I wouldn't go as far as to call them boring, but I've never seen the appeal of them either.  The same goes for W-RPGs and F/TPS.

inFamous felt pretty enjoyable for a large portion of the game for me. Where as a game like FFXIII felt repetitive as hell after spending 6 hours pressing X all day which pretty much gets the job done. Then walking in a straight line to either a cutscene or another instance where I need to pretty much just keep pressing X.

Graphical hit? Seriously? That's the icing on the cake? Not every game is aiming to be the next Uncharted. Games like inFamous and GTAIV looked pretty darn good when they released from what I remembered. In sandbox games, most people would say that the biggest weakness is the numerous bugs they often have. Mainly because it's hard to properly test out such complex games that offer so many options and what ever little time devs get.

The joy in sandbox games lies in exploration, navigation, and having numerous things to do and a lot of different ways to do them.

"in linear games they throw many exilirating set pieces at you so you are constantly entertained . not the same case in open world games."

Well if you're getting bored of seeing the same world over again, then yea, I could understand you not enjoying them.

GTA IV was boring imo....thats why I haven't picked up RDR yet despite all the praise its getting.

But the PS2 GTA games were awesome....so was inFAMOUS. Jak 2 and 3 are my favourite sandbox games.

Can't wait for the awesomeness of inFAMOUS 2 !

Yeah, WRPGs are definately not for you, lol.

The idea behind WRPGs and the basic design philosphy behind the silent protagonist is that it enables you to place your own personality and ideas behind the main protagonist/character. Rather than being told the story passively like in Final Fantasy or Uncharted, the games are meant to give you the perception that it is personal to you and give you more room for your imagination to take over.

The motives are rarely present because you apply your own motives (especially true in Oblivion where you don't have to do the main quest at all). The guild quest lines in Oblivion for instance are just as long as the main quest, all have their own story, yet all are completely optional. Your character and his/her motives are entirely what you decide you want them to be. That's what these games are supposed to appeal to.

You seem to desire more depth in story and character development over the open exploration and personal experience in open world and WRPGs in which case most WRPGs probably aren't for you. Having said that, Dragon Age Origins isn't a complete write off as it does have better character development and is more linear in structure.

!

My feeling, regarding the attempt to do storytelling by means of games, is videogame designers generally aren't that good at it.  Because of this, I tend to view games as games, things to be played, which need entertaining gameplay with them.  Of course, when the game designers get it right, it is awesome, and memorable.  The Uncharted series, Mass Effect 1 and 2, Bioshock, and others, really do well in that area (for the most part).  For me though, I want the gameplay to be fun, which the mentioned games were.  But, for me, Borderlands is my top game, because the FPS action, loot run, and leveling up, were fun... lots of fun for me.  Keep in mind, one game I really like also is Diablo, so you can see the appeal of Borderlands.  As I said, gameplay is very important to me.  In my case, as much as I wanted to like Brutal Legend, what it had me trying to do, was NOT fun.  I like most of it, except having to do Guitar Hero with a 360 controller during the middle of a battle.  Seriously?

Pardon me if I missed anything above.  That is what came to mind for games.  For me, Sandbox works, if there is some sort of key play mechanic that is fun to do over and over (like hunt agility orbs in Crackdown) or a variety of minigames which work also and are varied enough.

If you played the first Mercenaries you would know that they can be everything you are looking for with interest.

But I like them because there is alot of freedom. It doesn't feel restricted and most of the open world games I've played are chock full of exciting story missions and side missions. I mean, they also me to make the decision about how I should go about my next objective.

Here's a list:

Dead Rising

Mercenaries (mercs 2 sucks balls tho)

Batman AA

Assassin's creed (especially 2)

Burnout paradise

test drive unlimited

fallouts

elder scrolls

crackdown

red dead

Red faction

fable

gun

stalker

prototype

I don't like sandbox games either, but I think it's more to do with what the games are about than the type of game itself.

InFamous appealed to me cos it seemed cool to be a super hero (a new one) and run around a smallish city. GTA... just don't give a f***. I think if a sandbox game about something appealing to you comes along you'll change your mind.

Well that's his opinion, I though INFAMOUS was so much fun. I can think of so many boring Genres, that's not even funny.

I think they can be fun, but it depends on the approach and they are prone to a lot of pacing issues.  I've enjoyed a few, but I've always felt they were wanting in various ways in terms of controlling the pacing and delivering a sustained experience.

Of course, you could argue they suit a gameplay experience that is fragmented - i.e. I could play a few GTA missions, walk away for a while, come back and just pick some more and not lose to much flow, whereas titles like Uncharted are just begging you to play right through like a movie and get an unbroken experience.

The other issue I have with sandboxes is they often fall into the jack of all trades trap where the gunplay, driving (riding) or whatever is never as good as a more linear, focused title, although they do offer a lot of freedom.

Recently I thought AC2 did a good job of balancing a linear structure/narrative in a sandbox environment, but it's always hard to stay fully immersed.  RDR also felt better than most I thought - although I love western's so I might be swated by setting there.

I keep thinking of how, in Olivion, while the world is coming to and end you could decide to take a subquest to catch a potato thief instead of cracking on with the plot... that aspect of sandbox titles, plus the ability to ruin progression of the story, always seems to dog them.

Personally, I think it would be better in sanboxes to drop any master plot and just have a series of sub-quests of various sizes and nature that have a cummulative effect on the game.

For example, in AC:Brotherhood you can slowly unlock terrotry which opens up new quests.  That felt natural and it occured to me that you could easily remove the overaching plot - which was a bit weak in Brotherhood anyway - and just have you as an assassin rising through the ranks and slowing affecting the territory around you.