Why the hell would you cancel your pre order just because there are PVP minigames? That seems rather idiotic to me. They are not the main focus of the game by any means they are just there for alternative PVP options. Weirdos.
Because it divides PvPers. Doing so ensures that only one of two groups will ever amount to anything. WoW has already made this error. Its world PvP died overnight once they added Instanced PvP. You can, of course, choose to ignore that factor. I'd advise against it, as a game with 10 million players to use as a study base is far better than your assumption instead.
the subscribers number they use is highly exaggerated, as they count trial accounts, inactive accounts, and bots / spammers. In reality they do not have any more than 2 million players, which is still a huge amount for an MMORPG, but 10 million would mean something of a whole different level. I'm not trying to interfere with your argument, just informing on some bad information laid out by Blizzard for marketing purposes.
Your information would incorrect, Douhk. Blizzard released a press release clearly stating what their guidelines are for what qualifies as a counted subscription. Trial accounts, inactive accounts pass 30 days (or was it 60 days) were not counted. So unless you can back up your claim, you are speaking on something you can't possibly know, with inaccurate info.
Still cant beleive people dont believe WoW numbers. WoW number do not included.. Banned, Cancelled, Expired or Trial account.
Fact.... 3.5 million copies of TBC were sold in the first month of its release in the west. And got the offical award of the fastest selling PC game ever.
There are over 470 EU+US servers.. blizzard last press release said there were 4.5 million ACTIVE EU & US subs.. that eqautes to an average of 9,700 per server.
Also blizzard have opened up 2 new US realms and 1 EU realm in last few months.
World of Warcraft's Subscriber Definition
World of Warcraft subscribers include individuals who have paid a subscription fee or have an active prepaid card to play World of Warcraft, as well as those who have purchased the game and are within their free month of access. Internet Game Room players who have accessed the game over the last thirty days are also counted as subscribers. The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expired or cancelled subscriptions, and expired prepaid cards. Subscribers in licensees' territories are defined along the same rules.
Why the hell would you cancel your pre order just because there are PVP minigames? That seems rather idiotic to me. They are not the main focus of the game by any means they are just there for alternative PVP options. Weirdos.
Because it divides PvPers. Doing so ensures that only one of two groups will ever amount to anything. WoW has already made this error. Its world PvP died overnight once they added Instanced PvP. You can, of course, choose to ignore that factor. I'd advise against it, as a game with 10 million players to use as a study base is far better than your assumption instead.
the subscribers number they use is highly exaggerated, as they count trial accounts, inactive accounts, and bots / spammers. In reality they do not have any more than 2 million players, which is still a huge amount for an MMORPG, but 10 million would mean something of a whole different level. I'm not trying to interfere with your argument, just informing on some bad information laid out by Blizzard for marketing purposes.
Your information would incorrect, Douhk. Blizzard released a press release clearly stating what their guidelines are for what qualifies as a counted subscription. Trial accounts, inactive accounts pass 30 days (or was it 60 days) were not counted. So unless you can back up your claim, you are speaking on something you can't possibly know, with inaccurate info.
It's not like Blizz would think people are stupid enough to not think of trial accounts, botters (why would botters and spammers PAY for an account?) and inactive people. They wouldn't count them in the 10m subscription number.
um, in regards to botters/spammers who work for those gold selling/pl service companies -- how exactly would a trial account be around long enough to store 1000s of gold and/or items (for sale), or to have lvl 70 toons around for PL'ing folks (for money)...
please don't forget that in that 10m, the majority of those are not western accounts. 10m is a drop in the bucket if you consider all the asian markets.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
Anyone who took the time to pre-order and then cancels because of unobserved reports probably didn't want to play anyways.
unobserved reports? guess you have not been reading the articles being released to other sites besides this one on what and how the game is gonna work come release. the major parts of this game have not and will not be released till after the game goes live and that is from the guy running the show at AOC. what does that mean? all kinds of things. do the math...
MINIGAMES !!!! YAY!!! why waster another $49.99 while i can reinstall my WOW and play WSG/AB/AV games all day and night and go into a team that trades wins to get points much faster? -because AOC has better graphics? hmmm, not really i would rather go play my HALO. its instanced and it has much better graphics...
sorry, All my hype died for AOC after playing the beta and now hearing this instanced PVP... should i reinstall wow while waiting for WAR?
Might as well go play something else...
6v6 pvp isn't my idea of a fun MMO pvp experience...
If 6v6 instanced pvp is it, gee, maybe I'll just go play some COD4 or something. That's more than 6v6 and even those maps are way better than AOC's CTF/TDM maps.
You people are totally forgetting why MMO's USED TO BE FUN. Because it was about a huge world, not some crumby little crap instance with 12 people.
Go give funcom 50 bucks for this sorry crap. Suckers.
Do you have to do the pvp minigames to pvp? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to raid? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to siege? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to level? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to craft? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to build a city? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to level an alt? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to enjoy pvp? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to enjoy the game? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to explore the world? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames to talk with other players? Nope. Do you have to do the pvp minigames TO DO ANYTHING IN THE GAME OTHER THAN LEAD A RAID? Nope. So only the people with the best pvp minigame score get to lead a raid? Yes. So the only thing the pvp minigame score/rating determines is who leads the raid? Yes. Wow, thats it! Really. I am not sure why people are getting so upset over this. I would suggest everyone reads this thread: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/176124 It clarifies a lot and thanks to the poster who posted it. Seems like everyone has blown this thing way out of proportion.
No, you don't. You also don't have to go out into the world to try world PVP and listen to crickets because that's all you'll hear, CRICKETS.
Did you totally miss WoW? Did you totally miss the fact that world PvP is non-existent since the incentives are in instanced PvP?
Geez. You take people from world pvp and give an incentive to instanced pvp, and world pvp collapses. They seriously need an MMO 101 history course for some people.
MINIGAMES !!!! YAY!!! why waster another $49.99 while i can reinstall my WOW and play WSG/AB/AV games all day and night and go into a team that trades wins to get points much faster? -because AOC has better graphics? hmmm, not really i would rather go play my HALO. its instanced and it has much better graphics...
sorry, All my hype died for AOC after playing the beta and now hearing this instanced PVP... should i reinstall wow while waiting for WAR?
Might as well go play something else...
6v6 pvp isn't my idea of a fun MMO pvp experience...
If 6v6 instanced pvp is it, gee, maybe I'll just go play some COD4 or something. That's more than 6v6 and even those maps are way better than AOC's CTF/TDM maps.
You people are totally forgetting why MMO's USED TO BE FUN. Because it was about a huge world, not some crumby little crap instance with 12 people.
Go give funcom 50 bucks for this sorry crap. Suckers.
Well said.
No free roaming world - step backwards from WoW (and I am no WoW fan by any length of imagination).
AoC is designed to be transfered to the console and that probably explains a lot.
But hey, I know people who will buy it because they have an impression that the big part of the game will be a single player with a chatbox. Mind you, those are the same people that find WoW too complicated to play.
AoC is an instanced world with 80 levels to grind and a final goal is end game PvP and PvE raids.
It will be interesting to see the reactions after the launch.
Unless you're not keeping up, it's obvious all the talk as of late on these forums and the official ones is of how PvP minigames are now going to play a crucial role, and they aren't just going to be something people do for nothing. This raises alarm bells with world pvp enthusiasts like myself who were hoping AOC would bypass the monotonous predictable boredom of instanced PvP, and keep all focus on keep a POPULATED world pvp experience 24/7. With ANY EMPHASIS AT ALL on instanced pvp, you take players from world pvp, and that's not a good idea, since you need as many players as you can pvp'ing in the world at all times in order for it to be fun and worthwhile. What is your stance on this? Are you still as enthusiastic? Me personally, I canceled my pre-order. I know why I quit WoW, and it's the same reason I'm going to avoid this game. Not only does it have the whole Vanguard 2.0 reputation floating around, but now it has this utter crap.
FFS... Stop trying to create a reality that dosent exist based on your own agenda.
If this bothers you just play on a FFA PvP server where full world PvP will be supported and rewarded. The emphasis on those servers will be on open world PvP.
Most interesting thing about this thread: 13 % of of the participants would buy pooh from Funcom
hehe I actually am one of those that ticked that box, but due to the fact that the poll is horribly and deliberatly skewed in favour of the OP's agenda.
I would rather buy their poo then his.
I guess some of the others felt the same, or they thought they would be getting a little bear that likes honey.
Why the hell would you cancel your pre order just because there are PVP minigames? That seems rather idiotic to me. They are not the main focus of the game by any means they are just there for alternative PVP options. Weirdos.
Because it divides PvPers. Doing so ensures that only one of two groups will ever amount to anything. WoW has already made this error. Its world PvP died overnight once they added Instanced PvP. You can, of course, choose to ignore that factor. I'd advise against it, as a game with 10 million players to use as a study base is far better than your assumption instead.
the subscribers number they use is highly exaggerated, as they count trial accounts, inactive accounts, and bots / spammers. In reality they do not have any more than 2 million players, which is still a huge amount for an MMORPG, but 10 million would mean something of a whole different level. I'm not trying to interfere with your argument, just informing on some bad information laid out by Blizzard for marketing purposes.
Your information would incorrect, Douhk. Blizzard released a press release clearly stating what their guidelines are for what qualifies as a counted subscription. Trial accounts, inactive accounts pass 30 days (or was it 60 days) were not counted. So unless you can back up your claim, you are speaking on something you can't possibly know, with inaccurate info.
It's not like Blizz would think people are stupid enough to not think of trial accounts, botters (why would botters and spammers PAY for an account?) and inactive people. They wouldn't count them in the 10m subscription number.
um, in regards to botters/spammers who work for those gold selling/pl service companies -- how exactly would a trial account be around long enough to store 1000s of gold and/or items (for sale), or to have lvl 70 toons around for PL'ing folks (for money)...
please don't forget that in that 10m, the majority of those are not western accounts. 10m is a drop in the bucket if you consider all the asian markets.
Just to clear up one thing real fast, Trial WoW accounts CANNOT TRADE, CANNOT PASS LEVEL 20
hence... there is ABSOLUTELY 0 CHANCE that gold sellers could use trial accounts to make money.
This thread has made me so sad...it reminded me of the days when I had the most fun with WoW. Before I go off on some rant, let me say that Funcom HAS responded to this matter and said that they aren't going to make the mini-games vital in any way. I think they will fail on that initially...by underestimating the player base and its need to power game. But, I do think they will resolve it quicker than Blizzard did, and in a way that suits this game better. Truth be told, given the direction Blizzard chose...their resolution to the issue was probably best.
I'm going to break PvP down into three sections, and explain why I think they might hit a bump on the way up with this thinking. In an MMO (given the current options they have) PvP happens in three ways. Random World PvP, like teams of people attacking an NPC city...or gank squads. Instanced PvP, like BGs. Lastly you have siege PvP, where guilds get together and attack each other en masse. Now, since siege order is going to be tied to PvP rank (in whatever form it arrives in) that means the players, who hope to be near first in line for sieges, must use the other two methods to attain their rank. This is very similar to level limits on instances, and the player solution is going to be the same. Find the easiest, and fastest, way to achieve the desired results. For PvE, that would be massive grinding and choice questing. Given our PvP options...the PvP solution will be instanced PvP.
Why? Because it will be the easiest, and most reliable, way to encounter other players in combat. In world PvP, players are spread out over a zone. They can run...run across multiple zones if they wish to flee. Gank squads aren't always easy to find (indeed, the ideal is to BE rather hidden from the masses so the ganking is easier). Instanced PvP will guarantee you some opponents, and that they will be very limited in where you can both find them, and where they can flee to. This expedites the whole matter by removing the 'hunt' AND the 'escape'. You walk in, you see someone...you kill them. Others will be close by.
Now, I KNOW it doesn't matter whether the focus is on minigames or not. I also know that it doesn't matter that other forms of PvP are rewarded too (in fact, world PvP is rewarded in WoW as well...I notice it has done nothing to remove the players from AV) because its not about which is rewarded...it is about which is fastest and easiest to accomplish. Instanced PvP is like quail hunting lodges...all of your prey is fenced in and easy to get to. If you REALLY want the thrill of the hunt, then going outside to find quail is better. But if all you wanted was a number of dead quail..well...the lodge is better, easier, and faster.
However, if the quail outside of the lodge was filled with gold coins and hookers...you'd find a greater number of people hunting them the hard way. The only way for great world PvP to survive the inclusion of instanced PvP is make the rewards outside higher to compensate for the ease of access in instances. I doubt Funcom will get this balance correct the first time (mostly because it won't be until well after launch that any issues with it arise...many players will be engaging in world PvP as the level due to the nature of the beast.) but I know they will address it when the time comes. My only regret here is that, if I can see the potential issues clearly, I would think they could too. I expected them to really address the matter boldly and clearly. They haven't yet...they simply said that minigames won't be required. Being required isn't really the issue. I want them to face the issue. I was deeply hoping they would before launch...because I'm very well aware that the game will seem quite fine at launch. In fact, it will be more than fine. I just would like them to show that they really do pay attention to the details of other games.
"Theyre going to implement alot of things after release!!"
No one here was present for the startup of AO or the Shadowlands expansion? Funcom really screwed over the playerbase then. In shadowlands All mobs had double health, gave 1 exp and the zones after elysium were not even started in development. 2 months later theres an update and the mob-weapons for inferno arrived. They even broke the quests to get further on purpose while lying about it on forums.
"Oh ooops did that mob not drop that questitem?"
"Oh ooops did we break that spawn again?"
"Oh ooops questgiver despawns forever?"
"Oh ooops you cannot buy that sanctuary key?"
I was hoping for the playerbase to issue a class-action suit, but no one seemed to mind...
I predict the same for this game. On a sidenote, have fun with your "real-time combat" and "innovations", its all PR talk and lies, sadly.
Unless you're not keeping up, it's obvious all the talk as of late on these forums and the official ones is of how PvP minigames are now going to play a crucial role, and they aren't just going to be something people do for nothing. This raises alarm bells with world pvp enthusiasts like myself who were hoping AOC would bypass the monotonous predictable boredom of instanced PvP, and keep all focus on keep a POPULATED world pvp experience 24/7. With ANY EMPHASIS AT ALL on instanced pvp, you take players from world pvp, and that's not a good idea, since you need as many players as you can pvp'ing in the world at all times in order for it to be fun and worthwhile. What is your stance on this? Are you still as enthusiastic? Me personally, I canceled my pre-order. I know why I quit WoW, and it's the same reason I'm going to avoid this game. Not only does it have the whole Vanguard 2.0 reputation floating around, but now it has this utter crap.
Comments
Because it divides PvPers. Doing so ensures that only one of two groups will ever amount to anything. WoW has already made this error. Its world PvP died overnight once they added Instanced PvP. You can, of course, choose to ignore that factor. I'd advise against it, as a game with 10 million players to use as a study base is far better than your assumption instead.
the subscribers number they use is highly exaggerated, as they count trial accounts, inactive accounts, and bots / spammers. In reality they do not have any more than 2 million players, which is still a huge amount for an MMORPG, but 10 million would mean something of a whole different level. I'm not trying to interfere with your argument, just informing on some bad information laid out by Blizzard for marketing purposes.
Your information would incorrect, Douhk. Blizzard released a press release clearly stating what their guidelines are for what qualifies as a counted subscription. Trial accounts, inactive accounts pass 30 days (or was it 60 days) were not counted. So unless you can back up your claim, you are speaking on something you can't possibly know, with inaccurate info.
Still cant beleive people dont believe WoW numbers. WoW number do not included.. Banned, Cancelled, Expired or Trial account.
Fact.... 3.5 million copies of TBC were sold in the first month of its release in the west. And got the offical award of the fastest selling PC game ever.
There are over 470 EU+US servers.. blizzard last press release said there were 4.5 million ACTIVE EU & US subs.. that eqautes to an average of 9,700 per server.
Also blizzard have opened up 2 new US realms and 1 EU realm in last few months.
World of Warcraft's Subscriber Definition
World of Warcraft subscribers include individuals who have paid a subscription fee or have an active prepaid card to play World of Warcraft, as well as those who have purchased the game and are within their free month of access. Internet Game Room players who have accessed the game over the last thirty days are also counted as subscribers. The above definition excludes all players under free promotional subscriptions, expired or cancelled subscriptions, and expired prepaid cards. Subscribers in licensees' territories are defined along the same rules.
Links - http://www.blizzard.com/us/press/080122.html & http://www.blizzard.com/us/press/070724.html
Because it divides PvPers. Doing so ensures that only one of two groups will ever amount to anything. WoW has already made this error. Its world PvP died overnight once they added Instanced PvP. You can, of course, choose to ignore that factor. I'd advise against it, as a game with 10 million players to use as a study base is far better than your assumption instead.
the subscribers number they use is highly exaggerated, as they count trial accounts, inactive accounts, and bots / spammers. In reality they do not have any more than 2 million players, which is still a huge amount for an MMORPG, but 10 million would mean something of a whole different level. I'm not trying to interfere with your argument, just informing on some bad information laid out by Blizzard for marketing purposes.
Your information would incorrect, Douhk. Blizzard released a press release clearly stating what their guidelines are for what qualifies as a counted subscription. Trial accounts, inactive accounts pass 30 days (or was it 60 days) were not counted. So unless you can back up your claim, you are speaking on something you can't possibly know, with inaccurate info.
It's not like Blizz would think people are stupid enough to not think of trial accounts, botters (why would botters and spammers PAY for an account?) and inactive people. They wouldn't count them in the 10m subscription number.
um, in regards to botters/spammers who work for those gold selling/pl service companies -- how exactly would a trial account be around long enough to store 1000s of gold and/or items (for sale), or to have lvl 70 toons around for PL'ing folks (for money)...
please don't forget that in that 10m, the majority of those are not western accounts. 10m is a drop in the bucket if you consider all the asian markets.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
unobserved reports? guess you have not been reading the articles being released to other sites besides this one on what and how the game is gonna work come release. the major parts of this game have not and will not be released till after the game goes live and that is from the guy running the show at AOC. what does that mean? all kinds of things. do the math...
Head Joint SoundCloud Page
https://soundcloud.com/headjointambient1
Might as well go play something else...
6v6 pvp isn't my idea of a fun MMO pvp experience...
If 6v6 instanced pvp is it, gee, maybe I'll just go play some COD4 or something. That's more than 6v6 and even those maps are way better than AOC's CTF/TDM maps.
You people are totally forgetting why MMO's USED TO BE FUN. Because it was about a huge world, not some crumby little crap instance with 12 people.
Go give funcom 50 bucks for this sorry crap. Suckers.
No, you don't. You also don't have to go out into the world to try world PVP and listen to crickets because that's all you'll hear, CRICKETS.
Did you totally miss WoW? Did you totally miss the fact that world PvP is non-existent since the incentives are in instanced PvP?
Geez. You take people from world pvp and give an incentive to instanced pvp, and world pvp collapses. They seriously need an MMO 101 history course for some people.
Might as well go play something else...
6v6 pvp isn't my idea of a fun MMO pvp experience...
If 6v6 instanced pvp is it, gee, maybe I'll just go play some COD4 or something. That's more than 6v6 and even those maps are way better than AOC's CTF/TDM maps.
You people are totally forgetting why MMO's USED TO BE FUN. Because it was about a huge world, not some crumby little crap instance with 12 people.
Go give funcom 50 bucks for this sorry crap. Suckers.
Well said.
No free roaming world - step backwards from WoW (and I am no WoW fan by any length of imagination).
AoC is designed to be transfered to the console and that probably explains a lot.
But hey, I know people who will buy it because they have an impression that the big part of the game will be a single player with a chatbox. Mind you, those are the same people that find WoW too complicated to play.
AoC is an instanced world with 80 levels to grind and a final goal is end game PvP and PvE raids.
It will be interesting to see the reactions after the launch.
If this bothers you just play on a FFA PvP server where full world PvP will be supported and rewarded. The emphasis on those servers will be on open world PvP.
It's that easy if you are genuine.
I don't think you are though.
I call troll and shill.
Most interesting thing about this thread:
13 % of of the participants would buy pooh from Funcom
____________________________
CASUAL CONFESSIONS - Draccan's blog
____________________________
This thread kinda doesn't make sense as PvP minigame thing was a misquote of someone from IGN?
I would rather buy their poo then his.
I guess some of the others felt the same, or they thought they would be getting a little bear that likes honey.
"Yes, I'm still going to try it, but it's not sounding good"
(said try, not buy)
Wow and wowlikes aren't for me.
i dont pvp.
does that mean if i choose to pvp, i have the option of ganking people in the world or, going to instanced pvp areas?
if i were to pvp or was a fan of pvp, id say the more population of targets is better. i understand the opposition to instanced pvp in that case.
chips, dips chains & whips.
Because it divides PvPers. Doing so ensures that only one of two groups will ever amount to anything. WoW has already made this error. Its world PvP died overnight once they added Instanced PvP. You can, of course, choose to ignore that factor. I'd advise against it, as a game with 10 million players to use as a study base is far better than your assumption instead.
the subscribers number they use is highly exaggerated, as they count trial accounts, inactive accounts, and bots / spammers. In reality they do not have any more than 2 million players, which is still a huge amount for an MMORPG, but 10 million would mean something of a whole different level. I'm not trying to interfere with your argument, just informing on some bad information laid out by Blizzard for marketing purposes.
Your information would incorrect, Douhk. Blizzard released a press release clearly stating what their guidelines are for what qualifies as a counted subscription. Trial accounts, inactive accounts pass 30 days (or was it 60 days) were not counted. So unless you can back up your claim, you are speaking on something you can't possibly know, with inaccurate info.
It's not like Blizz would think people are stupid enough to not think of trial accounts, botters (why would botters and spammers PAY for an account?) and inactive people. They wouldn't count them in the 10m subscription number.
um, in regards to botters/spammers who work for those gold selling/pl service companies -- how exactly would a trial account be around long enough to store 1000s of gold and/or items (for sale), or to have lvl 70 toons around for PL'ing folks (for money)...
please don't forget that in that 10m, the majority of those are not western accounts. 10m is a drop in the bucket if you consider all the asian markets.
Just to clear up one thing real fast, Trial WoW accounts CANNOT TRADE, CANNOT PASS LEVEL 20
hence... there is ABSOLUTELY 0 CHANCE that gold sellers could use trial accounts to make money.
This thread has made me so sad...it reminded me of the days when I had the most fun with WoW. Before I go off on some rant, let me say that Funcom HAS responded to this matter and said that they aren't going to make the mini-games vital in any way. I think they will fail on that initially...by underestimating the player base and its need to power game. But, I do think they will resolve it quicker than Blizzard did, and in a way that suits this game better. Truth be told, given the direction Blizzard chose...their resolution to the issue was probably best.
I'm going to break PvP down into three sections, and explain why I think they might hit a bump on the way up with this thinking. In an MMO (given the current options they have) PvP happens in three ways. Random World PvP, like teams of people attacking an NPC city...or gank squads. Instanced PvP, like BGs. Lastly you have siege PvP, where guilds get together and attack each other en masse. Now, since siege order is going to be tied to PvP rank (in whatever form it arrives in) that means the players, who hope to be near first in line for sieges, must use the other two methods to attain their rank. This is very similar to level limits on instances, and the player solution is going to be the same. Find the easiest, and fastest, way to achieve the desired results. For PvE, that would be massive grinding and choice questing. Given our PvP options...the PvP solution will be instanced PvP.
Why? Because it will be the easiest, and most reliable, way to encounter other players in combat. In world PvP, players are spread out over a zone. They can run...run across multiple zones if they wish to flee. Gank squads aren't always easy to find (indeed, the ideal is to BE rather hidden from the masses so the ganking is easier). Instanced PvP will guarantee you some opponents, and that they will be very limited in where you can both find them, and where they can flee to. This expedites the whole matter by removing the 'hunt' AND the 'escape'. You walk in, you see someone...you kill them. Others will be close by.
Now, I KNOW it doesn't matter whether the focus is on minigames or not. I also know that it doesn't matter that other forms of PvP are rewarded too (in fact, world PvP is rewarded in WoW as well...I notice it has done nothing to remove the players from AV) because its not about which is rewarded...it is about which is fastest and easiest to accomplish. Instanced PvP is like quail hunting lodges...all of your prey is fenced in and easy to get to. If you REALLY want the thrill of the hunt, then going outside to find quail is better. But if all you wanted was a number of dead quail..well...the lodge is better, easier, and faster.
However, if the quail outside of the lodge was filled with gold coins and hookers...you'd find a greater number of people hunting them the hard way. The only way for great world PvP to survive the inclusion of instanced PvP is make the rewards outside higher to compensate for the ease of access in instances. I doubt Funcom will get this balance correct the first time (mostly because it won't be until well after launch that any issues with it arise...many players will be engaging in world PvP as the level due to the nature of the beast.) but I know they will address it when the time comes. My only regret here is that, if I can see the potential issues clearly, I would think they could too. I expected them to really address the matter boldly and clearly. They haven't yet...they simply said that minigames won't be required. Being required isn't really the issue. I want them to face the issue. I was deeply hoping they would before launch...because I'm very well aware that the game will seem quite fine at launch. In fact, it will be more than fine. I just would like them to show that they really do pay attention to the details of other games.
"Theyre going to implement alot of things after release!!"
No one here was present for the startup of AO or the Shadowlands expansion? Funcom really screwed over the playerbase then. In shadowlands All mobs had double health, gave 1 exp and the zones after elysium were not even started in development. 2 months later theres an update and the mob-weapons for inferno arrived. They even broke the quests to get further on purpose while lying about it on forums.
"Oh ooops did that mob not drop that questitem?"
"Oh ooops did we break that spawn again?"
"Oh ooops questgiver despawns forever?"
"Oh ooops you cannot buy that sanctuary key?"
I was hoping for the playerbase to issue a class-action suit, but no one seemed to mind...
I predict the same for this game. On a sidenote, have fun with your "real-time combat" and "innovations", its all PR talk and lies, sadly.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
This was your first post?
Never mind