Can we have a Sandbox game instead?

[giftforce]

Think about it. Making pre-fabricated content is way more effort than it's actually worth. It's much more cost-effective to develop the systems for players to make their own fun. "Give a man a fish and he can feed for a day" and so on.

People play the same Call of Duty maps over and over on multiplayer mode, not because they are such amazing maps, but because playing with others is. You never know what someone else is going to do.

Applying that convention to the MMO setting, you get the sandbox design philosophy. A philosophy which basically stipulates that players should have some, if not all, control over the game-world.

Of course, the downside is the developers have less control over what people do. For example, maybe some cruel person will build their house on a hilltop which was someone else's favorite vantage-point.

But the upside is that it's really hard to give meaning to MMOs without these aspects.

[Anonymoose]

You'd have my full support if not for the reservation of one factor in my mind: sandbox MMOs, while known for their player-driven content and freedom, are also, sadly, known for their focus on mundane repetition of mindless tasks to obtain "progress" that never actually leads to any increased skill (Lookin' at you, Synthesis System. And Levequests. And Gath-god, this is depressing.)

One aspect of Themepark MMOs that has always appealed to me is that levelling up doesn't feel like that - you're doing your quests, exploring the content, hanging out with your friends, and levelling up is a fast-paced side-effect that just happens to you.

I'd give my mouse hand to have an MMO that skillfully took the best of both worlds.

Give a man a fish, and now that man knows there to come for fish. But if you teach a man to fish - well, then you've just destroyed your entire marketbase.

[Dubont]

Think about it. Making pre-fabricated content is way more effort than it's actually worth. It's much more cost-effective to develop the systems for players to make their own fun. "Give a man a fish and he can feed for a day" and so on.

People play the same Call of Duty maps over and over on multiplayer mode, not because they are such amazing maps, but because playing with others is. You never know what someone else is going to do.

Applying that convention to the MMO setting, you get the sandbox design philosophy. A philosophy which basically stipulates that players should have some, if not all, control over the game-world.

Of course, the downside is the developers have less control over what people do. For example, maybe some cruel person will build their house on a hilltop which was someone else's favorite vantage-point.

But the upside is that it's really hard to give meaning to MMOs without these aspects.

I don't play the same COD maps repeatedly because I like to play with others on it....I try out the multiplayer and get the trophies (if available) then never touch it again...because COD multiplayer is terrible. Back on point, there are enough horrible sandbox games. There's no need to pack on another.

[giftforce]

Back on point, there are enough horrible sandbox games. There's no need to pack on another.

Wrong. There are lots of horrible sandboxes, leaving a vacuum in the market for a good one.

[Dubont]

Wrong. There are lots of horrible sandboxes, leaving a vacuum in the market for a good one.

I think SE needs to get the MMO part down first, before trying to make another sub-genre...otherwise, it WILL be just another horrible sandbox

[Anonymoose]

I think SE needs to get the MMO part down first, before trying to make another sub-genre...otherwise, it WILL be just another horrible sandbox

As much as I hate the uncalled for levels of XIV-Bashing this forum so often provides, that's actually pretty legitimate. Still, just because something is far off doesn't mean that there can't be a quality discussion to hammer out some ideas for the devs to store away for that era of development. Hell, the thread in my sig is exactly that.

[giftforce]

I think SE needs to get the MMO part down first, before trying to make another sub-genre...otherwise, it WILL be just another horrible sandbox

There is already content in development to satisfy the themepark sub-genre, which is more or less what I am asking they sacrifice.

[yukikaze_yanagi]

So, we had a sandbox in the start.Maybe with more time would turned in a good one, but in the mean time SE changed direction to theme park.
We waited 4 moths for the opening of theme park.
Now you want sandbox back.

Move on guys, anothe giftthread, nothing to see. Bring it on the streets !

[alexi14]

FFXI was kinda sandbox.

Don't believe me? Go claim a god that another hnmls wanted. You may not be able to PVP, but they will do everything in their power to destroy your ls!

mmmm ffxi politics

[giftforce]

So, we had a sandbox in the start.Maybe with more time would turned in a good one, but in the mean time SE changed direction to theme park.
We waited 4 moths for the opening of theme park.
Now you want sandbox back.

Move on guys, anothe giftthread, nothing to see. Bring it on the streets !

We started off with neither a themepark nor a sandbox. I think it could have gone both ways. However, because there was absolutely nothing in the game at launch, people probably look at it like a sandbox because making their own fun was all they could do. But a sandbox needs sand to be a sandbox. FFXIV was more like an empty plot of land, waiting for either a sandbox or a themepark to be built.

Also, I wouldn't say no to some questhubs and whatever else they have planned, but I'm just saying that I personally would like a more sandboxy approach. I'm also using the market-potential as a ploy to appeal to SE's commercial sense. I mean, there really are no decent sandbox MMOs, not since Ultima Online. Yoshi himself has said he liked UO and DaoC so it's obvious he is only pushing a WoW-clone agenda because he thinks that's what the market calls for.

But it doesn't.