What does "sandbox game" mean to you?

[Deleted]

There are few elements I consider required for game to be considered sandbox:

*Skill progression based on what you do. You shoot arrows? Your ranged skill goes up. You take alot of hits? Your defense skill goes up. You chop alot of wood? Forester skill goes up. You swim alot? Swimming speed goes up. There should be noticeable diminishing returns the higher skill goes up and the more skills you have. Achieving super high rank in some skill should be a challenge only few people on server will overcome. You will know Joe is the best sword user, Maggie rules with doublewielding axes, if you are looking for superb potion maker pay the man to see is Ed. Stuff like that, sense of reputation, community should be the core.

*Minimal or zero instancing. Everything is happening on the same world available to all people on server. This requires the game world to be substantial. What you do will have impact on the world and everyone who plays in it.
Example:
They may be areas where you can get access only when lumberjack with skill of 100+ cut down trees. They will grow up back in few days.
To kill special boss everyone in party will be required to drink potion X, only potion maker with skill of 150+ can craft.
Once you kill the boss, noone else can kill it until it respawns.

*Crafting should allow you to make up your own recipes, explore world to find special materials that are unseen for others who did not develop your scavenging skills. You should be able to experiment, doesn't matter that 50 tries will be crap, but 51th can be the gem that will get you recognition. Crafting should be viable way how to progress your character. Great pvper, raider, crafter, explorer should be on relatively same strength to each other.

*Noticeable death penalty. If you die, you lose something that will cause some setback, be it experience, skill, gear, money loss any combination of that. When they reduced death penalty in modern games, almost every sense of exploring, adventure, caring about your character vanished. You are not feeling adrenaline when you enter dark cave, travel through rocky mountains, delve in forest labyrinth. You are not trying to survive and fight for your life when a pack of unexpected mobs jumps you.

*PVP: Attacking other players should be available almost everywhere. Only small zones would be protected, like banks, crafting areas. I think it will be better if there was no-pvp server option as well since many people are not prepared for real open pvp game. Because of death penalty, killing a player will be something significant. Victim will lose quite few things and the killer will gain. To prevent mindless griefing there should be soft limits on how many people you can kill and penalties for breaching them. Strong guilds can enforce ruling of certain hunting areas, controlling travel routes or resource spots. Solo players will have smaller chance to survive, grouping and guild will be something you pretty much have to do. Guild wars will have huge stake in it for all parties, just like are wars for resources in real life.

There are more things this is just on top of my head.

edit: Also I want to say that many people think they want sandbox game, but if true sandbox game were presented to them they wouldn't like/play it. The truth is real sandbox game does not cater to majority casual players of this time who just want to hop in the game for and hour and get a reward for it. Sandbox game presents a time commitment which you should treat like hobby and expect to play such game for couple of years or like 6 months minimum.

TLR Players are the force that shapes how the game on the server looks. Developers are there to deliver tools and keep players from going apeshit and using the tools to destroy the game.

[Xavas]

There are few elements I consider required for game to be considered sandbox:

Sounds a lot like Ultima Online actually. :P

[Deleted]

Sounds a lot like Ultima Online actually. :P

UO, but also couple of other older games were great grounding stone for sandbox.

[Stir]

There are few elements I consider required for game to be considered sandbox:

*Skill progression based on what you do.

This first one is arguable. One might say you'd get railroaded by what situations demand of you rather than what you would like your character to be. It's a very limiting system, to be honest. Also pretty exploitable, to be sure.

*Minimal or zero instancing. Everything is happening on the same world available to all people on server. This requires the game world to be substantial. What you do will have impact on the world and everyone who plays in it.
Example:
They may be areas where you can get access only when lumberjack with skill of 100+ cut down trees. They will grow up back in few days.
To kill special boss everyone in party will be required to drink potion X, only potion maker with skill of 150+ can craft.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the 'sandbox' and everything to do with economy and population limitation. Basically, you create a competitive environment where not everyone can get what they want, because someone else took it already. Really off-putting for many, many gamers, and there's nothing 'sandbox' about it.

*Crafting should allow you to make up your own recipes, explore world to find special materials that are unseen for others who did not develop your scavenging skills. You should be able to experiment, doesn't matter that 50 tries will be crap, but 51th can be the gem that will get you recognition. Crafting should be viable way how to progress your character. Great pvper, raider, crafter, explorer should be on relatively same strength to each other.

For your first point: Yes; great. Make up your own recipes/schematics. But in reality, this is simply not viable. What you get is simply a very, véry long list of possible effect combinations; you can't actually create something new, but you'll have the illusion of newness.
The rest of this point is just an entitlement issue. 'Find materials that are unseen for others who did not develop your scavenging skills' is a very... Specific phrasing. You worded it so that entitlement oozes out. You could have phrased it like this: 'Have hidden components that can be discovered at higher skill levels,' but you didn't.

*Noticeable death penalty. If you die, you lose something that will cause some setback, be it experience, skill, gear, money loss any combination of that. When they reduced death penalty in modern games, almost every sense of exploring, adventure, caring about your character vanished. You are not feeling adrenaline when you enter dark cave, travel through rocky mountains, delve in forest labyrinth. You are not trying to survive and fight for your life when a pack of unexpected mobs jumps you.

There's nothing sandbox about this suggestion. It's just inconvenience, really. The question you should ask yourself is this: Do you really want to be punished for failure, or would you rather be rewarded for success? Personally: Punishment for failure puts me off of a game. I get punished for failure enough as it is by simply not succeeding (and therefore, not proceeding for a short while).

*PVP: Attacking other players should be available almost everywhere. Only small zones would be protected, like banks, crafting areas. I think it will be better if there was no-pvp server option as well since many people are not prepared for real open pvp game. Because of death penalty, killing a player will be something significant. Victim will lose quite few things and the killer will gain. To prevent mindless griefing there should be soft limits on how many people you can kill and penalties for breaching them. Strong guilds can enforce ruling of certain hunting areas, controlling travel routes or resource spots. Solo players will have smaller chance to survive, grouping and guild will be something you pretty much have to do. Guild wars will have huge stake in it for all parties, just like are wars for resources in real life.

And again the entitlement thing oozes out. You want to be the winner, you want to be the victor, you want to be mighty.
It has nothing to do with a sandbox. Absolutely nothing at all. It has everything to do with convenience. If other people do not want to be inconvenienced by having a raging Nolfster breathing down their necks whenever they set out to do something, then they have a right not to be bothered by you. In fact, they have far more of a right not to be bothered by you than you have a right to bother them... And that's because Nolfster is Nolfster, and the rest of the world is the rest of the world.

There are more things this is just on top of my head.

None of these things are sandbox related. They could all fit into a themepark railroader and not add a pinch of sandbox to it.

edit: Also I want to say that many people think they want sandbox game, but if true sandbox game were presented to them they wouldn't like/play it. The truth is real sandbox game does not cater to majority casual players of this time who just want to hop in the game for and hour and get a reward for it. Sandbox game presents a time commitment which you should treat like hobby and expect to play such game for couple of years or like 6 months minimum.

TLR Players are the force that shapes how the game on the server looks. Developers are there to deliver tools and keep players from going apeshit and using the tools to destroy the game.

No... Sandbox games put so many people off because there's never a good story to follow in a sandbox game. A sandbox game, by definition, lacks direction. It doesn't force you to go anywhere in particular, to do anything in particular. As a result, you'll not have a very engaging storyline, you'll get lost more often than not from the get-go, you get frustrated by the fact that you don't know where to go, and there's no real storyhooks there, and you come to the conclusion that if you want to stand around without a purpose, you might as well do so outside.

You don't want a sandbox game. You want to smash skulls and be a winner. They're completely unrelated.

[galluk]

To do what you want, how you want, and still progress in your path.

If you can play a game for a year without killing an NPC, and still have as rewarding experience as a combat oriented character, it's Sandbox.

[Deleted]

You don't want a sandbox game. You want to smash skulls and be a winner. They're completely unrelated.

I prefer non-pvp servers.

[Fencers]

I agree that those 2 games are very different in their designs. I would call 1 of them sandbox but not the other. But see:
http://daxgamer.com/2012/07/the-top-...es-since-2000/

Open world games are not inherently sandbox games.

Warcraft is definitely an open world game. But no play system in the entire game is non linear, emergent, blahblah.

Warcraft is the height of the theme park MMO. A concept contradictory to sandbox gameplay. The two could not exist in the same play environment.

People have different views about that.

People can also possess views and opinion which are faulty. And they can even be commonly shared among large percentage of people.

Evidenced by... all of human history pretty much.

[wariofan1]

A sandbox game is where you essentially create your own fun within the game with whatever tools are at your disposal.

Yeah, this is pretty much how I see it too.

[Deleted]

I prefer non-pvp servers.

So you tickle the enemies to death?

[procne]

Open world games are not inherently sandbox games.

Warcraft is definitely an open world game. But no play system in the entire game is non linear, emergent, blahblah.

Warcraft is the height of the theme park MMO. A concept contradictory to sandbox gameplay. The two could not exist in the same play environment.


People can also possess views and opinion which are faulty. And they can even be commonly shared among large percentage of people.

Evidenced by... all of human history pretty much.

Oh, I do agree with you, mostly. But the point of the thread is to see what does "sandbox" mean to people. Before making the thread I checked a few articles (linked one was one of them) where people wrote about sandbox games. And in that article, and in one of the threads on this forum, people said that multiple choices and playstyles make game a sandbox.

If that's what people write about sandboxes it would only be fair to include such option in the poll

[checking facts]

to me, this is a sandbox game.

[Zogarth]

In my opinion a sandbox game is stuff like Roller Coaster: Tycoon, Simcity, and minecraft. You create your own fun, and construct your own game. A game like Skyrim is just openworld. Nothing sandboxy about an openworld game.

[Deleted]

So you tickle the enemies to death?

I slay virtual dragons for virtual rewards!

[bohapjut]

No other option in the poll?

[philefluxx]

Why are so many people trying to make apples out of oranges? People really cant be bothered to use any logic can they?

Seriously, think of a real life sandbox and what you do in a sandbox. Then apply that to your "open freedom" argument and tell me how that fits?

[procne]

No other option in the poll?

What other option would you like?

[Gsara]

Just look to Eve and you will know what a true sandbox is all about. You can do anything and everything, its all player driven. It even has a little bit of the hand holding quest design to get you started but you do not have to even do them if you dont want to. You can be an explorer, gatherer, pure crafter, pure ganker, bounty hunter, spy thief, drug dealer, anything you want, the game is only limited by the players imagination. You can be apart of a corp., play solo, do large scale war or just solo pvp. The gameplay can be as shallow or deep as you want it to be.

Everything is player driven with very very little developer interference. Industry(crafting) is completely player driven as well as the markets(auction house) although there is the option to buy some things from npc's with loyalty points. There is even a care bear land for people that dont want to pvp called high sec.

To me, this is what a sandbox is all about. Not a game with limited set boundaries where you are constantly waiting for an xpac or a new raid or where "questing" becomes your "daily" grind.

Also, the options in the poll clearly show that the op is confused about the differences from a theme park and sandbox game. WoW and almost all mmorpg's out today are pure themeparks. There are small area's of a game or two that have a sandbox element or two but they are not sandbox games.

[Stir]

I prefer non-pvp servers.

There are, of course, more ways to win than PvP alone. To seek to trump others in pure achievement is another kind of 'winning.' It is competitive.

There's nothing wrong with wishing a competitive game. If you really want a game like that, then by all means; go for it. Make on, find a game that fits, play with like-minded people, and have fun. A game is all about fun, after all.

It's just not the same as a sandbox, is all. A sandbox game can be as competitive as you would wish, but the competitive, driven nature you seem to wish is not the nature of a sandbox itself.

I am a human. I hold the opinion that raspberries taste good. That doesn't mean holding the opinion that raspberries taste good is somehow a prerequisite to being human.

[procne]

Also, the options in the poll clearly show that the op is confused about the differences from a theme park and sandbox game. WoW and almost all mmorpg's out today are pure themeparks. There are small area's of a game or two that have a sandbox element or two but they are not sandbox games.

You bet I am confused seeing "sandbox" term being overused to describe standard theme parks or RPGs. I tried to include different options which I have seen on the net. So if there are people who think that way then options for their opinions should appear in the poll.

I even read Assasin's Creed 3 or The Secret World are sandboxes.

[Stir]

You bet I am confused seeing "sandbox" term being overused to describe standard theme parks or RPGs. I tried to include different options which I have seen on the net. So if there are people who think that way then options for their opinions should appear in the poll.

I even read Assasin's Creed 3 or The Secret World are sandboxes.

Yeah; well... The Sandbox is hip. People somehow think that people really love the 'genre.' It's the new big thing (ironically, since it's not quite successful, really).
Basically, people think that they want sandbox. Because of independence and individuality, and you can't control me, yo! So game developers are creating games, and publishers refer to those games as 'sandbox' whenever players can make choices.
For instance: Levelling in WoW. You go from levelling 'zone' 1 to 'zone' 2, to 3, to 4, to 5... Etcetera, until your character is level 90. Now; this is themepark. You're pretty much guided from zone to zone, and each quest seems to be a fluid follow-up from the previous one. It's a railroad.
Now; Blizzard has multiple sites that are all the same 'zone.' So you've got levelling sites 2A, 2B, 2C, 3A, 3B, 3C etcetera... And you can choose which site you would like to use to level through your levelling zone. So you can go for (2A)Darkshore, or (2B)Westfall, or (2C)Loch Modan(?). This is the choice you've got.
Now; what you've got here is three railroads, and you get the option to switch tracks whenever you feel like it. But what any current publisher who churns out a new title would want you to think is: 'It's completely open world! You choose the way you level, the way your character develops! This is a SANDBOX GAME!'

Yeah; no. Minecraft is a sandbox game. All the Elder Scrolls games are sandbox games (you could fully ignore any story and still successfully play the game if you wanted, go anywhere within the world without such things as 'you must be this high level to enter (and survive)'). Eve online is a sandbox game. Assassin's Creed is an Open World game; not a sandbox (and the world is pretty small, really). The Secret World... I haven't played; I do believe it's Open World (since it was supposed not to have character levels as such, and character development should be pretty free), but with all the questing and story involved, it cannot be a sandbox game. You cannot have a game that must follow a plot-line and call it sandbox.