Well you cite the principle of having seperate PvP and PvE servers being flawed. I think if XL games really wants to make it work they will make it work. When you mention this I can't help but think of the fact that this game will have 120 potential classes. This in itself will make balancing issues a huge problem. Or maybe we'll see a trend where certain classes will be more prominent on PvP servers while others might be more prominent on PvE servers. I would like that.
People need to quit spouting Aion as a FFA game, it was TEAM PVP.
People are 'spouting' Aion as an open world PvP game, not a FFA one. You have missed the point.
No, I covered ALL points and more. Try again. Read the parts you decided to -snip-, and to which you have no counter. Also, feel free to scroll back a few pages to see all the examples or hugely popular world PVP MMO's and servers, which you seem to blatantly disregard.
...limited the success of the game here, it was the grind/mat grind, it wasn't 'world pvp'.
Yes it was, it was a stated reason for a ton of cancels. That is why NCS introduced the open world PvP buff to nerf it.
The masses wanted to level in peace, and quit when they couldnt. it's as simple as that. It wasnt the game's only issue, but it was the one big enough to take the action they did.
And like I said, they could level in peace if they went to the correct zones, or played smart. And if it was 'stated' as being a reason for a ton of cancels, then you'd have no problems providing evidence to support your claims. But as I already covered, Aion's world PVP setup failed on many levels, and proves nothing other than bad world pvp designs are bad. (it wasn't even sandbox, relevence?).
Doing quick google searches why Aion failed, and guess what the #1 reason was in all results - the grind, aka PVE, funny that! If I used your logic, I could just as easily jump to the conclusion that PVE MMO's are failures... all based on one very poor example.
But as I've said, I have no problems with AA adding a PVE server (as long as they don't start adding epics / gear grinds for PVE'rs that trump player skill in PVP, or force PVP'ers to spend hours doing raids to be competitive etc etc)
You are aware that AA already is PvE heavy and gear/ level dependent right?
Evidence?
If you want a drop in PvP game, I hear theres a new Medal of Honor title coming out soon...
And I here there's a new sims game coming out soon.. I hear farmville's pretty popular these days too, oh yeah, and there's hundreds of safe 'carebear' (see, I can do it too) MMO's out there designed from the ground up for your playstyle.
I support AA adding a PVE server. I do not support people putting down other rulesets or making wild claims without supporting evidence.
Guess OP never played DAOC and appears to have limited scope & grasp on open world coincidental contact , with enemies -VS- PvP-centric arcade action MMO
(ie: Rift, Warhammer, etc)
People who are evil and bandits, will have a hard life in ArcheAge and only those who have the stomach will endure.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
People who are evil and bandits, will have a hard life in ArcheAge and only those who have the stomach will endure.
and you obviously do not understand the system on offer right now in AA.
You do not have to be 'evil' to perma gank others without penalty, you need not be the other faction.
and, please, whereis your information as to how 'hard' life as a red will be? (and your making out that it's some kind of feat to 'endure' is laughable tbh... do you open worlders actually think your in a real war when you play these games? lol)
I will ignore the other part of your post because it's founded on false assumption.
People who are evil and bandits, will have a hard life in ArcheAge and only those who have the stomach will endure.
and you obviously do not understand the system on offer right now in AA.
You do not have to be 'evil' to perma gank others without penalty, you need not be the other faction.
and, please, whereis your information as to how 'hard' life as a red will be? (and your making out that it's some kind of feat to 'endure' is laughable tbh... do you open worlders actually think your in a real war when you play these games? lol)
I will ignore the other part of your post because it's founded on false assumption.
And..?
We all know that player faction (kill penalties/jail) isn't in game yet. So speculating without first recognizing the underlaying system, means ur ideas will mean very little.
And yes, in open worlds sometimes it takes a tight schdule to maintain real-life patrol your grounds... because it's 360 degree content, not an arcade game.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
People need to quit spouting Aion as a FFA game, it was TEAM PVP.
People are 'spouting' Aion as an open world PvP game, not a FFA one. You have missed the point.
No, I covered ALL points and more. Try again. Read the parts you decided to -snip-, and to which you have no counter. Also, feel free to scroll back a few pages to see all the examples or hugely popular world PVP MMO's and servers, which you seem to blatantly disregard.
...limited the success of the game here, it was the grind/mat grind, it wasn't 'world pvp'.
Yes it was, it was a stated reason for a ton of cancels. That is why NCS introduced the open world PvP buff to nerf it.
The masses wanted to level in peace, and quit when they couldnt. it's as simple as that. It wasnt the game's only issue, but it was the one big enough to take the action they did.
And like I said, they could level in peace if they went to the correct zones, or played smart. And if it was 'stated' as being a reason for a ton of cancels, then you'd have no problems providing evidence to support your claims. But as I already covered, Aion's world PVP setup failed on many levels, and proves nothing other than bad world pvp designs are bad. (it wasn't even sandbox, relevence?).
Doing quick google searches why Aion failed, and guess what the #1 reason was in all results - the grind, aka PVE, funny that! If I used your logic, I could just as easily jump to the conclusion that PVE MMO's are failures... all based on one very poor example.
But as I've said, I have no problems with AA adding a PVE server (as long as they don't start adding epics / gear grinds for PVE'rs that trump player skill in PVP, or force PVP'ers to spend hours doing raids to be competitive etc etc)
You are aware that AA already is PvE heavy and gear/ level dependent right?
Evidence?
If you want a drop in PvP game, I hear theres a new Medal of Honor title coming out soon...
And I here there's a new sims game coming out soon.. I hear farmville's pretty popular these days too, oh yeah, and there's hundreds of safe 'carebear' (see, I can do it too) MMO's out there designed from the ground up for your playstyle.
I support AA adding a PVE server. I do not support people putting down other rulesets or making wild claims without supporting evidence.
first off, I don't really uinderstand why you are so snarky in your tone in this, we are just talking about games.You seem mad for some reason
Osc8r, you might not thiink it but you DID miss the point... You said you don't get why 'people are spouting Aion as a FFA game when it was TEAM PVP', when they simply wernt. People were talking about Aion being an open worldPvP game, nothing to do with FFA or team. You were wrong and I simply pointed that out.
Look, you have got so caught up in the need to be right you have missed the simple fact that I said Aion failed for many reasons, as your 'quick google search' agrees with, but I said the open world PvP was a major one and thats why they introduced the open world PvP nerf. Are you really arguing that they imposed the nerf because open world gankfest was wildly popular with the bulk of the playerbase?
They nerfed open world PvP and expanded PvE in that game based on player polls and exit feedback, so no, I don't think you could claim that PvE was seen as the issue for the bulk of cancels, even considering on your 'evidence' of a 'quick google search'.
Your very demanding of evidence from others, but provide none of your own past references to vague 'google searches' and the expectation that we should take your word for it... Because you have repeatedly demanded evidence from me, I now demand precise evidence from you as to the popularity of pure open world PvP games and servers versus optional PvP games and servers in order to support your assertions. No vague ball park references like you have been doing (like ~50% or whatever) please- real evidence.
You seem to think others should provide it for every point they make. Well, then so you must as well. In fact, I ask you to lead by example. Fair?
As for AA, it ihas been established it features PvE as a big part of it's play design, it is also level and gear based progression. Evidence? Just go read some stuff... use your friend google.
Well I know for fact myself and several of my friends dropped out of Aion once we figured out post-20 your options were to grind while avoiding PvP or to just flat out PvP. I like PvP a lot actually, but when PvP is forced upon me with FFA PvP it ceases to be PvE, I don't care what you call it.
People need to quit spouting Aion as a FFA game, it was TEAM PVP. There were also zones which didn't have exit rifts, meaning PVP could easily be avoided. And you know what limited the success of the game here, it was the grind/mat grind, it wasn't 'world pvp'. But yes, the TEAM PVP setup in that game failed. Level 50's who wanted to PVP had no choice but to enter the lower level 40's rift/zone and no the max level zone, so all we can conclude is that poorly made world PVP setups fail, but poorly made PVE setups fail even harder.
Easily avoided? When I got to 22 I think it was I couldn't quest at all with coming across some team of PvP'ers. Again there just has to be one situation, one zone, one area where PvP can't be avoided and any claims of 'easily avoidable' is out the window.
It could be the most intricate, complex storyline with record breaking amounts of PvE content, if there is FFA PvP, it is a PvP game. Period. FFA PvP supercedes all playstyles, and I don't mean in fun or quality, I mean no other playstyle can fully exist alongside FFA PvP.
Tell that to all the people in EVE, and UO who do/did nothing but craft, or harvest etc. And in AC1, a lot of the PVE 'world firsts' or 'one time events' were claimed by people on the FFA PVP server.
Crafting and harvesting isn't PvE. Killing NPC's is. Otherwise you could call people crafting weapons that may be used in PvP by someone, somewhere 'PvP' Also a AC1 ref? Got anything in say hte past 5 years? Also notice how I said 'fully exist' this just doesn't the very top end stuff, this means bottom end stuff too. If a level 1 can't get some PvE quest or kill he wants because of getting PK'd, his not getting the full access to PvE.
The western market is a PvE centric. Even PvP servers on western MMO's have a ton of PvE and ways to avoid PvP. I think the OP is spot on here. There have been several PvP centric games released in the west and at best see moderate success and not all at the same time or for long periods save for maybe EvE.
Compared to what? How many AAA PVE/PVP-lite MMO's have we seen fail lately? TONNES! The only AAA/AA FFA PVP MMO's I can think of are UO and EVE, and both of them were hugely succesful - UO broke records (pre tram), and EVE has seen continued growth for 8 years now. Scroll back a few pages for fruther examples and data.
You act like there hasn't been more PvP games because the devs just refuse to make them. There aren't as many because there isn't as much of a demand. If people would pay as much for PvP centric games as they do PvE games they wouldn't hesitate to cash in.
TL;DR: Look at a game with PvE and PvP servers, now realize most of those people on PvE servers wouldn't play the game AT ALL if the PvE servers didn't exist. Not having a PvE solution will hurt this game in the West.
The reverse is also true. Even primarily PVE focused games like Rift and WOW (with poor world PVP) had/have ~50% of their players on PVP servers. Now consider how saturated the PVE/PVP-lite market is these days, and who you are competing against, and well...
You say yourself that they are 'pvp-lite' so no, the reverse wouldn't be true. A lot of those players on PvP servers would be happy on a PvE server because that is most of the content anyway. But PvE players wouldn't tolerate any kind of open PvP at all. If for some reason those games had to go completely PvP or PvE, they wouldn't hesitate to pick PvE because they would keep more people that way.
But as I've said, I have no problems with AA adding a PVE server (as long as they don't start adding epics / gear grinds for PVE'rs that trump player skill in PVP, or force PVP'ers to spend hours doing raids to be competitive etc etc), but please stop theorising #'s, making false claims, or putting down PVP'ers in the process.
I haven't theorised any numbers or made any false claims. Matter of fact when it comes to the state of the market you have agreed with me 100%. Only 2 big open world PvP MMO's. Most MMO's are PvP-lite, and developers make many more PvE centric games than PvP ones. Every single one of these points goes to prove that the western market has a higher demand for PvE than PvP. Certainly doesn't prove people want more PvP. If there was a higher demand even the low quality PvP centered MMO's would have seen better results simply because there was little to choose from. Instead we see every single low end PvP game shut down, sold off, or making some sort of capitulationto be cheaper and more accessible.
Agreed and will probably happen this way. I'll be hitting FFA but look at this game! Why alienate anyone?
Read my post above, again you cannot do this without making one or the other suffer. I hope these developers are smart enough to realize this. Besides if they make the game well enough there won't be any reasons for the tree-hugging-carebear-loving-pansies not to play.
Sorry I couldn't resist.
So if you are saying there are two server types: PVE and PVPFFA, that people will choose to flock to the PVE rather than stick to the PVPFFA server. If the game only have PVPFFA servers, then that will be popular. IS that correct?
[Mod Edit]
It's simple. If you're making a game that you want to try and cater to everyone with both sides (PvE / PvP) will suffer from them trying to keep everyone happy through features that do not lend themselves to a particular play-style; it's not a popularity contest it's just fact.
That's why I'd rather them focus on one group of people over them try to please the crowd. Either way at the end of the day some people will love their game while others hate it. They just need to decide who gets to love it more.
If I ever get the chance to make an MMO I will be very blunt about the type of game it will be. No amount of forum bitching / drama would ever make me think about changing MY vision of what the game is suppose to be. Just let the developers make their damn game and decide later on down the road if you lke it or not.
Ultima Online more than doubled its population after introducing Trammel and it's popularity pinnacle would have never gotten anywhere near where it did without it.
That's all I need to say really (for those that don't know - Trammel turned UO from a FFA game to a pvp optional game).
In the end, I don't care what the developers do it's their game to design. But I don't think it'll be anywhere near as great as it could be if they made more space catering to pve'ers than "safe" areas that end around level 20. Look how that did for the pve crowd in Aion - it didn't help at all.
This is 100% true. PvP is a good thing to have but full on PK'ing is a huge turnoff to the western market. Look at Asherons Call, it had servers that were White unless you flagged and 1 red server. Same is true of DAoC, a game built on the ground up as a PvP based game, Mordred wasa failure and never reached the population of the RvR servers.
I think its perfectly fine to laucnh with a mix of both though, alot of us want a Sandbox PvE game and that jsut hasnt happened since Asherons Call.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Agreed and will probably happen this way. I'll be hitting FFA but look at this game! Why alienate anyone?
Read my post above, again you cannot do this without making one or the other suffer. I hope these developers are smart enough to realize this. Besides if they make the game well enough there won't be any reasons for the tree-hugging-carebear-loving-pansies not to play.
Sorry I couldn't resist.
So if you are saying there are two server types: PVE and PVPFFA, that people will choose to flock to the PVE rather than stick to the PVPFFA server. If the game only have PVPFFA servers, then that will be popular. IS that correct?
You don't have a brain do you?
It's simple. If you're making a game that you want to try and cater to everyone with both sides (PvE / PvP) will suffer from them trying to keep everyone happy through features that do not lend themselves to a particular play-style; it's not a popularity contest it's just fact.
That's why I'd rather them focus on one group of people over them try to please the crowd. Either way at the end of the day some people will love their game while others hate it. They just need to decide who gets to love it more.
If I ever get the chance to make an MMO I will be very blunt about the type of game it will be. No amount of forum bitching / drama would ever make me think about changing MY vision of what the game is suppose to be. Just let the developers make their damn game and decide later on down the road if you lke it or not.
Sounds like you might get 15 total subscribers friend!
But really. The people here are asking for no changes to anything except a PvP-optional server. We don't want anything else. We don't want changes. We don't want extra content specifically for us on that server. We don't want anything other than a server, with everything the same, except toggle PvP on the home continents. That's it. How does that negatively impact your gameplay?
I hope im not the only one here not wanting it to come to the west the game will fail in the west from mass's wanting this and that ruining a new game once more. I want it just as it is now lvl 1-20 is easy mode with map marker's and all then after you get no quest markers FFA PVP building crafting I hope it's just not a gear grind or if it is if i kill you i can steal it after killing you.
I hope im not the only one here not wanting it to come to the west the game will fail in the west from mass's wanting this and that ruining a new game once more. I want it just as it is now lvl 1-20 is easy mode with map marker's and all then after you get no quest markers FFA PVP building crafting I hope it's just not a gear grind or if it is if i kill you i can steal it after killing you.
Hate it for you, friend, but it has been announced that the Western market is the target audience for this game.
Agreed and will probably happen this way. I'll be hitting FFA but look at this game! Why alienate anyone?
Read my post above, again you cannot do this without making one or the other suffer. I hope these developers are smart enough to realize this. Besides if they make the game well enough there won't be any reasons for the tree-hugging-carebear-loving-pansies not to play.
Sorry I couldn't resist.
So if you are saying there are two server types: PVE and PVPFFA, that people will choose to flock to the PVE rather than stick to the PVPFFA server. If the game only have PVPFFA servers, then that will be popular. IS that correct?
{mod edit}
It's simple. If you're making a game that you want to try and cater to everyone with both sides (PvE / PvP) will suffer from them trying to keep everyone happy through features that do not lend themselves to a particular play-style; it's not a popularity contest it's just fact.
That's why I'd rather them focus on one group of people over them try to please the crowd. Either way at the end of the day some people will love their game while others hate it. They just need to decide who gets to love it more.
If I ever get the chance to make an MMO I will be very blunt about the type of game it will be. No amount of forum bitching / drama would ever make me think about changing MY vision of what the game is suppose to be. Just let the developers make their damn game and decide later on down the road if you lke it or not.
It's simple, if you have both and people flock to the pve server and avoid the pvp server, then the idea that a pvp game being so viable in the NA market seems to be off. The fear that offering a PVE server will kill your PVP server seems as if you already know that offering the PVE will kill your PVP because you are aware it will fail. IF PVP is as popular as people are trying to claim, they wouldn't fear a PVE server.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
IF thats the problem give the themepark crybabies an PVE Server before they ruin another great MMORPG.
Once again, the hostility and bad attitude in this thread comesfrom tthe open worldPvP crowd. Why is that always the case?
Just to clarify though;
This isnt about themepark at all. Both camps obviously want the game for the sandbox element, as well as both being willing to enjoy the themepark. This is about open world pvp (gankfest) and optional PvP.
(AA is a 50/ 50 thempark sandpark game, this has been stated, so if you hate themepark players it might not be the space for you.)
You seem to have the whole thing mixed up tbh and have just settled for trying to be as insulting as possible.
If a game has only pve servers, the pure pvpers won't play it.
If a game has only pvp servers, the pure pveers won't play it.
If a game has servers for both pvpers and pveers the pure...who won't buy it again? Oh, right. The pure griefers won't buy it, because they only enjoy killing players who are forced into pvp against their will, and if separate servers exist, who will they grief?
How large is the pure griefer population, anyway? A lot of games sure do seem to cater to these guys.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
If a game has only pve servers, the pure pvpers won't play it.
If a game has only pvp servers, the pure pveers won't play it.
If a game has servers for both pvpers and pveers the pure...who won't buy it again? Oh, right. The pure griefers won't buy it, because they only enjoy killing players who are forced into pvp against their will, and if separate servers exist, who will they grief?
How large is the pure griefer population, anyway? A lot of games sure do seem to cater to these guys.
This is PURE 100% perspective. nothing less.
What you call a Greifer, others call friend, generally the only people who moan about Greifing are those on the receiving end of it, and there is a million and 1 ways to avoid it, log out, learn to play, get better items, level up, gain some skills so the next time the guy comes along your on a level playing field.
To be honest, they add way more to a game than they take away, fear for a start can really get a players blood pumping, out in the dark woods hunting wolves always looking over your shoulder for some epic hero from the enemy faction who could at any moment ride into sight.
Or
out in the wood grinding mindlessly on the 5 gajillionth wolf as you zombie your way to level 100, this is PVE without the risk of random PVP.
I would rather unplug my net connection than be forced to play on a PVE server where open world PVP was not a risk.
I agree with you that for mass appeal this games will need pve only servers. Most of the people that compose WoW for example are pve'ers and they could care less about open pvp. If they want to achive mass sucess they need pve servers. Otherwise most hardcore mmo players will not mind and proably support it. As for myself I know I would roll on a pvp server but im a pvp freak
If a game has only pve servers, the pure pvpers won't play it.
If a game has only pvp servers, the pure pveers won't play it.
If a game has servers for both pvpers and pveers the pure...who won't buy it again? Oh, right. The pure griefers won't buy it, because they only enjoy killing players who are forced into pvp against their will, and if separate servers exist, who will they grief?
This is so true. A real PvPer would never mind a PvE server, he would be happy to play on his PvP server.
I hope im not the only one here not wanting it to come to the west the game will fail in the west from mass's wanting this and that ruining a new game once more. I want it just as it is now lvl 1-20 is easy mode with map marker's and all then after you get no quest markers FFA PVP building crafting I hope it's just not a gear grind or if it is if i kill you i can steal it after killing you.
Learn before you speak...
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
What you call a Greifer, others call friend, generally the only people who moan about Greifing are those on the receiving end of it, and there is a million and 1 ways to avoid it, log out, learn to play, get better items, level up, gain some skills so the next time the guy comes along your on a level playing field.
Okay this is just ridiculous, aside from logging out it's hard to do any of this if you're being "griefed". Griefing usually means repeated action, if you're being griefed by a player, that means they're holding you at bay, you have no escape but to log out. Complaints about this are completely understandable. People pay a sub fee to play a game, if you can't play, it's pointless to pay the sub fee.
Therein lies the problem with retention in games like that, when the playing field is no longer balanced (top heavy). The fully temped griefers prey on new comers, forcing them to choose to log out, as they have no other way to combat such odds.
The only way to combat this is to allow new players safety until they're at a level to be competitive. Which is what destroyed UO for those who loved to grief, good riddance I say. Eve has the right approach to this, anything else is counter productive for those making these games.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Well maybe he can't say everyone is built that way but I know I am. When you have to constantly look over your shoulder while soloing or even out with a group in a PvP game it does add a certain elemant that PvE only can never have. Not everyone likes this but, there are people that do, I am one of them and pretty much everyone I played L2 with thinks this same way.
I will admit that it can be taxing on the nerves at times though. Although the feeling you get when you're out in the world only to get attacked out of nowhere and end up winning is almost as good as gets in MMOs. At the same time getting ganked countless times at low levels when you're just trying to get started is about as worse as it gets in MMOs.
Comments
Well you cite the principle of having seperate PvP and PvE servers being flawed. I think if XL games really wants to make it work they will make it work. When you mention this I can't help but think of the fact that this game will have 120 potential classes. This in itself will make balancing issues a huge problem. Or maybe we'll see a trend where certain classes will be more prominent on PvP servers while others might be more prominent on PvE servers. I would like that.
Derp...
Guess OP never played DAOC and appears to have limited scope & grasp on open world coincidental contact , with enemies -VS- PvP-centric arcade action MMO
(ie: Rift, Warhammer, etc)
People who are evil and bandits, will have a hard life in ArcheAge and only those who have the stomach will endure.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
and you obviously do not understand the system on offer right now in AA.
You do not have to be 'evil' to perma gank others without penalty, you need not be the other faction.
and, please, whereis your information as to how 'hard' life as a red will be? (and your making out that it's some kind of feat to 'endure' is laughable tbh... do you open worlders actually think your in a real war when you play these games? lol)
I will ignore the other part of your post because it's founded on false assumption.
And..?
We all know that player faction (kill penalties/jail) isn't in game yet. So speculating without first recognizing the underlaying system, means ur ideas will mean very little.
And yes, in open worlds sometimes it takes a tight schdule to maintain real-life patrol your grounds... because it's 360 degree content, not an arcade game.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
first off, I don't really uinderstand why you are so snarky in your tone in this, we are just talking about games.You seem mad for some reason
Osc8r, you might not thiink it but you DID miss the point... You said you don't get why 'people are spouting Aion as a FFA game when it was TEAM PVP', when they simply wernt. People were talking about Aion being an open worldPvP game, nothing to do with FFA or team. You were wrong and I simply pointed that out.
Look, you have got so caught up in the need to be right you have missed the simple fact that I said Aion failed for many reasons, as your 'quick google search' agrees with, but I said the open world PvP was a major one and thats why they introduced the open world PvP nerf. Are you really arguing that they imposed the nerf because open world gankfest was wildly popular with the bulk of the playerbase?
They nerfed open world PvP and expanded PvE in that game based on player polls and exit feedback, so no, I don't think you could claim that PvE was seen as the issue for the bulk of cancels, even considering on your 'evidence' of a 'quick google search'.
Your very demanding of evidence from others, but provide none of your own past references to vague 'google searches' and the expectation that we should take your word for it... Because you have repeatedly demanded evidence from me, I now demand precise evidence from you as to the popularity of pure open world PvP games and servers versus optional PvP games and servers in order to support your assertions. No vague ball park references like you have been doing (like ~50% or whatever) please- real evidence.
You seem to think others should provide it for every point they make. Well, then so you must as well. In fact, I ask you to lead by example. Fair?
As for AA, it ihas been established it features PvE as a big part of it's play design, it is also level and gear based progression. Evidence? Just go read some stuff... use your friend google.
IF thats the problem give the themepark crybabies an PVE Server before they ruin another great MMORPG.
[Mod Edit]
It's simple. If you're making a game that you want to try and cater to everyone with both sides (PvE / PvP) will suffer from them trying to keep everyone happy through features that do not lend themselves to a particular play-style; it's not a popularity contest it's just fact.
That's why I'd rather them focus on one group of people over them try to please the crowd. Either way at the end of the day some people will love their game while others hate it. They just need to decide who gets to love it more.
If I ever get the chance to make an MMO I will be very blunt about the type of game it will be. No amount of forum bitching / drama would ever make me think about changing MY vision of what the game is suppose to be. Just let the developers make their damn game and decide later on down the road if you lke it or not.
Full Sail University - Game Design
This is 100% true. PvP is a good thing to have but full on PK'ing is a huge turnoff to the western market. Look at Asherons Call, it had servers that were White unless you flagged and 1 red server. Same is true of DAoC, a game built on the ground up as a PvP based game, Mordred wasa failure and never reached the population of the RvR servers.
I think its perfectly fine to laucnh with a mix of both though, alot of us want a Sandbox PvE game and that jsut hasnt happened since Asherons Call.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Sounds like you might get 15 total subscribers friend!
But really. The people here are asking for no changes to anything except a PvP-optional server. We don't want anything else. We don't want changes. We don't want extra content specifically for us on that server. We don't want anything other than a server, with everything the same, except toggle PvP on the home continents. That's it. How does that negatively impact your gameplay?
And some might say, 'Give the FFA whiners exactly what they want, so there's no excuse or scapegoat for the empty servers this time!'
Hey, that snarky comment thing can be kinda fun.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I hope im not the only one here not wanting it to come to the west the game will fail in the west from mass's wanting this and that ruining a new game once more. I want it just as it is now lvl 1-20 is easy mode with map marker's and all then after you get no quest markers FFA PVP building crafting I hope it's just not a gear grind or if it is if i kill you i can steal it after killing you.
Hate it for you, friend, but it has been announced that the Western market is the target audience for this game.
It's simple, if you have both and people flock to the pve server and avoid the pvp server, then the idea that a pvp game being so viable in the NA market seems to be off. The fear that offering a PVE server will kill your PVP server seems as if you already know that offering the PVE will kill your PVP because you are aware it will fail. IF PVP is as popular as people are trying to claim, they wouldn't fear a PVE server.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Once again, the hostility and bad attitude in this thread comesfrom tthe open worldPvP crowd. Why is that always the case?
Just to clarify though;
This isnt about themepark at all. Both camps obviously want the game for the sandbox element, as well as both being willing to enjoy the themepark. This is about open world pvp (gankfest) and optional PvP.
(AA is a 50/ 50 thempark sandpark game, this has been stated, so if you hate themepark players it might not be the space for you.)
You seem to have the whole thing mixed up tbh and have just settled for trying to be as insulting as possible.
If a game has only pve servers, the pure pvpers won't play it.
If a game has only pvp servers, the pure pveers won't play it.
If a game has servers for both pvpers and pveers the pure...who won't buy it again? Oh, right. The pure griefers won't buy it, because they only enjoy killing players who are forced into pvp against their will, and if separate servers exist, who will they grief?
How large is the pure griefer population, anyway? A lot of games sure do seem to cater to these guys.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
This is PURE 100% perspective. nothing less.
What you call a Greifer, others call friend, generally the only people who moan about Greifing are those on the receiving end of it, and there is a million and 1 ways to avoid it, log out, learn to play, get better items, level up, gain some skills so the next time the guy comes along your on a level playing field.
To be honest, they add way more to a game than they take away, fear for a start can really get a players blood pumping, out in the dark woods hunting wolves always looking over your shoulder for some epic hero from the enemy faction who could at any moment ride into sight.
Or
out in the wood grinding mindlessly on the 5 gajillionth wolf as you zombie your way to level 100, this is PVE without the risk of random PVP.
I would rather unplug my net connection than be forced to play on a PVE server where open world PVP was not a risk.
I agree with you that for mass appeal this games will need pve only servers. Most of the people that compose WoW for example are pve'ers and they could care less about open pvp. If they want to achive mass sucess they need pve servers. Otherwise most hardcore mmo players will not mind and proably support it. As for myself I know I would roll on a pvp server but im a pvp freak
This is so true. A real PvPer would never mind a PvE server, he would be happy to play on his PvP server.
Learn before you speak...
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
Ok, I was seriously listening to you until you said this.
stop that.
If you are making the assumption that everyone likes their blood pumping then you really need to take a better look at how people are "built".
Not everyone views this as a positive thing nor does everyone experience this feeling as good.
I like what you said before this part though.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
/100% agree.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Okay this is just ridiculous, aside from logging out it's hard to do any of this if you're being "griefed". Griefing usually means repeated action, if you're being griefed by a player, that means they're holding you at bay, you have no escape but to log out. Complaints about this are completely understandable. People pay a sub fee to play a game, if you can't play, it's pointless to pay the sub fee.
Therein lies the problem with retention in games like that, when the playing field is no longer balanced (top heavy). The fully temped griefers prey on new comers, forcing them to choose to log out, as they have no other way to combat such odds.
The only way to combat this is to allow new players safety until they're at a level to be competitive. Which is what destroyed UO for those who loved to grief, good riddance I say. Eve has the right approach to this, anything else is counter productive for those making these games.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Well maybe he can't say everyone is built that way but I know I am. When you have to constantly look over your shoulder while soloing or even out with a group in a PvP game it does add a certain elemant that PvE only can never have. Not everyone likes this but, there are people that do, I am one of them and pretty much everyone I played L2 with thinks this same way.
I will admit that it can be taxing on the nerves at times though. Although the feeling you get when you're out in the world only to get attacked out of nowhere and end up winning is almost as good as gets in MMOs. At the same time getting ganked countless times at low levels when you're just trying to get started is about as worse as it gets in MMOs.