How would you define open world? From my memory the term came about with things like FF7 where you could literally roam from one place to another on a large map rather than the hubs etc that had existed before. I would even argue that FF7 isn't open world because the map and towns behave differently
Not official definition, but to me "sandbox" means: game's designers provide you with tools (game world and gameplay mechanics) and lets you interact with them in whatever way you want. You're not being handholded, but this freedom comes at the expense of storytelling and repetitiveness.
The best time is very early on a Sunday morning, the random NPC encounters are much more interesting.
That's the thing. These terms do change in what people expect from them over time (FF7's world opened up in quite a linear fashion) and there is a spectrum on which games fall for various people as to what they would classify them as. What then is the difference between "open world" games and ones that have large maps that you can move about largely freely, but have little variety of gameply/interactivity in the world?
Cyberpunk 2077 is clearly an open-world game, as it features a large, virtual world that can be explored to various degrees of freedom. Sandbox is a more nebulous term that includes games like Sims (that aren't tied to a specific narrative, and thus, provide more freedom to do whatever you want), and games like GTA, Elder Scrolls, Witcher, or Cyberpunk (which prioritize narrative over complete freedom).
With that said, GTA Online via NoPixel has shown a tremendous amount of freedom in how to role play in a virtual world.
With that said, GTA Online via NoPixel has shown a tremendous amount of freedom in how to role play in a virtual world.
Last edited:
Rogue-like games have their own fun in definitions : the mighty "Berlin Interpretation"
But Steam is not going to put an automatic checker in the game before putting the tag I fear (Diablo fails rogue-like scoring).
Yeah, the more I think about it, I'm really not sure because I would have to come up with some kind of tick list or matrix to give a firm definition and spend hours agonising over it. To me the single large map makes it open world, but I wouldn't class Pokemon Red as an open world game, despite it having pretty much just that.
As far as Sandbox goes, again to my mind a pure sandbox allows you to manipulate both terrain and structures/ items or inhabitants.
The modern definition seems to include things like GTA which I disagree with, yes you can do what you like, but you cant change the environment other than by blowing up vehicles and NPCs.
Just being able to play how you like doesn't make it a sandbox, to me.
If I was to define CP2077 then to my mind it is an open world, narrative driven, action rpg (I know there's a whole other thread for that rpg debate and I have my reasons for not putting adventure because I think that implies more of the fun things to do outside of the story).
Post automatically merged:
So does Returnal IMHO its a procedural stick shooter
Depends what you expect out of a sandbox game. Some missions you can approach as you like, sort of like Assassins Creed style, others are completely linear, typical the main and side stories.
But besides these random missions, there is basically nothing else to do, so if you expect just running around doing all sorts of things, that is not possible.
I would probably categorize it as an open world adventure, action game, with some weak RPG elements.
Going into it, expecting a GTA style game with a serious amount of limitations, to the point where it's almost unfair towards GTA, to make such comparison
, but it have those wipes at least.But it has some very cool delivered story, characters, lots of the missions are really a lot of fun and simply roaming NC is cool as well.
But in my opinion, to get the absolute most out of the game, one should approach it as a RPG game, where you as player involve yourself in the story of V and play by the "rule" so to speak and not thinking that it is a deep game with lots of RPG mechanics etc.
But again, it's actually difficult to tell, because the game is sort of all over the place, and only the story, characters and NC is exceptional good. Some of the other mechanics like shooting etc. are decent and fun. But if you just want to go in and shoot stuff, I would think that you could find better games out there.
That's why I'm not a fan of the term "sandbox" as it isn't clearly defined. You can have small sandbox with a few activities, or a huge sandbox with far more activities. People end up picking their own definition of what constitutes a sandbox, similar to when people try to define what an RPG is.
I don't routinely play games. I come in and out, just seeing if there's anything that interests me. And recently it's become this wall of acronyms and weird terms like "Rogue-like", including in all the reviews, and it just feels like "what the f*** are people talking about, just tell me *what it is like to play the game* not which random jargon box it may or may not fit into"(!).
I think meaningful definitions help to a degree, but if you've ever looked on the Android or Apple store and to a certain extent Steam it is a bit of a free-for-all and virtually impossible to get any idea what you're looking at. I think that adds to the confusion (grey beard hair fully showing) it used to be so much simpler, the games weren't as ambiguous and neither were the definitions. Portal is probably the last truly "genre breaking" game I can think of. The developers tag as many genres as they can to stimulate purchases and the platforms don't seem to have any interest in policing it.
I agree that reviews are also become largely useless, it's like they have to define the game in the first paragraph and throw in the catchall terms for those who won't read any further. Maybe it also doesn't help that most of the "journalists" probably haven't ever played Rogue so they wouldn't know whether it's like Rogue or not.
I really miss demo discs and shareware. Promo videos are usually not representative (present company included CDPR) So much easier to find out if the game was to your liking without watching someone else play it and probably drop loads of spoilers in the process.
Maybe the industry needs to come together to define the genres more strictly and have an agreed criteria but, basically you're right. The main criteria you need are is it enjoyable, is it like anything I've played before, is there anything better than it at the moment.
"IS CYBERPUNK 2077 A SANDBOX GAME OR NOT?"
I've heard the term "Sandbox game" a couple of times before, but while I thought I knew what it meant, I actually didn't. So I googled: "What is a Sandbox game?" This came up;"A sandbox game is a video game with a gameplay element that gives the player a great degree of creativity to complete tasks towards a goal within the game, if such a goal exists. Some games exist as pure sandbox games with no objectives. These are also known as non-games or software toys."
Based on this, I'm leaning to answer your question with, "No, Cyberpunk 2077 is not a sandbox game." But that's only because I played a game before, where you could use your creativity to build the most craziest of buildings, which you could use to defend yourself. Buildings like a fort, a castle, or stronghold of any kind. That was a sandbox game according to this.
In CP77 you can complete tasks towards a certain goal, but you can also ignore them, and you'll reach that same goal even faster. It's devs say that CP77 is an RPG, but a sandbox game? I'm not so sure.
Yes stuff like "platform", "point and click adventure", "driving" are fine. They have clear, self-evident and well understood meanings. But the categories and subcategories now are so specific (and so misunderstood between different people) that they're teetering on the verge of meaningless.
It also seems to be contributing to a sentiment among some players that "a game of genre A must do X, Y, and Z" (see the at times utterly ludicrous suggestions about what Cyberpunk "should" do because game S in genre T does it). Christ if every game followed all the other games in each genre to make sure it fit precisely into a self-imposed box every game would end up exactly the same.
Last edited:
All marketing terminology innit, and I've yet to hear a more perfect dissection of marketing than that proffered by Bill Hicks.