MMO's and gameplay in them, or maybe a refusal to acknowledge different types of MMO's and gameplay styles.

Because looking at this thread and others like it, all the arguments that pointed towards the differences have been mentioned. If people still can't acknowledge the differences between games like UO, SWG and EVE and games like WoW or Rift, then it's obviously because people don't want  to see the differences, or lack experience with all those MMO's.

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by Bladestrom

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by sagil

Sandbox should actually have more content than themepark. Take this as an example of a feature: quests (i dont like seeing just terrain, i would like to go on missions and uncover the history of the world) that give fame to particular factions. Since in sandbox you skill up instead of going up in levels so you can freely choose what to be.

 

It's too bad only small budget developers are making sandbox games.

Sandbox with lots of contents is a Theme Park.

 try reading through the threads you create:

Sandbox core is about cultivating and maintaining a stable community and economy.

Thempark core is about offering activities and accessability. 

Both over varying layers of functionality/gameplay on top of this.  End game may or may not be relevant.  A lot of confusion comes from the comparison of the layers.  And based on this adding extra stuff to either type of game does not change its format as long as the core is maintained.  re OP.

Contents = more Activities to do.

 

Again,,, its fits even your definition.

Sandbox with lots of Contents(activities to do) = Themepark

 Sorry exposed.  Going to have to disagree and go with Bladestrom.  You can have all the content from all the games in existance rolled into one game but if that game has the tools needed to cultivate adn maintain a stable community and economy I'll call it a sandbox.

in that case, there are no themeparks.. which MMO doesnt have a community/economy? and dont say Guild Wars, because thats not a MMO

 It isn't whether it has a community/economy as Bladestrom said it is about cultivating and maintaing a stable community and economy versus just offering activities and accessibilty.

A sandbox needs the former to survive, a themepark doesn't need the former - it needs the latter.

Originally posted by Bladestrom

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by sagil

Sandbox should actually have more content than themepark. Take this as an example of a feature: quests (i dont like seeing just terrain, i would like to go on missions and uncover the history of the world) that give fame to particular factions. Since in sandbox you skill up instead of going up in levels so you can freely choose what to be.

 

It's too bad only small budget developers are making sandbox games.

Sandbox with lots of contents is a Theme Park.

 try reading through the threads you create:

Sandbox core is about cultivating and maintaining a stable community and economy.

Thempark core is about offering activities and accessability. 

Both over varying layers of functionality/gameplay on top of this.  End game may or may not be relevant.  A lot of confusion comes from the comparison of the layers.  And based on this adding extra stuff to either type of game does not change its format as long as the core is maintained.  re OP.

Well said, Bladestrom.

Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

Because looking at this thread and others like it, all the arguments that pointed towards the differences have been mentioned. If people still can't acknowledge the differences between games like UO, SWG and EVE and games like WoW or Rift, then it's obviously because people don't want  to see the differences, or lack experience with all those MMO's.

 True. It's a very hard thing to describe, but anyone would get the difference if they play WoW/Rift/LoTRO and take note of everything, then compare to a game like UO or EVE.

Originally posted by Bladestrom

 try reading through the threads you create:

Sandbox core is about cultivating and maintaining a stable community and economy.

Thempark core is about offering activities and accessability. 

Both over varying layers of functionality/gameplay on top of this.  End game may or may not be relevant.  A lot of confusion comes from the comparison of the layers.  And based on this adding extra stuff to either type of game does not change its format as long as the core is maintained.  re OP.

I really don't agree, because I think even a Themepark can cultivate a thriving community or economy. I think it simply boils down to a sandbox offers you tools to manipulate the world and/or build on to the world. Themeparks usually don't offer such a thing.

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by Bladestrom

 try reading through the threads you create:

Sandbox core is about cultivating and maintaining a stable community and economy.

Thempark core is about offering activities and accessability. 

Both over varying layers of functionality/gameplay on top of this.  End game may or may not be relevant.  A lot of confusion comes from the comparison of the layers.  And based on this adding extra stuff to either type of game does not change its format as long as the core is maintained.  re OP.

I really don't agree, because I think even a Themepark can cultivate a thriving community or economy. I think it simply boils down to a sandbox offers you tools to manipulate the world and/or build on to the world. Themeparks usually don't offer such a thing.

He didn't say that you can't do that in themepark-based MMOs. He simply said that it is a core focus of sandbox-based MMOs.

Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

Meh. This whole 'my favorite themepark MMO has all the features that sandbox MMO's have' is kind of a silly argument.

Nice argument for baiting though

Although it also maybe shows a lack of experience/knowledge of MMO's and gameplay in them, or maybe a refusal to acknowledge different types of MMO's and gameplay styles.

Because looking at this thread and others like it, all the arguments that pointed towards the differences have been mentioned. If people still can't acknowledge the differences between games like UO, SWG and EVE and games like WoW or Rift, then it's obviously because people don't want  to see the differences, or lack experience with all those MMO's.

 You can't differeniate between the two on features alone, it's philosophy that separates them. A sandbox like SWG basically had themepark features, they even called some of them themeparks, (IE: Rebel bases, Imperial bases, Jabba's palace etc...). Most of the features people use to call EVE a sandbox are not sandbox features they're space sim features.

The philosophy of a Themepark MMO is accessability, easy to find goals etc.. The philosophy of a sandbox is to let players build on-to what the devs have created, and call a piece of it their own. It's really this simple a separation.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by Bladestrom

 try reading through the threads you create:

Sandbox core is about cultivating and maintaining a stable community and economy.

Thempark core is about offering activities and accessability. 

Both over varying layers of functionality/gameplay on top of this.  End game may or may not be relevant.  A lot of confusion comes from the comparison of the layers.  And based on this adding extra stuff to either type of game does not change its format as long as the core is maintained.  re OP.

I really don't agree, because I think even a Themepark can cultivate a thriving community or economy. I think it simply boils down to a sandbox offers you tools to manipulate the world and/or build on to the world. Themeparks usually don't offer such a thing.

He didn't say that you can't do that in themepark-based MMOs. He simply said that it is a core focus of sandbox-based MMOs.

again thats not true. Because this rule doesnt apply to Second Life, which is the most Sandbox of them all.

Also most Themepark MMO have group contents that requires community to work together. and I still havnt seen a Themepark MMORPG without a Economy

I know EvE has slowly been growing for the past few years, but has any "sandbox" approached the number of players SWG had?  Wasn't it over 500k?

That game did not have FFA pvp that "sandbox" people say is needed.  FFA with looting drives people away.  That's great, you don't care if people don't like it, yet wonder why these "sandboxes" have such little population.

Personally, the only true sandbox I know of is Second Life.  You create whatever you want.  And not create the same exact breastplate of +1, or the same house that the next person makes.

The other "sandboxes" are just empty, barren themeparks with a little bit of sandbox with "spongebob shovels, buckets, and pales" so you can create the "spongebob weapon".

You have classless systems for these games.  Yet, people will make the same basic "specs".  They raise certain skills First and highest, because they are the best.  Sure, you have different specs that fit different situations.  IE A heavy ranged fighter, a more tankish ship, a back lines magic/healer.  That is SOOOOO different then how people use talent trees and follow the same talents with a few variations, Right?  The illusion of freedom and choice is quite rampant in these Sandbox themeparks.

I know a big thing people claim is so great for sandboxes themeparks is the community.  And while I agree whole-heartedly that every sandbox I've played has a great community, I think there is a fairly obvious reason for that.

As a whole, they have small communities.  The players in the game want the game to succeed so much.  They want other players to enjoy the game.  They blindly ignore any criticism, warrented or not, of their game, and defend it to the death.  Even if the game is terrible to most people, they won't leave it.  So many like minded individuals helps the community come together.

I quite loved SWG when it first came out.  I didn't really get into eve because of how long, boring, and spreadsheetish it looked.  I didn't feel like spended months and months to be able to do anything.  I'm sure if I knew more people playing, I would have enjoyed it more.  But I had fun while I played, for the most part, yet not enough to stick with it.

If they could create a sandbox with actually content in addition to allowing a lot of freedom, that'd be perfect.  But that doesn't sound like that is about to happen any time soon.

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by Bladestrom

 try reading through the threads you create:

Sandbox core is about cultivating and maintaining a stable community and economy.

Thempark core is about offering activities and accessability. 

Both over varying layers of functionality/gameplay on top of this.  End game may or may not be relevant.  A lot of confusion comes from the comparison of the layers.  And based on this adding extra stuff to either type of game does not change its format as long as the core is maintained.  re OP.

I really don't agree, because I think even a Themepark can cultivate a thriving community or economy. I think it simply boils down to a sandbox offers you tools to manipulate the world and/or build on to the world. Themeparks usually don't offer such a thing.

He didn't say that you can't do that in themepark-based MMOs. He simply said that it is a core focus of sandbox-based MMOs.

again thats not true. Because this rule doesnt apply to Second Life, which is the most Sandbox of them all.

You claim that it is false, so I would ask that you back up your claim with links to what you are basing your argument on. Now, I wouldn't ask that of you if I wasn't willing to do the same.

"Second Life is an online virtual world developed by Linden Lab which was launched on June 23, 2003. A number of free client programs called Viewers[1][2] enable Second Life users, called Residents, to interact with each other through avatars. Residents can explore the world (known as the grid), meet other residents, socialize, participate in individual and group activities, and create and trade virtual property and services with one another." - Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Life



If you click "What is Second Life?" on their site, it takes you to a video description. Here are the first four lines:

"A place to connect
a place to shop
A place to work
A place to love"

Source: http://secondlife.com/whatis/?lang=en-US



Both the Wikipedia entry and the Second Life site itself describe almsot exclusively interaction and trade as the core features of Second Life.

Could you provide links to what you are basing your stance on?
 

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

Meh. This whole 'my favorite themepark MMO has all the features that sandbox MMO's have' is kind of a silly argument.

Nice argument for baiting though

Although it also maybe shows a lack of experience/knowledge of MMO's and gameplay in them, or maybe a refusal to acknowledge different types of MMO's and gameplay styles.

Because looking at this thread and others like it, all the arguments that pointed towards the differences have been mentioned. If people still can't acknowledge the differences between games like UO, SWG and EVE and games like WoW or Rift, then it's obviously because people don't want  to see the differences, or lack experience with all those MMO's.

 You can't differeniate between the two on features alone, it's philosophy that separates them. A sandbox like SWG basically had themepark features, they even called some of them themeparks, (IE: Rebel bases, Imperial bases, Jabba's palace etc...). Most of the features people use to call EVE a sandbox are not sandbox features they're space sim features.

The philosophy of a Themepark MMO is accessability, easy to find goals etc.. The philosophy of a sandbox is to let players build on-to what the devs have created, and call a piece of it their own. It's really this simple a separation.

Of course it's design philosophy that makes the difference. However, that exposes other issues, namely pre-WoW MMO's like for example EQ had a philosophy that was nowhere near the accessibility and ease of gameplay in a guided experience that's often associated with themepark MMO's. However, EQ is also not a sandbox MMO like UO was.

Another more recent example would be AA, which I see as being a clear example of a hybrid themepark/sandbox MMORPG.

Originally posted by MMOExposed

again thats not true. Because this rule doesnt apply to Second Life, which is the most Sandbox of them all.

Second Life is sandbox but isn't an MMORPG.

True MMORPG's like UO and SWG and such come closer to Second Life-style of gameplay than MMORPG's like WoW.

Draw your own conclusions.

Second Life isn't an MMORPG. A game has set rules and limits on players, and makes a challenege with those rules. Second Life is a group of gods that have no limits and can do anything they please.

Originally posted by Draron

Second Life isn't an MMORPG. A game has set rules and limits on players, and makes a challenege with those rules. Second Life is a group of gods that have no limits and can do anything they please.

Sounds like the ops team in the last IRC channel I visited. ;)

Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

Of course it's design philosophy that makes the difference. However, that exposes other issues, namely pre-WoW MMO's like for example EQ had a philosophy that was nowhere near the accessibility and ease of gameplay in a guided experience that's often associated with themepark MMO's. However, EQ is also not a sandbox MMO like UO was.

Another more recent example would be AA, which I see as being a clear example of a hybrid themepark/sandbox MMORPG.

This is what I was basically being a smart ass about in the last thread. As you're right design philosophy can change. EQ is based on very different principles than the themeparks of today. Just as AA seems to be aiming for a combination of SB and TP style mechanics and philosophy. In the future I doubt there will be much difference between the two as games will borrow from each philosophy and attempt to make original products.

 

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by VengeSunsoar

I would generally agree with that as well.  The availability of tools that allow for player created content (despit what we discussed that particular thread) does make a game more sandboxy.

The question comes down to specifics.  What tools does a game like Eve offer for player created content that, wow doesn't.  And don't say housing because that is a given and I allready admit that it is needed and WoW doesn't have it.  What besides housing though?

Venge

edit - don't bother mentioning skills either as I allready agree to that.  What I want is are there other things besides skills and housing?  What more does Eve do that you can't do in WoW?

It allows players to control and actually improve areas of space in 0.0.  This gives players a reason to hold territory, defend it against all others, and actively strive to take other peoples space from them in order to control the better resources that their territory may possess. (stations, ore, npc's, moon mines etc).

This results in player forming vast alliances with a political complexity rivaling the real world, with spying, invasions, desperate home defenses and of course, the random gank as you roam through space.

WOW has nothing like this, not even close, and all of this is made possible by the tools CCP provides in EVE.

Edit: In fact, I'd say that if anything really sets most sandboxes apart from themeparks is the ability to control territory, though DAOC was a themepark that managed to emulate this somewhat by encouraging players to take Castles in order to gain control of Darkness falls which was the premier resource source at the time.

 But it does.  There are areas with towers of keeps you can control (Eastern plaguelands) and I'm told in Lich King expansion (I've never actually played this) there are more player controlled areas like this.

In a PVP realm in Wow there is nothing stopping a guild or players from controlling one particular zone and fighting to keep it (south shore anyway - a major gankfest of just horde killing alliance). 

No WoW cannot improve (I allready talked about building) those areas but they can keep them.

The spying, invasions, defense, that can all be done in WoW.  It normally isn't but it can be.

And if control territory is what sets them apart what apart all the so-called sandboxes that don't allow that - Istaria for one.

Venge

edit - since those can be done in WoW but the population chooses not to most of the time, does this mean that a major difference between sandbox and themepark is simply choice?

edit - aside from what bladstrom and I allready decided.  :)

The difference is in WoW the Developers decided which areas players can control. In EVE the players decide. Also In WoW the Developers chose the factions for the players. In EVE this is also left totally up to the players. In WoW the players controlled areas are on a timer... once the timer resets the areas are up for grabs again. In EVE a Corp can hold an area for years if they are strong enough. In WoW if you don't want to be a part of the area control system you can wander through without any concern. In EVE if you go into a another Corp's space you better have a damn good reason for being there.

The territory control system in EVE is nothing like what is in WoW.

Bren

Yes that is a difference too.

Venge

Originally posted by Draron

Second Life isn't an MMORPG. A game has set rules and limits on players, and makes a challenege with those rules. Second Life is a group of gods that have no limits and can do anything they please.

that's a great assessment of second life.

I think that to truly call something a sandbox MMO you need to pay attention to some of the following:

Player-based Economy.  The fewer things left to NPCs, generally speaking (very generally; good design is key here) the better.

Heavy emphasis on crafting.  It's not enough for player-made items to be merely relevant, they need to be central to the game's progression.

No levels combined with scalable content.  Levels are those nasty little buggers that like to sneak up on you and pigeon-hole you into content categories.

No classes.  Classes are nearly as insidious as levels.  When you have classes, you require all manner of class-specific content, quests, gear, etc.  Having a sandbox with classes is like having an open field neatly divided by big, immobile fences into much smaller, less open fields. 

Finally, you need to give at least *some* thought to player-made content.  Whether this takes the form of player housing, player-run areas, etc (again, here be dragons - design, design, design is the mantra for the developers of such content).

Just my two cents.

Originally posted by MMOExposed

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by Bladestrom

 try reading through the threads you create:

Sandbox core is about cultivating and maintaining a stable community and economy.

Thempark core is about offering activities and accessability. 

Both over varying layers of functionality/gameplay on top of this.  End game may or may not be relevant.  A lot of confusion comes from the comparison of the layers.  And based on this adding extra stuff to either type of game does not change its format as long as the core is maintained.  re OP.

I really don't agree, because I think even a Themepark can cultivate a thriving community or economy. I think it simply boils down to a sandbox offers you tools to manipulate the world and/or build on to the world. Themeparks usually don't offer such a thing.

He didn't say that you can't do that in themepark-based MMOs. He simply said that it is a core focus of sandbox-based MMOs.

again thats not true. Because this rule doesnt apply to Second Life, which is the most Sandbox of them all.

 

Also most Themepark MMO have group contents that requires community to work together. and I still havnt seen a Themepark MMORPG without a Economy

 You original arguement was 'add lots of stuff to an sandbox and it becomes a thempark'  I assert that the core of the game is well  the core of the game.  You can add all the layers you like but if the foundations of the game is concerned with CULTIVATING community then it satisfies some of the core principles that sandbox players want, which is different from the typical themepark player who wants content.  Adding lots of tools and widgets to support the community is not the same, simply put, more layers. 

'Also most Themepark MMO have group contents that requires community to work together. and I still havnt seen a Themepark MMORPG without a Economy'

is a layer, read the posts.

Your new arguement that Second life is sandbox has got nothing to do with your original theory that adding content to a sandbox to turns it into a themepark.