Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Execute/Dumbo.exe]

That reminds me, there is also a

There is actually a mod for customisable ships, though it's mostly just making the ship area one big empty box and allowing you to destroy your starting ship, but it's still cool.

There's also a massive music mod, as well as a Bee mod and a few other things.

"Just"

That mod was responsible for something like 85% of my playtime in Starbound after I got bored with the annoying, repetitive grind and lack of updates.

Spoiler: Though in retrospect I can't help but notice how much it looks like a cluster of plant spacedicks (click to show/hide)

Or would that be space plantdicks? Floral no undersssstand.

Maaaaaaaaan. That picture has got me really itching to play again. I suppose I could just load up with mods and enjoy until the next release...

As though I didn't already have too many games to play and not enough time to play them.......

The resemblance to Space Peeni is far too noticable.

[Gentlefish]

time, and whether or not you had fun.

Yeah basically. I definitely put some indie games on the same level of enjoyment as some "Game of the Year" AAA games.

[Neonivek]

time, and whether or not you had fun.

Yeah basically. I definitely put some indie games on the same level of enjoyment as some "Game of the Year" AAA games.

It isn't that I don't value time. It is that time to me isn't where a game starts and ends. You have to take a game as a collective whole in order to come at a fair and balanced viewpoint.

To eliminate anything but time and binary fun... Just isn't enough.

It is why I was glad people were finally talking about WHY Starbound was good. Instead of just saying "Starbound wasted 100 hours and I had fun".

Shallow but Vast is quite common.

There is this stunning lack of insight into what makes Starbound fun beyond being a time waster. Which would be fine if that is what they said "Yeah, I needed something to waste time and it did it" since I have games that I feel are just a fun and long time without needing to be much deeper than that but the implication isn't that. The implication is that it is a very worthwhile game that lasts and lasts. Yet the language isn't there, just the implication.

Is Starbound a fun time waster and that is it? If so I apologize I misunderstood.

[WillowLuman]

It's fun to wander around the pretty environments, exploring, looting, and listening to the very nice soundtrack. There is a lot to explore/find in this game, and despite balancing issues the danger present almost everywhere does add an edge that can help keep things exciting.

[Gentlefish]

It's very much a 4-1X game. eXplore eXploit eXpand (eXterminate). Exploration and growth are an intrinsic part of the game, and that's the fun part.

I can't imagine you're one for sandboxes, Neonivek

[Neonivek]

It's very much a 4-1X game. eXplore eXploit eXpand (eXterminate). Exploration and growth are an intrinsic part of the game, and that's the fun part.

I can't imagine you're one for sandboxes, Neonivek

I actually like Sandboxes quite a bit. They just need to be made well with not only nice peaks in gameplay, but with variety that stretches further then just the vast open world.

It is the difference between Oblivion and Skyrim/Morrowind.

[Gentlefish]

Those are Open World Western RPGs and not sandboxes. A great example of a sandbox is the powder game.

Minecraft is a pretty sandboxxy world with fun limitations. Heck DF, though a simulation at its core, is still very much a sandbox. There's no plot except what you want to make, and no win conditions that end your game.

[Neonivek]

Those are Open World Western RPGs and not sandboxes. A great example of a sandbox is the powder game.

Minecraft is a pretty sandboxxy world with fun limitations. Heck DF, though a simulation at its core, is still very much a sandbox. There's no plot except what you want to make, and no win conditions that end your game.

Your using Synonyms.

"Open World games" are by very definition "Sandbox" games.

[Kaitol]

Not really.

What part of the elderscrolls series resembles a sandbox in any way shape or form? Can you build anything, anywhere, in whatever shape or form you please? Mold the game world to your whim?

The elderscrolls may be open world, but what you can do in that world is exceptionally narrow. Doesn't really sound like a sandbox. Basically all you choose is the manner in which you kill things.

Edit: I mean, with some extra thought in it the construction set might sort of kind of qualify, maybe? But even then its not the game itself that's a sandbox...

[Sergius]

Actually GTA 3 San Andreas is a sandbox. Sandbox doesn't mean build and mine, it means that you have a lot of things to do that aren't quest related. People only started using it for destructible/constructable terrain after games like Minecraft became popular.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Can you build anything, anywhere, in whatever shape or form you please? Mold the game world to your whim?

That's absolutely not what Sandbox means. Your arbitrarily narrow definition excludes the games that created the genre definition itself, which I find odd, to say the least.

[Tack]

You've linked your own demise there...

An "open world" game does not necessarily imply a true sandbox. In a true "sandbox", the player has tools to modify the world themselves and create how they play. Generally open world games still enforce many restrictions in the game environment, either because of absolute technical limitations or in-game limitations (such as locked areas) imposed by a game's linearity.

Skyrim is Open World- Because you can go anywhere from game start.
Minecraft is a Sandbox- because the game says 'Here's your tools - shape your world'.
It makes you feel like a kid in a sandbox.
Hence the term, sandbox.

But I don't doubt there'll be someone disagreeing soon, so I'm gonna chalk this one down to cultural differences.

[Sergius]

You've linked your own demise there...

An "open world" game does not necessarily imply a true sandbox. In a true "sandbox", the player has tools to modify the world themselves and create how they play. Generally open world games still enforce many restrictions in the game environment, either because of absolute technical limitations or in-game limitations (such as locked areas) imposed by a game's linearity.

Skyrim is Open World- Because you can go anywhere from game start.
Minecraft is a Sandbox- because the game says 'Here's your tools - shape your world'.
It makes you feel like a kid in a sandbox.
Hence the term, sandbox.

But I don't doubt there'll be someone disagreeing soon, so I'm gonna chalk this one down to cultural differences.

Ahem

Wasteland, released in 1988 by Interplay Productions, is another important pioneer in open-world game-play. The game features a large open world, where the player's actions have a permanent and persistent effect, keeping areas in the state that the player leaves them in. It had a non-linear game-play, where the player could explore much of the world from the beginning, and tackle quests and missions in any order, with the quests often having multiple possible solutions. The player also has the ability to interact with the world in other ways, using tools like ropes and shovels, to progress; an early example of true sand-box style game-play.

Not to mention that "true sandbox" line is opinion and the linked footnote says nothing about what is a "true" or "fake" sandbox. I call it the "No true sandbox" fallacy.

[Arbinire]

I know this mostly applies to PC gaming but most of these "open-world" games ARE sandboxes in that they can and often are modded(whether or not the tools are provided).  It's really semantics, just like Rogue-Like is these days.  Starbound, Terraria, Rogue Legacy, etc...aren't anything at all like Rogue, and the RNG they posses have been done in other games without the appelation of Rogue-Like...these are just buzzwords that are used to trigger a response in our brains to buy the games.

Also I agree with Neonivek, Time spent in a game most definitely does not equate to a game being fun or great.  It's subjective opinion, and to use the "well you spent this amount of time playing" as an argument against why someone is dissatisfied is, at best, disingenuous.  It's like saying since Nicki Minaj is the greatest musical genius ever because her Anaconda video got 50 bajillion views and likes within it's first day or 2 of release.  Subjective.

I mean, hell, I've spent thousands of hours playing World of Warcraft, doesn't mean the game is still fun to me, nor that it's accumulated overall hours played by every subscriber and/or private server player equates to it being the greatest game ever.  Subjective.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

But I don't doubt there'll be someone disagreeing soon, so I'm gonna chalk this one down to cultural differences.

[Or you're mislabeling things and further arbitrarily narrowing a definition that encompasses things you say it doesn't]