They have already stated that one of the design goals of the game is to be not-EVE. I take that very much as a rejection of a lot of the design choices that define EVE.
They're a sandbox, but not a libertarian anarchist's playground.
Its not EVE, because it doesnt have 1000 players in an instance or it doesnt have combat mechanics like EVE, or it doesnt have gates between systems that You can camp, but exactly how can You not have EVE like interactions within full sandbox?
I mean, what exactly do You guys have in mind to prevent full scale pvp with high death consequences in player driven world, because thats whats sandbox is all about.
You cant make half-sandbox game, its sandbox or its not.
And if its sandbox and we know it will be, then all rules that apply to theme park games wont apply there. I think the biggest problem that SC is facing with its funding and reception to its funding, is that people are too used to theme park games and just do not know sandbox. They cant think 'outside the box'
They think in borders of standard theme park MMOs and they try to fit ships to character loot, the tiers to level power etc, the player driven economy to NPC based economy etc.
I mean, just the one implication of losing everything on death changes everything about the game, the combat and player interactions in comparison to theme park MMO.
And just add the fact that there is not progression at all and items are basically on similar power level and we have something people just dont understand.
For almost any MMO player and definitely for every theme park MMO player the concept of five lvl 1 character killing lvl 60 is laughable, but thats completely possible in realms of Star Citizen if we take that lvl 1 characters are people in Aurora and lvl 60 character is in Idris. 5 Auroras will probably be able to kill one man manned Idris without any problem.
