Readers are reminded that this should be considered personal opinion, and in no way represents StartGame’s view on the issues covered.
Sandbox games for me are just a bit meh. The open world freedom is nice, I do like that, and the adventuring and running about like a loon, stealing cars and messing up people’s faces is fun; I generally like 3rd person shooters and action games. However, the experiences of Grand Theft Auto I’ve had have left me cold and put me off similar games, though there are plenty of exceptions to the rule I have.
Let me start off by saying that I’m no big fan of Grand Theft Auto and the latest iteration on home consoles (number IV) left me feeling a little bit cheated and, suffice it to say, bored. There’s nothing to do that has any sense of achievement. It’s essentially your real life plus guns, unless you’re a mad Russian with a penchant for firearms and motorvehicular theft, and I’m really just citing the drudgery: sitting in commutes, going to the strippers (no, I don’t want to see “beeg American teetees”, leave me alone!), playing (ugh)! darts or pool and having to retune the freaking radio station every freaking time you jack a freaking beige sedan.
However, I will say that it was a major technical achievement for Rockstar North (a studio I’m fond of because they’re Scottish) and for gaming in general but it doesn’t look overly impressive, and to be honest the graphics are rather unpolished considering how many people said they’re excellent. I get why, it’s a mahoosive game, so graphics aren’t at the forefront when coding.
Assassin’s Creed bored the crap out of me, but I really enjoy playing ACII. Weird eh? It just feels like there’s more to do, plus the Italian setting gives it a nice piece of romanticism and a bit of a light air to cover up the conspiracy, as compared to the heavy anti-crusades theme of the first. Plus, the combat is way better and you aren’t suspicious to guards if you’re on a horse crawling along at anything more than a snail’s pace. Clambering about and scaling tall buildings isn’t as suspicious as it was in the first, either.
Talking of snail’s pace and walking for freaking hours, I found Fallout 3 uninspiring though technically brilliant; I spent ages just walking about in a bored state and even the combat got boring after a while, seeming almost methodical over thrilling. Whereas with Borderlands, I had fun from the start. Fallout does carry the sense of humour and it is a fantastic game, but it isn’t as fun as it should be. I’ve said that Borderlands plays like F3 should have, just without the shotgun-toting midgets.
The fun factor was really ramped up in Borderlands, but this was at the expense of some of the RPG elements which were flouted so flagrantly on the box and in any preview media. Some of the songs tied to it were freaking unreal: “Ain’t No Rest For The Wicked” by Cage The Elephant and “No Heaven” by DJ Champion (in the promo vids). Fallout 3 had some pretty decent songs too, but they helped to add to the eeriness with the 50s soundtrack coupled with the sparse score and the wasteland visuals.
Red Faction: Guerrilla is a stellar example of brilliant action-based 3rd person sandboxery and it does it well. Plenty to shoot and blow up with side missions and story missions, and smashing people in the face with a large sledgehammer never gets old.
Burnout Paradise, too, is so much fun with you just racing around smashing stuff; Criterion got the open world mechanic right from the off. I would have liked to have seen the Crash mode back (as per Burnout 3: that mode was EPIC!), but the racing is fun and trying to smash all the gates and signs is a blast, if a little laborious. And the Showtime mode: mwah! What a brilliant and slightly hidden game feature similar to the Crash mode, but different.
Well, on looking back, it appears I like more than I would have thought at first. Maybe I’ve just got a beef with GTA or something, but I don’t know why, or maybe it’s the overwhelming popularity that I just don’t see. I mean seriously, people were going apeshit over GTAIV for no apparent reason: it’s only a game. It could be that although the sense of humour and writing appeals to my wicked side, I just don’t see it because I get bogged down in the drudgery that I can’t get to the good stuff.
I don’t know, maybe I’ve got ADD, but… ooh look, a pigeon… where was I? Oh yes… I think that gaming should be fun over realism any day of the week. I like the thrill of a chase, the exhilaration that comes with smashing in a face and the sheer joy from bouncing on a mushroom’s head. OK, I know that realism is required for some games, but do they have to be boring along with it? If you want uber-realism, play a simulator. If you want fun, play a game.
Oh, and before you start the tirade: I’ve got nothing against simulators, it’s just they aren’t stimulating for me. See what I did there?
Peace, Love and Good Gaming.
mynameisblair (75)
wick15 (17)
toutski (14)
Daywalker (13)
gazzagb (12)
(Signed up to give thoughts about my experiences of sandbox games-nice topic pp63)
As has been said by a number of game designers of late most notably pointed out surrounding the latest Final Fantasy’s linearity what sandbox games by their definition is huge direction, narrative or otherwise.
Some players love this, others find it slightly baffling.
In my sandbox gaming experience I became tired of Fallout 3 very quickly, much to the surprise of friends who love the game. I found the setting and game-play boring.
In my opinion one of the finest examples of sandbox game-play is that of Oblivion. Elder Scrolls was a complete joy and gave real freedom not just a sense of it. One of the big keys on how enjoyable a sandbox game is can be, imo, is playing with friends or other players. I didn’t enjoy the story in GTA IV and have not completed the single player, however I had a blast with friends in free-roam and multiplayer modes.
One thing that’s certain is that sandbox games are here to stay,
Good article.
Well, with the whole Final Fantasy thing, they’ve always been linear, and it’s never been promised otherwise (except for maybe XI, but I’ve never played it, so I don’t know). It’s just that the linearity in the previous games was hidden by the world map, but you still have to do tasks in a certain order.
Most sandboxes are like this too, the nature of it being that story missions are there to progress, while more of the map is unlocked, towards a grander goal at the end of the game. I’ve never played a truly free Sandbox game. Unless you can count Burnout Paradise.
(typo: Sandbox games – not huge direction, can’t seem to edit : )
Of course every game needs a point of progression, through narrative means or character improvement or a mix of the two.
In sandbox terms it’s how much players are forced to do this, in Oblivion for example character progression could take precedent with a player going and exploring the world and doing side quests and dungeons without much care for the main story. This isn’t the way the developers intended the game to be played, but, that’s down to the player.
I think we are in some sense talking about different things, you describe your experiences with single player sandbox games, and talk about the story experience. What I enjoy most is playing with friends and enjoying the sandbox experience (not the story) so a game like Crackdown for example, the story is provides missions to complete now and again but the real fun is exploring the world with friends.
In my mind sandbox games whilst providing interesting single player experiences come into there own with other people, without story progression when playing on your own what would be the point? But with other players interaction within the sandbox is what provides the entertainment.