If FFXIV is a theme park MMO, what other types of MMOs are there?

And can you give me some examples? Thanks.

Theme Park and Sandbox Rant

It's a decent intro.

Sandbox is the other one. You have far more freedom to do what you want and kind of help build the world. EVE online comes to mind for that one.

Sandbox MMOs are fun, but the downside to them is that they typically take a lot of time to do anything meaningful. I like EvE Online, I just don't have the time for it anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slick

And can you give me some examples? Thanks.

---

These are just fan-terms.

MMO's basically fall into three camps
"Themepark" which is where every piece of content is delineated like a "theme park" and whatever you do in A has no bearing on B. eg you can play the storyline or skip it, and the world will remain the same. Likewise what you do in the game has no bearing on what someone elses storyline.

"Sandbox" which is where you have a lot more control over the world beyond just making a house in a "housing area", sandbox MMO's do not use instances or shards to create multiple versions of the world (for more players), rather they have one world that isn't indelible, the content reflect it. So far no MMO in existence actually qualifies for "sandbox" because ... The closest thing are minecraft clones, but they all fail the sharding test. Sandbox MMO's are designed for Role-play by not providing a thematic element.

"Pseudo-sandbox", which is somewhere between themepark and sandbox. These are games that adopt some sandbox-like elements (eg placeable housing, large explorable areas, physics engines) in a larger themepark style MMO. Most games that call themselves sandbox MMO's are actually this. So the players can have some soft-effect on the world (that other players can undo) but in the end, if a player quits the game, everything they left in the game will disappear or be claimed by someone else.


The point is that a "themepark" mmo is designed around storyline content. You can have multiple storylines. You don't have to pay attention to the storyline, but there is a "theme" running through all the "rides" (eg dungeon content, overworld content, crafting, etc)

Other kinds of games (eg Destiny, PSO2) that have some dynamic multiplayer elements, but are otherwise single player games with one multiplayer lobby are also just themepark MMO's.

A "MMO" itself is "Massive Multiplayer Online" and can refer to any game with an online component, including games like farmville, even if all the game does is invite your friends for goodies. However this classification of game is neither a themepark or a sandbox, because the world isn't shared at all, and the extent of MMO'ness is visiting another friends town. Just like minecraft.


So generally all MMORPG's are Themepark MMORPG's even if they call themselves sandbox MMORPG's. There are no true sandbox MMORPG's, and at best, the sandbox elements are just another "theme" to the themepark, that is completely optional play with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KisaiTenshi

snip

---

Wakfu was the closest thing I've seen from a sandbox MMO when it launched. All mobs and plants were finite in number. Kill them all ? They'll never come again unless you took the time to collect semen/seeds to repopulate. In a matter of days, the devs had to put a safeguard because 90% of the starting areas had become a wasteland with nothing left alive.

Sandbox MMOs will never ever work just because players are unable to actually manage a world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kuwagami

Wakfu was the closest thing I've seen from a sandbox MMO when it launched. All mobs and plants were finite in number. Kill them all ? They'll never come again unless you took the time to collect semen/seeds to repopulate. In a matter of days, the devs had to put a safeguard because 90% of the starting areas had become a wasteland with nothing left alive.

Sandbox MMOs will never ever work just because players are unable to actually manage a world.

---

Exactly.

Archeage was another game that was a "sandbox mmo", but it was only sandbox'ish in building houses and ships. The houses were persistent but the ships were not. Players could strip all the "free" resources from the game, but the bots were faster at it. Players could produce farms or "illegal" farms (farms planted in common areas that anyone could loot) and what would happen is you'd get people who just outright destroy other players stuff for their own amusement.

After a while the "sandbox" elements wear thin because other players find it fun to metaphorically "kick the sandcastle down"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kuwagami

Wakfu was the closest thing I've seen from a sandbox MMO when it launched. All mobs and plants were finite in number. Kill them all ? They'll never come again unless you took the time to collect semen/seeds to repopulate. In a matter of days, the devs had to put a safeguard because 90% of the starting areas had become a wasteland with nothing left alive.

Sandbox MMOs will never ever work just because players are unable to actually manage a world.

---

That Anime is a real MMO. Interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ferrasper

That Anime is a real MMO. Interesting.

---

Not a really good one though it has really interresting mecanics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KisaiTenshi

Snip.

---

If we're talking about Purity, then I don't really know any MMO's that don't have any sandbox elements.
All MMO's are between those two terms, they get categorized by which side of the spectrum they're closest to.

By the same right, they're all psuedo-theme park. They're opposing terms, so you can't be purist for only one side.
Most developers are smart enough to lean on one side while appropriating parts of the other.

Trove might fit in to the "sandbox" MMO category. Minecraft-ish, but MMO.

Saying there are no sandbox games seems pretty silly; it's not some kind of unattainable Platonic ideal. On the Sandbox <----------> Theme Park continuum plenty of games have fallen far closer to Sandbox. UO, once upon a time, EVE Online, Darkfall (before they uh, "fixed" it), Mortal Online, Entropia, Elite: Dangerous. There's a billionty. They're not all excellent but they're out there.

https://i.imgflip.com/odo6l.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by squidbunny

Saying there are no sandbox games seems pretty silly; it's not some kind of unattainable Platonic ideal. On the Sandbox <----------> Theme Park continuum plenty of games have fallen far closer to Sandbox. UO, once upon a time, EVE Online, Darkfall (before they uh, "fixed" it), Mortal Online, Entropia, Elite: Dangerous. There's a billionty. They're not all excellent but they're out there.

---

The problem is that "sandbox" is just a keyword used in marketing and has absolutely no bearing on the "sandbox-worthiness" of the game.

For a game to be a true sandbox, it has to be a persistent world that functions regardless if the player is in it or not. UO originally started that way. But sharding and spamability of monsters demotes it to Themepark.

A true Sandbox MMO:
1) Is "ONE" world, not a dozen copies of one, and does not instance out of "fairness" but for local capacity.
2) Is not indelible, the world must be changable by the players without the server needing to be patched to change the content
3) Has an entity-driven market, whereby you can't simply harvest infinite materials and dump them on the market for infinite money.
4) Has an entity-driven combat, whereby you can't simply kill everyone and everything and not have players and "autonomous" entities attempt to capture or kill you.
5) Has an entity-driven "enmity" rumor mill. Hence, if you go around drowning cats and kicking dogs, and someone (player or entity) notices it, it will make them hostile to you until they forget about it. If you want to go roam around with a pack of wolves and help them kill cows, the wolves will befriend you but the cows will want to kill you.
6) Has a realistic physics environment. If you cut the foundation out from under a building, the building is going to collapse. If someone builds a catapult, you should be able to use it defensively, aggressively, or even launch yourself from it, and die if you hit a solid wall.
7) The rules of the Sandbox is dictated by those who play in it. The server only assists in enforcement of such rules, marking rule breakers and rule enforcers, but letting players decide how to deal with it.

Like the entire idea of a sandbox MMO runs counter to the rule of fun. Hence why none exist, and those that call themselves a sandbox are nothing but a themepark with a few sandbox ideas used to expand the amount of time-sinks. A crafting system alone does not make a game a sandbox, but that is what Marketers seem to think it means. Placable housing seems to be another element often touted as sandbox'ish. Games that wish they were sandbox games are often also primarily PvP games because that's the only way to add fun to an otherwise bloodlust competition.

A MMO is a Themepark if ANY of below are true:
1. Monsters (and NPC's) respawn on a schedule, and do NOT spawn based on environmental conditions.
2. Quests can be repeated for the same reward.
3. NPC's stand in the same spot regardless of environmental conditions.
4. NPC's will buy all items and junk, regardless of quality, and have infinite money
5. Any Immortal NPC's

Long story short, a sandbox MMO is player-driven.

What happens in the game world is primarily due to player action. A castle has a new king? It's because a bunch of players grouped up to make it so.

Theme park MMOs are developer-driven.

Generally anything significant that happens is because the developers willed it so. A castle has a new king? It's because the story line said so.

In theme park MMOs, players are more or less "just along for the ride". While in sandbox MMOs, players (as a collective) have control over the state of the game world.

Eve Online is a good example of a sandbox MMO. The story is "written" by the players and their corporations. The developers pretty much just "record" it.

They are just marketing words or buzzwords. I personally hate sandbox games because they are so damn boring, no direction and no purpose. and Eve isn't a good example of a sandbox since it still has you going from point a to point b. Second Life might be the closest thing to a true Sandbox mmo with world being created by it's players and no one else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meya

They are just marketing words or buzzwords. I personally hate sandbox games because they are so damn boring, no direction and no purpose. and Eve isn't a good example of a sandbox since it still has you going from point a to point b. Second Life might be the closest thing to a true Sandbox mmo with world being created by it's players and no one else.

---

There are differing levels of "sandbox-ness".

Second Life is the extreme case of it.

Even FFXIV has sandbox elements, namely the Market Board - it is still indirectly regulated via drop rates and availability on vendors but is mostly player driven. However most of FFXIV is themepark and developer driven - an easy way to tell is to just observe what happens when the developer pauses the game updates, if players "have nothing to do" than it's primarily themepark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bishop81

There are differing levels of "sandbox-ness".

Second Life is the extreme case of it.

Even FFXIV has sandbox elements, namely the Market Board - it is still indirectly regulated via drop rates and availability on vendors but is mostly player driven. However most of FFXIV is themepark and developer driven - an easy way to tell is to just observe what happens when the developer pauses the game updates, if players "have nothing to do" than it's primarily themepark.

---

So basically we as players can ignore the term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meya

So basically we as players can ignore the term.

---

I feel that is the lazy way out and just dismissing the entire topic.

While there are various degrees of sandbox-ness, MMOs still can be grouped into separate themepark and sandbox categories by their ratio of themepark v.s. sandbox content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meya

They are just marketing words or buzzwords. I personally hate sandbox games because they are so damn boring, no direction and no purpose. and Eve isn't a good example of a sandbox since it still has you going from point a to point b. Second Life might be the closest thing to a true Sandbox mmo with world being created by it's players and no one else.

---

Secondlife breaks the "no sharding" rule. Connecting to SL might be "one world" but it's a series of independent instances, wherein NOTHING you do in one counts for anything in another.

The importance of "no sharding" is that allows two players to have equal opportunity to do X activity. If you create two copies of the world. That player now has to exist in both shards to do the same X activity(doubling time-sinkness,) or they have to forgo one of the shards, resulting in different competitive environments for other players.

It is "not fun" to join the lower-populated server, but it's also not-fun to have to compete with people who have spent a lot more time on that server as well. In a Sandbox environment, there is no such thing as a "I spent a lot of time perfecting my rotations to fight (whatever)" because the environment adapts to being spammed. An inexperienced player has a slight upper hand, because entities do not know how they will fight them. So all new players have that opportunity. The entities don't learn "the best rotation" from the first player and then use it to pummel everyone who comes after them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KisaiTenshi

The problem is that "sandbox" is just a keyword used in marketing and has absolutely no bearing on the "sandbox-worthiness" of the game.

For a game to be a true sandbox, it has to be a persistent world that functions regardless if the player is in it or not. UO originally started that way. But sharding and spamability of monsters demotes it to Themepark.

A true Sandbox MMO:
1) Is "ONE" world, not a dozen copies of one, and does not instance out of "fairness" but for local capacity.
2) Is not indelible, the world must be changable by the players without the server needing to be patched to change the content
3) Has an entity-driven market, whereby you can't simply harvest infinite materials and dump them on the market for infinite money.
4) Has an entity-driven combat, whereby you can't simply kill everyone and everything and not have players and "autonomous" entities attempt to capture or kill you.
5) Has an entity-driven "enmity" rumor mill. Hence, if you go around drowning cats and kicking dogs, and someone (player or entity) notices it, it will make them hostile to you until they forget about it. If you want to go roam around with a pack of wolves and help them kill cows, the wolves will befriend you but the cows will want to kill you.
6) Has a realistic physics environment. If you cut the foundation out from under a building, the building is going to collapse. If someone builds a catapult, you should be able to use it defensively, aggressively, or even launch yourself from it, and die if you hit a solid wall.
7) The rules of the Sandbox is dictated by those who play in it. The server only assists in enforcement of such rules, marking rule breakers and rule enforcers, but letting players decide how to deal with it.

Like the entire idea of a sandbox MMO runs counter to the rule of fun. Hence why none exist, and those that call themselves a sandbox are nothing but a themepark with a few sandbox ideas used to expand the amount of time-sinks. A crafting system alone does not make a game a sandbox, but that is what Marketers seem to think it means. Placable housing seems to be another element often touted as sandbox'ish. Games that wish they were sandbox games are often also primarily PvP games because that's the only way to add fun to an otherwise bloodlust competition.

A MMO is a Themepark if ANY of below are true:
1. Monsters (and NPC's) respawn on a schedule, and do NOT spawn based on environmental conditions.
2. Quests can be repeated for the same reward.
3. NPC's stand in the same spot regardless of environmental conditions.
4. NPC's will buy all items and junk, regardless of quality, and have infinite money
5. Any Immortal NPC's

---

I don't think this is entirely accurate. Sandbox/Themepark are at best vague terms or an "Idea" used to describe some content a MMO would offer... so I don't think you can refute what he said with a list of your opinions lol.

Though if you assert these are in fact defined characteristic, i'd just like to know where you found this very concise list of defining traits required to be considered a Sandbox MMO, because I think a game you described would not only be awful but impossible to create on any realistic scale in the form of an MMO.

As I see it. A Themepark is about following a set story line. A Sandbox is where you make your own story. Or a themepark is a written book you read in a linear fashion, a sandbox is a blank page where you write what you want.

Mayhaps not the best definition, but it works for me ^_^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlaiseArath

I thought you might have been describing the characteristics of a Sandbox game in general and what defines that... but you mention economy... and frankly, based on your definitions, there is no game I know of in existence that can be considered "Sandbox" by your rules listed. Even Minecraft, a game I consider to be a true Sandbox, doesn't meet half your criteria lol.

---

That's the idea.

Think about what an actual sandbox is.

1) There is only one sandbox (Not 4 segregated boxes right next to each other, with one full of older kids)
2) I can move the sand around with my hands, my feet, or with tools that I brought from outside the sandbox
3) I can trade tools with other people in the sandbox, but I can't lend them my hands and feet
4) I can punch the other person in the sandbox, and they can punch me back
5) If I punch Bob and call him names, Bob is going to tell Mary who will then probably want to punch me too
6) If it rains, what I built in the sandbox will dissolve unless I protect or reinforce it
7) If I play Tag in the sandbox, the other people need to play by my rules, or not play the game.

Meanwhile think about what a themepark is:
1) The park is open for set hours
2) I can go on the attraction as many times as I want, and the content will never change
3) The staff of the themepark sit in one spot all day and repeat the same dialog repeatedly
4) They are more than happy to sell you any souvenirs, regardless of usefulness.
5) Staff will not tolerate rule breakers and throw you out.

Hence, a sandbox environment is one where the player(s) are create the content, and set their own rules. A Themepark environment is any environment that sets limitations on the players being able to create their own content and rules.

Spore was the closest any game ever got to being a true sandbox, but it was hobbled by trying to be several different games at once. The MMO component was only used to back-fill the content so the player wouldn't have to create EVERYTHING. It was otherwise entirely a single player game. The Sims, and Minecraft have several "sandbox" types of elements to them, but they are otherwise no more a sandbox than any other single player game.

Marketers do not agree on what the term "Sandbox" means in a game. Some of them use it for crafting ( a la minecraft), some of them use it to describe vanity housing (a la Sims), some use it to describe the concept of an "open world" which games like Minecraft can do, but they are entirely boring empty open worlds with nothing to discover.

Algorithm generated content is actually worse than "themepark" content. At least themepark content has a goal. The open-endedness of a fractal-generated landscape (which is what Minecraft, and Landmark are) is of no value if you're the only one in it.

Most players would rather play a Themepark MMO than a "sandbox" one, because a Themepark MMO is closer to watching TV, if you don't like what you're playing, you find another game. A "Sandbox" is a time investment in creativity, which is something that not everyone is good at. If you don't like the way a sandbox is going, you don't get to find another one, because there is only one, you push the reset button and all the time you spent is lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KisaiTenshi

Think about what an actual sandbox is.

---

The true criteria to be a Sandbox in the real world. It is a box. It is full of sand.

I feel that if there were four boxes full of sand, you'd have four sandboxes, not four things that could be sandboxes but aren't because there are four of them. If someone set out rules for how to play in the sandbox, it would be a sandbox with rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KisaiTenshi

Snip.

---

You're reaching though.
Any game that has any player driven content or fun that isn't entirely pre-developed (even PVP falls in this category) is not a pure theme park game if you're talking about purity.

It's not about what checks all on the list, it's about what the overall direction the game takes.
Sandboxes give people the tools to make their own enjoyment.
Theme parks provide the predeveloped attractions.

Both don't work in a pure sense, but most games fall on one side or the other.

Is it me, or is this topic running a bit close to the old "Not a True Scotsman" fallacy?

Now, with that said, the difference is simple. It all comes down to what's driving the game. The players? Or the developers?

If it's the developer, then it's more like a theme park MMO. If it's the players, then it's more like a sandbox MMO.

In a theme park MMO, the developers provide the adventures. They set up the quests, provide direction in adventures, and generally points the players in directions. There's even a strict storyline that the players generally can't control.

On the other hand, a sandbox MMO is a bit more free. The players make their own directions and make their own adventures. There may be quests, and generally events, but the role of the developers really is to simply provide the world and ensure that there's some balance. It's the players that write the story rather than the other way around.

Sand box MMO's were pretty common in the early days of MMO's, such as Ultima Online and EVE online. Theme park MMO's are more common now. They're easy to design, easy to build, and easy for people to get into, especially if they're new to MMO's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChazNatlo

The true criteria to be a Sandbox in the real world. It is a box. It is full of sand.

I feel that if there were four boxes full of sand, you'd have four sandboxes, not four things that could be sandboxes but aren't because there are four of them. If someone set out rules for how to play in the sandbox, it would be a sandbox with rules.

---

Real world sandboxes are curated. You aren't allowed to just take over anyone's property at will in real life. You either take turns, or you make your own private exclusive sandbox. If there were no rules whatsoever, you'd have sandboxes full of cat poop and syringes. Someone is making sure the sandbox is a sandbox and not a toxic death trap.

So this is just nitpicking. A real world sandbox, someone went through the effort of making sure it was safe to play in when it was opened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Allyrion

You're reaching though.
Any game that has any player driven content or fun that isn't entirely pre-developed (even PVP falls in this category) is not a pure theme park game if you're talking about purity.

It's not about what checks all on the list, it's about what the overall direction the game takes.
Sandboxes give people the tools to make their own enjoyment.
Theme parks provide the predeveloped attractions.

Both don't work in a pure sense, but most games fall on one side or the other.

---

Of course neither work in a pure sense, because that would make such games not fun and not profitable.

Look at the direction of "minecraft" clones. Why aren't these more popular? Because there is nothing to do in them? So you seeing everyone cloning them trying to add MMORPG elements to them for the sake of adding themepark elements so there is something to do beyond building a house in it. That's the same thing that happened with The Sims. The original Sims was a lot more sandbox'ish than it's later sequels because EA saw a profit motive in controlling the content. You'll see the same thing happen to Minecraft.

My issue is the use of the term "sandbox" to describe ANY game, because that is as misleading as calling a Pizza a pie. Yes technically a Pizza is a Pie, but when you buy a pie, you're thinking about a fruit-filled pastry, not a cheesey thing. This is the problem with calling a game a sandbox, is that we're using the term "sandbox" for something that isn't, and no two games that use the term share the same aspects.

If I'm looking for a "Sandbox" game, I'd want something closer to Minecraft, that also let me make the monsters/npc's, and has actual physics. No such game exists. But I don't want "yet another minecraft" because the NPC's in these kinds of games are simply infinite shops to have some reason to use the "gold" that there is an infinite supply of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keyln

Now, with that said, the difference is simple. It all comes down to what's driving the game. The players? Or the developers?

If it's the developer, then it's more like a theme park MMO. If it's the players, then it's more like a sandbox MMO.

---

UO was a logical extension of Ultima 4 in the Ultima 7/7.5/8 style. Ultima 6 and later all had crafting aspects to it. NPC's all had schedules, Monsters all had their own needs, etc.

But an infinite supply of players means there is a requirement for an infinite supply of resources.

Hence why Sandbox MMO's can never truely exist, someone is going to just take all the sand if you don't provide infinite sand.

"Themepark" is often used derisively when talking about if a game is a Themepark or a Sandbox. It's insinuating that a themepark game is a bad game, eg "please let me off the cutscene ride and just play"

But a "Sandbox" is often worse, because the gameplay takes precedence, and makes the environment have increasingly inflexible rules, eventually becoming it's own themepark game due to the "loudest" dogs demanding it be fun for them and not some other group.

Does 'idle in your garrison until raid time' count as an MMO type? Cos that'd be WoW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KisaiTenshi

Real world sandboxes are curated. You aren't allowed to just take over anyone's property at will in real life. You either take turns, or you make your own private exclusive sandbox. If there were no rules whatsoever, you'd have sandboxes full of cat poop and syringes. Someone is making sure the sandbox is a sandbox and not a toxic death trap.

---

Not exactly the point I was trying to make. Ignore my point about rules, that was an example. My point was that you had several factors there that really had nothing to do with whether the sandbox is a sandbox or not. sure they're things that can apply to a sandbox, but many of them also apply to a playground. Note, I said many, not all. They are not what make a sandbox a sandbox.

Really my point is that you are being a little strict with your definition. I mean, what if we played it in reverse, disqualified all MMOs from being theme parks because they don't fit all the exact qualifications for being a themepark? Then we'd have no terms that we allow ourselves to apply to ANY of our games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KisaiTenshi

UO was a logical extension of Ultima 4 in the Ultima 7/7.5/8 style. Ultima 6 and later all had crafting aspects to it. NPC's all had schedules, Monsters all had their own needs, etc.

But an infinite supply of players means there is a requirement for an infinite supply of resources.

Hence why Sandbox MMO's can never truely exist, someone is going to just take all the sand if you don't provide infinite sand.

"Themepark" is often used derisively when talking about if a game is a Themepark or a Sandbox. It's insinuating that a themepark game is a bad game, eg "please let me off the cutscene ride and just play"

But a "Sandbox" is often worse, because the gameplay takes precedence, and makes the environment have increasingly inflexible rules, eventually becoming it's own themepark game due to the "loudest" dogs demanding it be fun for them and not some other group.

---

I'm not sure that we agree on the meaning of "Sandbox MMO" and "Themepark MMO". I also think you may be overthinking this just a tad. It's really quite simple. A Sandbox MMO is a MMO where the developers provide the tools and the players provide their own form of gameplay. There's no guidance from the developer. A Theme Park MMO is a MMO where the developers guide the players and they provide the drive. Most modern MMO's made in the past 5 years are generally Theme Park MMO's.