These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Dev Response to Open Letter
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Yourmoney Mywallet
Doomheim
#21 - 2016-08-22 15:29:02 UTC
Solecist Project
#22 - 2016-08-22 16:38:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
Moac Tor wrote:

I don't think you understand what the term sandbox actually means. Your mixing up a PvP game with a sandbox game. Eve is both, but a game can be one or the other, they are not mutually exclusive.

or maybe ou need to understand that it isn't what you think it is ...
... and that an egocentric "I DO WHAT I WANT" has nothing to do with what a sandbox is.

And that's what it is.
An egocentric viewpoint that only serves you and ignores everyone else, including the game itself.

Is that really too hard to understand?

You didn't manage to logically counter ANYTHING I wrote ...
... nothing ...
... so you don't really have much ground for such a statement.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#23 - 2016-08-22 17:03:08 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Moac Tor wrote:

I don't think you understand what the term sandbox actually means. Your mixing up a PvP game with a sandbox game. Eve is both, but a game can be one or the other, they are not mutually exclusive.

or maybe ou need to understand that it isn't what you think it is ...
... and that an egocentric "I DO WHAT I WANT" has nothing to do with what a sandbox is.

And that's what it is.
An egocentric viewpoint that only serves you and ignores everyone else, including the game itself.

Is that really too hard to understand?

You didn't manage to logically counter ANYTHING I wrote ...
... nothing ...
... so you don't really have much ground for such a statement.

"A sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish. "

^^ There is no reason a miner is not playing in the sandbox, albeit a small part of it.
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#24 - 2016-08-22 17:13:16 UTC
I disagree with most of the things said in that letter.

Jump fatigue is good. It needs to be looked at and tweaked, but it does what it was designed to do. The capital landscape has been much better since it was introduced with certain entities not being able to jump around the map at a moment's notice.

New structures are fine, as are the attack mechanics surrounding them. Damage cap prevents a portion of the N+1 crap and makes the fight for a structure last a certain minimal amount of time even if you bring everyone in EVE.

The only thing that letter gets right is that Aegis Sov is utter ****. In the worst case scenario you're sitting on a structure or a node for an HOUR doing absolutely nothing. Literally nothing. Grinding for sov is now the most hated type of fleet op anyone can go on. No-one likes doing it, everyone wants to see it changed. And I can't figure out why sov structures can't follow the same rules as Citadels. Allow people to shoot them, introduce a damage cap and be done with it. And for the love of christ do away with the 'nodes spread around the constelation' BS. It doesn't create the small scale fights it is supposed to create. If any fighting happens at all its on the inbound gates. So what possible difference would it make to have the fight on the structure itself? At least then the entosiser is actually on the grid with the fight and is at risk of being instantly primaried.

The way sov works right now is 10x more boring and 20x worse than Dominion ever was.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Solecist Project
#25 - 2016-08-22 17:28:08 UTC
Moac Tor wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
Moac Tor wrote:

I don't think you understand what the term sandbox actually means. Your mixing up a PvP game with a sandbox game. Eve is both, but a game can be one or the other, they are not mutually exclusive.

or maybe ou need to understand that it isn't what you think it is ...
... and that an egocentric "I DO WHAT I WANT" has nothing to do with what a sandbox is.

And that's what it is.
An egocentric viewpoint that only serves you and ignores everyone else, including the game itself.

Is that really too hard to understand?

You didn't manage to logically counter ANYTHING I wrote ...
... nothing ...
... so you don't really have much ground for such a statement.

"A sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game, a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks. Instead of featuring segmented areas or numbered levels, a sandbox game usually occurs in a “world” to which the gamer has full access from start to finish. "

^^ There is no reason a miner is not playing in the sandbox, albeit a small part of it.

Do you have NOTHING to say that comes from your own mind?

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2016-08-22 17:45:11 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:

Do you have NOTHING to say that comes from your own mind?

Sol, out of curiosity, (in fifty words or less)* what would you consider being "in the sandbox" to be?

* - I know you, I'll get a dissertation if I don't cap it up front. :P

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Hengle Teron
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#27 - 2016-08-22 18:24:29 UTC
Apart from the whine about not being able to move his cap 2/3 across the galaxy in an hour, there are some good points in it.
Especially the wand waving sov.

I think CCP took a step in right direction with the occupancy based sov, but the mechanic for the capture is horrible. It would make mining look like a fun activity in comparison.
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2016-08-22 18:27:23 UTC
Hengle Teron wrote:

I think CCP took a step in right direction with the occupancy based sov, but the mechanic for the capture is horrible. It would make mining look like a fun activity in comparison.


That's like saying ebola is less terrible than the bubonic plague.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#29 - 2016-08-22 18:39:35 UTC
Technically by definition *any* MMO game *has* to be a "sandbox" - because if the game has fixed goals and doesn't allow you to set your own goals there is only a finite amount of time any player can spend in reaching those goals...

EVE is unique in that it is a much more open-world sandbox than many, with minimal game mechanics that dictate what players can/can not do. It is truly well-described by the "sandbox" analogy because you are put in a (very large) sandbox and pretty much given the ability to do whatever you want there. While games that do this have existed before - EVE is the first to truly take this concept and introduce a single-shard multi-player version... With spectacular results.

But there isn't really a word for what EVE is...other than "unique". I think we sometimes forget this, and try to take the "sandbox" metaphor and re-define the entire accepted definition of a "sandbox" game to mean EVE, just because it fits the metaphor better.

It is a silly thing to argue about - but you are both "right", you are just using the term differently - so of course it isn't going to line up...



As for miners - they are certainly welcome to build their sandcastles off in the corner if they like. The really meticulous ones can even build them grain by grain using a pair of tweezers if they like.... But being within the EVE universe means that the "sandbox" is also wide open for somebody else to come kick them in the back so they fall and damage their sandcastle. If it happens in high-sec, the "sandbox" enforcers will come along and tackle the bully shortly after the incident, and hold him down for 15 minutes to think about what he has done - and while this won't satisfy the "victim" it is how things are done in EVE.

Whether the miner chooses to resume their mundane activity and try to pretend it never happened or chooses to change their style of play to attempt to prevent future occurrences using the tools/resources at their disposal is entirely up to them - and there is no "wrong" way for them to play, as long as they accept the consequences of their decisions.

Where the problems start is when they instead try to step outside the sandbox, and demand a *new* sandbox that won't let such things happen... One does not simply impose new limitations/boundaries into a giant, open, free sandbox like EVE mid-game - at least not without massive disruption to the players trying to enjoy their time playing without such boundaries. And while you might well hit your intended targets - you also cause chains of unanticipated consequences and collateral damage to other players who weren't involved in the small encounter you are focusing on.



Now to tie this back into the OP... Lately CCP has been drastically changing up our sandbox. They keep adding new features and changing/removing old features... Trying to introduce more set goals and impose extra boundaries/limitations on people in an effort to try to funnel them into certain forms of play.

Our vast, open sandbox has been deemed old, outdated, and unattractive - so it is being transformed before our eyes into a playground, complete with shiny new slides and play equipment (OK, they are the cheesy modern plastic kind) - and as people have thrown out there are indications that they intend to transform it even farther past a playground and into a full-fledged theme-park - complete with lots of concession stands to spend extra money beyond the admission fee.

The OP's concerns are merely one of many symptoms of this change - rules/limitations suddenly becoming more restrictive... New mechanics being arbitrarily added. Freedom being taken away to make the game more appealing to the new, higher paying customers that CCP is trying to attract.

These changes can pass entirely unnoticed, or they can be quite obvious and Jarring - it all depends how closely they land to your part of the sandbox - and how deeply you had your head buried in the sand while they were being put in...



Don't you just love metaphors? P

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
#30 - 2016-08-22 18:46:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirty Forum Alt
Oh also as for the "impact" that players have on the game... The beauty of an open-sandbox game has always been that while you certainly *can* expend the effort to accumulate power and have an impact that will shape the environment... It is *not* required for fun/fulfilling game play.

People get to choose their own level of involvement in the universe around them - and there *is* no "right" or "wrong" choice...

Again - as long as they are prepared to deal with the *consequences* of living in an open sand-box with the level of power/influence they have *chosen* to accumulate (or not).



It will be a moot point anyway if fears are realized and the game really does become a theme-park P

The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool. They lay. They rotted. They turned Around occasionally. Bits of flesh dropped off them from Time to time. And sank into the pool's mire. They also smelt a great deal.

Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
Solecist Project
#31 - 2016-08-22 19:05:01 UTC
Elenahina wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:

Do you have NOTHING to say that comes from your own mind?

Sol, out of curiosity, (in fifty words or less)* what would you consider being "in the sandbox" to be?

* - I know you, I'll get a dissertation if I don't cap it up front. :P

I've tried, but failed.
It's just not doable in a fashion that gets it across properly.

And no, I'm seriously not reducing myself to what many other low-effort posters produce.


You can have the long version, if you wanna? :p

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2016-08-22 19:10:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Elenahina
Solecist Project wrote:
Elenahina wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:

Do you have NOTHING to say that comes from your own mind?

Sol, out of curiosity, (in fifty words or less)* what would you consider being "in the sandbox" to be?

* - I know you, I'll get a dissertation if I don't cap it up front. :P

I've tried, but failed.
It's just not doable in a fashion that gets it across properly.

And no, I'm seriously not reducing myself to what many other low-effort posters produce.


You can have the long version, if you wanna? :p


Sure, go ahead. Big smile

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
John Revenent
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#33 - 2016-08-22 19:50:42 UTC
The whining minority are at it again. I do hope CCP doesn't budge with their changes, its generated more content for the little guys.

Ishukone Loyalist - Private Contractor

"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned."
Solecist Project
#34 - 2016-08-22 20:26:08 UTC
Please know that this was actually a part of my above post. :p
In case you need translations to cross-reference a true sandbox ...
... where actual children play in ...
... with EVE-ONLINE then please let me know.

Just be sure that, when I talk about a sandbox, I often talk about the real thing as perfect analogy.
---


A sandbox is somewhere children/people go to, because they want to play in a specific way: with sand.

This involves building something, because there's nothing else to do in a sandbox. I wouldn't encourage eating it
and I'd suggest not to do so, but I would let you do it so you learn by yourself why you shouldn't have done it.

So people enter the sandbox and start doing what they can do. In - i would guess, at least - the vast majority of games
this involves some sort of tutorial or introductions which I tend to skip, because I consider it as insulting to my intelligence.
I did my own research beforehand (fun! :), I don't need your ******* tutorials ... but thank you for providing the needy.

I would sit down and start playing with the sand, based on what I've learned so far.
So, like, what I can do with sand ... and what happens when I mix it with water.
And then I use too much water and everything is just a ******* mess and I'm responsible for it.

For someone to play in a sandbox it is demanded that he plays with the sand.

If he doesn't play with the sand, he's just standing around occupying space someone else would happily play in.
Someone else might just sit down and start building his castle. That's great, we all do that.
We build our castles. We destroy them again. We build them again.
Eventually we try to build with someone else, because that's a new fun way of building castles.
I like castles.
What's not okay is when one starts growing his castle bigger and bigger ...
... refusing to build together with someone else and instead demanding the sand for him.

For its inhabitants a sandbox is an "open world mostly unrestricted by mechanics".
But there's more to that than just being "open world".


The only other MMO I have ever played was ArchArge, because a friend suggested it to me. There was a claim that it is a sandbox, blabla non-linear progression, blabla. I was curious and, of course, disappointed. The reason why EVE ONLINE was the first MMO I have ever tried, is because to it was the only game that's actually a sandbox. I didn't even know Ultima Online existed.

ArcheAge was marketed as sandbox, but it's just that ... marketing. The mainstream "definition" of "sandbox" is completely bogus, because it conviniently ignores that for a true sandbox experience you need unrestricted player interaction! The ONLY game you'll nowadays find that still is true to the definition of a sandbox is EVE ONLINE. I don't count Dark Falls, it's still too young.

When you jump into an MMO with zones of varying degrees of restrictions then you're not playing in a sandbox. When all you can do is run around and hunt monsters, then you're not playing a sandbox. My personal favourite: running around in underwear picking up flowers in the woods. There is nothing sand-boxxy (HI BOXXY!) in this, at all. It only shows the "open world" nature of the game, which does not require it to be in any way or form sand-boxxy.

So, if I TL;DR this, then I guess what i consider a sandbox to be is: a sandbox. Where you go inside and play with sand. Where you inevitably play with others. Where you start building castles and maybe plot against someone with a bigger one. Or you defend your castle against the mean kid trying to stomp over it.

A sandbox is an social environment with a low amount of restrictions and high amount of player-freedom. It naturally demands self responsibility and the ability to deal with others. Any mechanic restricting player freedom is not sand-boxxy. When you can't freely engage anyone you want, anytime, then it is not a sandbox, then it's an open world.

The realism of a sandbox demands the ability to engage anyone anytime. If someone wants to go and play in a sandbox, then he needs to accept that what happens in a sandbox will happen to him. He has to accept the rules and laws of the game. When he cries about how people in the sandbox play according to how the sandbox works, then this person does not want to play a sandbox. He wants to play an "open world" game.

I miss strong, healthy communities that self regulate and make sure that everyone who wants to be a part of the community adapts to it or simply stays out. I wonder when the shift away from a strong, healthy community towards a divided one actually happened.



Oh and ... sowwy. :3

*snickers*

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Looblaloobla Timmay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2016-08-22 20:27:46 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Moac Tor wrote:

I don't think you understand what the term sandbox actually means. Your mixing up a PvP game with a sandbox game. Eve is both, but a game can be one or the other, they are not mutually exclusive.

or maybe ou need to understand that it isn't what you think it is ...
... and that an egocentric "I DO WHAT I WANT" has nothing to do with what a sandbox is.

And that's what it is.
An egocentric viewpoint that only serves you and ignores everyone else, including the game itself.

Is that really too hard to understand?

You didn't manage to logically counter ANYTHING I wrote ...
... nothing ...
... so you don't really have much ground for such a statement.


or maybe you need to realize that your opinions are purely that, and that you're not always right.
Looblaloobla Timmay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2016-08-22 20:29:23 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Please know that this was actually a part of my above post. :p
In case you need translations to cross-reference a true sandbox ...
... where actual children play in ...
... with EVE-ONLINE then please let me know.

Just be sure that, when I talk about a sandbox, I often talk about the real thing as perfect analogy.
---


A sandbox is somewhere children/people go to, because they want to play in a specific way: with sand.

This involves building something, because there's nothing else to do in a sandbox. I wouldn't encourage eating it
and I'd suggest not to do so, but I would let you do it so you learn by yourself why you shouldn't have done it.

So people enter the sandbox and start doing what they can do. In - i would guess, at least - the vast majority of games
this involves some sort of tutorial or introductions which I tend to skip, because I consider it as insulting to my intelligence.
I did my own research beforehand (fun! :), I don't need your ******* tutorials ... but thank you for providing the needy.

I would sit down and start playing with the sand, based on what I've learned so far.
So, like, what I can do with sand ... and what happens when I mix it with water.
And then I use too much water and everything is just a ******* mess and I'm responsible for it.

For someone to play in a sandbox it is demanded that he plays with the sand.

If he doesn't play with the sand, he's just standing around occupying space someone else would happily play in.
Someone else might just sit down and start building his castle. That's great, we all do that.
We build our castles. We destroy them again. We build them again.
Eventually we try to build with someone else, because that's a new fun way of building castles.
I like castles.
What's not okay is when one starts growing his castle bigger and bigger ...
... refusing to build together with someone else and instead demanding the sand for him.

For its inhabitants a sandbox is an "open world mostly unrestricted by mechanics".
But there's more to that than just being "open world".


The only other MMO I have ever played was ArchArge, because a friend suggested it to me. There was a claim that it is a sandbox, blabla non-linear progression, blabla. I was curious and, of course, disappointed. The reason why EVE ONLINE was the first MMO I have ever tried, is because to it was the only game that's actually a sandbox. I didn't even know Ultima Online existed.

ArcheAge was marketed as sandbox, but it's just that ... marketing. The mainstream "definition" of "sandbox" is completely bogus, because it conviniently ignores that for a true sandbox experience you need unrestricted player interaction! The ONLY game you'll nowadays find that still is true to the definition of a sandbox is EVE ONLINE. I don't count Dark Falls, it's still too young.

When you jump into an MMO with zones of varying degrees of restrictions then you're not playing in a sandbox. When all you can do is run around and hunt monsters, then you're not playing a sandbox. My personal favourite: running around in underwear picking up flowers in the woods. There is nothing sand-boxxy (HI BOXXY!) in this, at all. It only shows the "open world" nature of the game, which does not require it to be in any way or form sand-boxxy.

So, if I TL;DR this, then I guess what i consider a sandbox to be is: a sandbox. Where you go inside and play with sand. Where you inevitably play with others. Where you start building castles and maybe plot against someone with a bigger one. Or you defend your castle against the mean kid trying to stomp over it.

A sandbox is an social environment with a low amount of restrictions and high amount of player-freedom. It naturally demands self responsibility and the ability to deal with others. Any mechanic restricting player freedom is not sand-boxxy. When you can't freely engage anyone you want, anytime, then it is not a sandbox, then it's an open world.

The realism of a sandbox demands the ability to engage anyone anytime. If someone wants to go and play in a sandbox, then he needs to accept that what happens in a sandbox will happen to him. He has to accept the rules and laws of the game. When he cries about how people in the sandbox play according to how the sandbox works, then this person does not want to play a sandbox. He wants to play an "open world" game.

I miss strong, healthy communities that self regulate and make sure that everyone who wants to be a part of the community adapts to it or simply stays out. I wonder when the shift away from a strong, healthy community towards a divided one actually happened.



Oh and ... sowwy. :3

*snickers*


tldr:

HeMad
Dornier Pfeil
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#37 - 2016-08-22 20:35:36 UTC
Dirty Forum Alt wrote:


Our vast, open sandbox has been deemed old, outdated, and unattractive - so it is being transformed before our eyes into a playground, complete with shiny new slides and play equipment (OK, they are the cheesy modern plastic kind) - and as people have thrown out there are indications that they intend to transform it even farther past a playground and into a full-fledged theme-park - complete with lots of concession stands to spend extra money beyond the admission fee.



Something like this?
Solecist Project
#38 - 2016-08-22 20:36:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
Oh yes.

The historical progression: Simple/Linear Gameplay -> Open World -> Sandbox.

Outliers exist, of course, but there weren't that many.

I remember playing X, I think it was the first part.
That's a single player sandbox. Fascinating, to be honest.
I have to watch some videos about the newest.

Classic Elite also counts as a single player sandbox, I'd guess.

The old original GhostBusters counts as a rather primitive "open world" game ...
... more limited by the hardware than by it's potential.

You were able to drive around a city ...
... able to park at every house on the map ...
... and get out of your car, in front of the house.

Very primitive ... but a tiny, tiny open world.


Nostalgia. *sighs*


Edit: Speaking about Nostalgia, I'll go play Red Alert 3. Steam.
If anyone wants to kick my ass in RA3 feel free send me an evemail. :D

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Looblaloobla Timmay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2016-08-22 20:40:49 UTC
I miss Star Wars Galaxies
Dornier Pfeil
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#40 - 2016-08-22 20:56:05 UTC
Looblaloobla Timmay wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
Please know that this was actually a part of my above post. :p
In case you need translations to cross-reference a true sandbox ...
... where actual children play in ...
... with EVE-ONLINE then please let me know.

Just be sure that, when I talk about a sandbox, I often talk about the real thing as perfect analogy.
---


A sandbox is somewhere children/people go to, because they want to play in a specific way: with sand.

This involves building something, because there's nothing else to do in a sandbox. I wouldn't encourage eating it
and I'd suggest not to do so, but I would let you do it so you learn by yourself why you shouldn't have done it.

So people enter the sandbox and start doing what they can do. In - i would guess, at least - the vast majority of games
this involves some sort of tutorial or introductions which I tend to skip, because I consider it as insulting to my intelligence.
I did my own research beforehand (fun! :), I don't need your ******* tutorials ... but thank you for providing the needy.

I would sit down and start playing with the sand, based on what I've learned so far.
So, like, what I can do with sand ... and what happens when I mix it with water.
And then I use too much water and everything is just a ******* mess and I'm responsible for it.

For someone to play in a sandbox it is demanded that he plays with the sand.

If he doesn't play with the sand, he's just standing around occupying space someone else would happily play in.
Someone else might just sit down and start building his castle. That's great, we all do that.
We build our castles. We destroy them again. We build them again.
Eventually we try to build with someone else, because that's a new fun way of building castles.
I like castles.
What's not okay is when one starts growing his castle bigger and bigger ...
... refusing to build together with someone else and instead demanding the sand for him.

For its inhabitants a sandbox is an "open world mostly unrestricted by mechanics".
But there's more to that than just being "open world".


The only other MMO I have ever played was ArchArge, because a friend suggested it to me. There was a claim that it is a sandbox, blabla non-linear progression, blabla. I was curious and, of course, disappointed. The reason why EVE ONLINE was the first MMO I have ever tried, is because to it was the only game that's actually a sandbox. I didn't even know Ultima Online existed.

ArcheAge was marketed as sandbox, but it's just that ... marketing. The mainstream "definition" of "sandbox" is completely bogus, because it conviniently ignores that for a true sandbox experience you need unrestricted player interaction! The ONLY game you'll nowadays find that still is true to the definition of a sandbox is EVE ONLINE. I don't count Dark Falls, it's still too young.

When you jump into an MMO with zones of varying degrees of restrictions then you're not playing in a sandbox. When all you can do is run around and hunt monsters, then you're not playing a sandbox. My personal favourite: running around in underwear picking up flowers in the woods. There is nothing sand-boxxy (HI BOXXY!) in this, at all. It only shows the "open world" nature of the game, which does not require it to be in any way or form sand-boxxy.

So, if I TL;DR this, then I guess what i consider a sandbox to be is: a sandbox. Where you go inside and play with sand. Where you inevitably play with others. Where you start building castles and maybe plot against someone with a bigger one. Or you defend your castle against the mean kid trying to stomp over it.

A sandbox is an social environment with a low amount of restrictions and high amount of player-freedom. It naturally demands self responsibility and the ability to deal with others. Any mechanic restricting player freedom is not sand-boxxy. When you can't freely engage anyone you want, anytime, then it is not a sandbox, then it's an open world.

The realism of a sandbox demands the ability to engage anyone anytime. If someone wants to go and play in a sandbox, then he needs to accept that what happens in a sandbox will happen to him. He has to accept the rules and laws of the game. When he cries about how people in the sandbox play according to how the sandbox works, then this person does not want to play a sandbox. He wants to play an "open world" game.

I miss strong, healthy communities that self regulate and make sure that everyone who wants to be a part of the community adapts to it or simply stays out. I wonder when the shift away from a strong, healthy community towards a divided one actually happened.



Oh and ... sowwy. :3

*snickers*


tldr:

HeMad


I think she can be boiled down to: PVE content is not sandbox content; Only PVP content counts as sandbox.
This is a definitional problem and you can't solve definitional problems. You can only either agree on a defintion or not.

LessWrong has pieces about definitional arguing.
https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Arguing_by_definition
Previous page123Next page