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.
Most MMO devs are bottom-line oriented. They have to be, even if they love their MMOs, they need to turn a profit, or they won't get the resources to continue developing them. So why would developers ever refuse to offer pveers a server where they can play without fear of being ganked?
It looks like this game will attract a population large enough to support a range of servers, from FFA PvP, to faction based, to a system similar to Eve's where some areas are safer than others, to a pure pve server with very limited or no open world pvp.
Offering as many choices as possible should bring in and then retain the largest possible playerbase. And only one portion of that playerbase will dislike being separated from people who do not want to pvp with them. And that is the people who delight in annoying, harassing, and driving away other players.
And I would never try to interfere with your server choice, pew pew away on whatever type of pvp server suits your fancy. Even the griefer type. I, however, know that the best way to avoid griefers in an MMO isn't to stay alert, look over your shoulder, and travel in packs, it's to not play games that cater to your crowd at all.
I don't actually mind open world, full loot, ffa pvp with few restrictions, the only game I'm subbed to right now is Xsyon, and I had no issues with getting ganked in Darkfall or Eve, either (although I managed to avoid this in Eve, even when I ventured out of hisec, because I was careful about when I did it and where I went in the short time I played).
What I do mind are gankers who complain when pveers are allowed to play in peace on a different server. You don't deserve to be able to ruin the fun for another player unless that player had a choice not to play on a pvp server and knowingly chose the pvp server anyway. In which case, have fun. Anyway, it won't be your fault if you and other griefers kill the game, it will be the fault of the devs who didn't see it coming a thousand miles away.
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.
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.
Well, that's great. Heck, i played L2 for 4 1/2 years so I get it. But his statement was assuming that getting the adrenaliine up is a good thing. Not for everyone. And even someone like yourself admits that it can get a bit nerve wracking. Now, imagine someone who hates it?
Also, isn't there an open pvp contientn in this game? If this is so why are anti ffa players upset?
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Well I'm not upset. They have already said that they will have both types and I'm happy their doing that. That way I can play on a PvP server with my friends that love ffa open PvP, and people that don't like it can play on a PvE server.
I would like to know more specifics on how the rules are going to differ. At this time they've really only said they will have PvP servers and PvE servers and mentioned something about a jail but that's really it. Well and the whole two existing factions that you can be apart of, not apart of, or create your own. I guess I'm looking foward to finding out the detailed specifics of the differences of the two.
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.
No, I didn't miss the point at all. I covered all your points, responded, and dismissed them. As I said, re-read what I posted before you did you magic -snip-. People were also refering to Aion in the same paragraph as they were discussing FFA PVP, therefore, my point/reminder still stands - so you can quit getting stuck on technicalities now.
I't's already been stated numerous times that bringing AION into the discussion doesn't support your case either. It failed because it had terrible PVE (general knowledge / google / polls, research: http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=why+you+quit+aion), and possibly because it had failed world PVP (still NOT seeing any evidence supporting your original claim of 'flood of cancelllations due to world pvp' ). Not only that, but it had a very unique world PVP setup, and was neither a sandbox game nor a FFA game, so it's hardly relevant to the topic at hand anyway.
The fact that you keep refering to aion as your primary evidence for world PVP being a failure shows me that your either not taking yourself seriously, or are simply clutching at straws.
Did you want me to go through and list all the failed AAA PVE games now, as they outnumber the failed world AAA PVP MMO's by a large factor.
The rest of your post is again, nothing but your opinion with no facts, so -snip-.
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...
You do realise that YOU are the one asking the dev's to change or add rulesets to cater to YOUR playstyle - therefore the responsibility would lay with YOU to provide supporting evidence, not me - as I'm more than content with the rulesets they are offering. You also don't have to take my word on anything, it's all easily & publicly available (eg http://www.riftgame.com/en/status/index.php).
Also, I and others have already provided evidence showing how popular well made world PVP games can be. If you scroll back a few pages you will see that.
But again, good job ranting against a ruleset you clearly dislike, & providing zero evidence to support your 'quest for a pve server'.
Well I'm not upset. They have already said that they will have both types and I'm happy their doing that. That way I can play on a PvP server with my friends that love ffa open PvP, and people that don't like it can play on a PvE server.
I would like to know more specifics on how the rules are going to differ. At this time they've really only said they will have PvP servers and PvE servers and mentioned something about a jail but that's really it. Well and the whole two existing factions that you can be apart of, not apart of, or create your own. I guess I'm looking foward to finding out the detailed specifics of the differences of the two.
We all need more information about this game. It looks really good but any number of factors could turn people off. f2p would likely kill it for me.
As to the third continent being ffa, I think it's a great approach.
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?"
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.
There were two zones for every level range, therefore PVP could easily be avoided if you chose to go to the zone without an exit rift. The world PVP was pretty limited in times and scope anyway, so why you would need to try and avoid it is beyond me.
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.
I didn't say it was PVE. You clearly said "no other playstyle can exist alongside FFA PVP". Crafting and harvesting is another playstyle, and it existed fine, so therefore your claim is false.
But now that you are twisting your words, yes, try Rift, AOC, WAR... Tell that to ALL the max level players on PVP servers who have completed all the PVE content/raids etc... and yes, they even managed to get beyond level 5?
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.
The dev's these days are too busy trying to emulate WOW's success - and they often fail, badly (so much for main stream 'target' = instant success). It's only now that dev's are catching on and starting to try something new.
There isn't many sci fi, or sandbox games either. I guess there isn't a demand for them either?
A lot of those players on PvP servers would be happy on a PvE server because that is most of the content anyway.
Proof? As I spend all my time on PVP servers, and PVP servers ONLY, I'm pretty confident that the vast majority of PVP'ers would NOT be playing the game if it didn't have PVP servers. PVP'ers don't see the [pve grind] mindless collect 5 wolf tales from stupid AI as content, just filler to get to the good stuff aka pvp.
Instead we see every single low end PvP game shut down, sold off, or making some sort of capitulationto be cheaper and more accessible.
Such as? Even that buggy empty mess that is Darkfall is doing well, UO broke records pre tram, EVE is indi on a lower budget and yet it has seen continued growth for 8 years solid (again, breaking records and putting most AAA PVE MMO's to shame).
And how are all these AAA WOW clones doing again, or PVE-lite MMO's like WAR?
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.
Again, proof?
AC1's darktide is now their most popular server.
Mordred was opened well after DAOC's release, which would account for lower subs. Besides, it was clearly designed for FvFvF.
Vanguard's team servers were merged into their FFA servers due to lack of subs on their TEAM servers.
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.
Again, proof?
AC1's darktide is now their most popular server.
Mordred was opened well after DAOC's release, which would account for lower subs. Besides, it was clearly designed for FvFvF.
Vanguard's team servers were merged into their FFA servers due to lack of subs on their TEAM servers.
do you really believe this? people don't like being ganked every 5 minutes while leveling. Thats why WOW has10 million subs, and Darkfall has a few thouseand.
Eve has optional pvp, thats why its doing well.
when UO came out it was the only game out there , so people had no choice.
Now that people have a choice nobody plays open PVP servers.
Sorry OP but you are just plain wrong, there is a balance to be found in open world pvp and how hardcore it should be but the existence of open world pvp is 100% positive for a game. Also there has never been an open world pvp game with this kind of budget and production in the history of MMO's.
From what I understand with Archage pvp is something you choose to do and can just as easily avoid, I could be wrong but that is what I have understood and it seem to me that Archage is aiming to appeal more to the casual serious gamers.
I have never said this about any MMO before but this is the first game that I have ever considered a potential wow killer.
But then, I like open world PvP. It's a virtual world ... you won'r really die. I promise.
Christ, make it a little exciting and suspenseful anyway. If I'm not looking over my shoulder for a PK I'll be bored and quit in a month.
How do you look over your shoulder in a MMO? never seen that in any game?
Oh wait, you mean constantly turning the camera around to see if there are any stalkers trying to gank me. ic
Unless they include some form of retribution system or bounty system for player to hunt their griefers, I don't see any good in FFA PvP
As ironically as it sounds, I think FFA PVP needs a system to support it, anything without rules can't be that much fun, its like playing tabletop dungeons and dragons but with no ruleset, as many have said MMO is a virtual world, but a world without rules is basically anarchy, where players just keep killing others because there isn't any potential consequences for doing the wrong thing.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW? As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
Rift is faction based, not FFA.Name one FFA mmorpg that is popular in the US. There isn't one. {mod edit}
You didn't even mention FFA in your original post so fail, but nice try.
Your claim was simply that: "nobody plays open PVP servers given the choice."
Yet the evidence he's given shows that even in PVE games, a large percentage of players still chose Open PVP servers.
Now you are backpedalling to save face.
The end.
Its a small percentage.. Not a large percentage. And in games that offer both server types many play them both and are not exlusive to one or the other. Its probably not even 10%.
You didn't even mention FFA in your original post so fail, but nice try.
Your claim was simply that: "nobody plays open PVP servers given the choice."
Yet the evidence he's given shows that even in PVE games, a large percentage of players still chose Open PVP servers.
Now you are backpedalling to save face.
The end.
Its a small percentage.. Not a large percentage.
I can't be stuffed counting them, but it looks to be about 40-50% which to me is a large %, is it not? It's also just one example, and it's an example that stands on it's own merits.. as rift is a very PVE orientated MMO.
And 40% is a far cry from the so called "NOBODY" that he claims, yet you call me out on being wrong, lol.
{mod edit}
Oh, just had another quick look at the rift subs. Guess which server has a queue, and which server type it belongs to? Answer: it's not PVE.
Rift is faction based, not FFA.Name one FFA mmorpg that is popular in the US. There isn't one. so I have proven you wrong.
You didn't even mention FFA in your original post so fail, but nice try.
Your claim was simply that: "nobody plays open PVP servers given the choice."
Yet the evidence he's given shows that even in PVE games, a large percentage of players still chose Open PVP servers.
Now you are backpedalling to save face.
The end.
Look at the OP. we are talking about this game being successful in the West. And this game will be FFA. And there aren't any successfull FFA games in the West. So you lose.
the end
Read the rest of this thread. We've already provided data showing succesful FFA PVP games in the west.
And yes, let's look at the OP... look at his first sentence, and thread title: "The one thing that could 'kill' this game's mass appeal in the West.......is the open world PvP, IMO." In case you missed it, he said.. OPEN WORLD PVP.
He didn't mention FFA PVP anywhere in his post. So sorry, but LMAO.
Also, as you are obviously clueless, this game will likely have both faction AND limited FFA PVP servers:
"there will be a PvP server where you can even PK characters of your own faction or alliance and a separate server where you can only PK those of the opposing sides.
"there will be strict penalties for PvP between groups within the same faction (e.g. going to jail for a certain time, being expelled from the faction and becoming a pirate faction if continuously repeated). A pirate faction can be an enemy of all factions."
Ah, fail OP opnion is fail. Please, look at similar games with less funding and tell me how many thousands of people they would lose to a game with actually intelligent design. All the Ultima and SWG fans who haven't gone to anything new yet would instantly try this game. There WOULD be mainstream gamers intrigued by the concept to varying degrees, and at least a few thousand people would play it from that mindset. I guarantee that if the game were good, many EVE players would leave because of the ability to directly control your character.
I can see this game stealing away all current MMO players who loved an old sandbox before trying a new stlye of MMO, as well as grabbing the people who don't currently play a game and hate the WoW and EQ2 style themepark. There are many dying games and games on life support that, if good, this game would instantly grab people away from.
And, most importantly, games like Perpetuuum, Earthrise, Fallen Earth, Xsyon, Dawntide, Mortal Online, and Darkfall would see their populations have huge drops. None of these games individually have large populations, but combined, they would provide something rather substantial. I guarantee that a AAA developed sandbox would lure 40-60% of those gamers away.
Western players are generally less pvp loving, so in terms of numbers I see the point of not translating a eastern style game into english and think it will attract huge numbers.
Why is that ? Well Eastern players are just younger compared to Western players. Older players don't have the same need to boost their ego and find their place, and therefore don't engage as much in actions designed to make them feel good by making others feel bad (the word griefing describes it completely with the definition of "Causing others grief").
As players grow older, he will find other ways to find pleasure in games, or simply stop playing, maybe because they never liked games itself, only what they could do with them. Young people grew up on console games, and see games as no more than a thing to use on their way in life. Older people have seen how there were no games when they were born, to really advanced games nowadays .. games are not a natural part of the world for them since they didn't grow up with them. And there is probably an important difference, that some find games exciting and interesting still, while others just see them the same way as they see a car - It was always here, taking people from a to b.
Read the rest of this thread. We've already provided data showing succesful FFA PVP games in the west.
And yes, let's look at the OP... look at his first sentence, and thread title: "The one thing that could 'kill' this game's mass appeal in the West.......is the open world PvP, IMO." In case you missed it, he said.. OPEN WORLD PVP.
He didn't mention FFA PVP anywhere in his post. So sorry, but LMAO.
Also, as you are obviously clueless, this game will likely have both faction AND limited FFA PVP servers:
"there will be a PvP server where you can even PK characters of your own faction or alliance and a separate server where you can only PK those of the opposing sides.
"there will be strict penalties for PvP between groups within the same faction (e.g. going to jail for a certain time, being expelled from the faction and becoming a pirate faction if continuously repeated). A pirate faction can be an enemy of all factions."
Read the rest of this thread. We've already provided data showing succesful FFA PVP games in the west.
And yes, let's look at the OP... look at his first sentence, and thread title: "The one thing that could 'kill' this game's mass appeal in the West.......is the open world PvP, IMO." In case you missed it, he said.. OPEN WORLD PVP.
He didn't mention FFA PVP anywhere in his post. So sorry, but LMAO.
Also, as you are obviously clueless, this game will likely have both faction AND limited FFA PVP servers:
"there will be a PvP server where you can even PK characters of your own faction or alliance and a separate server where you can only PK those of the opposing sides.
"there will be strict penalties for PvP between groups within the same faction (e.g. going to jail for a certain time, being expelled from the faction and becoming a pirate faction if continuously repeated). A pirate faction can be an enemy of all factions."
You still can't name one successfull FFA game is the west. Because there aren't any . {mod edit}Darkfall is a miserble failure.
as for strict pk penalties. those things have never worked in other games.
{mod edit}
I dont wish to defend anyone but his assertion is partially correct, he mentions Open World PVP and then you go to say that there are no FFA mmos that are successfull in the west which is true but misses the point, WoW has open world faction vs faction pvp in the same way it is presented in AA, there are no penalties for killing the other faction as you see it. And I wouldnt call WoW a failure.
The fact that you can attack your own faction is another detail that is actually presented differently with a penalty system involved, also the OP seems to want to convince everyone that you can just go perma red and go unchecked without any penalties, which to me is silly and would defeat the purpose of there even being a blood system. I can guarantee there will be faction penalties for ppl going perma red, access to cities amongst other things, thinking otherwise would be stupid because it means they spent time building up a blood system that does nothing, that is a pretty naive view of things and pretty black and white.
Now the core of the question is whether this will be slightly less appealing to the west or not, the short answer is we dont know, we can speculate but because we never actually had this sort of mix of systems before and we dont actually know how everything will pan out in the political game and between the factions it is not black and white, with this sort of system I even expect things to be very different on a per server basis, servers more guild politically driven will probably create different scenarios to servers where guilds are not really interested in the political game but more on just pvp.
The problem is that no penalty system will ever stop people from just ganking randoms for the joy of ganking randoms. What will jail be? Game spent sitting there? Oh noes. Gank a bunch of people, go to jail, afk. That system would be great in the East, where you pay per hour, but it does nothing here.
It doesn't help that you can't turn in blood from your own gank, so you basically can get ganked by anyone anytime anywhere as long as you and the griefer are the only ones around, with no penalty. At least that's how I've understood how it's been written.
I will say it again, please stop trying to change our open world pvp game into a care bear game just because you want to play it, either deal with the game play mechancis or find something else to play.
There WOULD be mainstream gamers intrigued by the concept to varying degrees, and at least a few thousand people would play it from that mindset.
lol, I think XL would probably want more then this
You have called my OP 'fail' and then actually backed it up... you have talked about niche games and then stated a niche mumber, showing clearly that open world gankfest PvP s niche and that it would limit this game severly in the West to a niche playerbase.
I will say it again, please stop trying to change our open world pvp game into a care bear game just because you want to play it, either deal with the game play mechancis or find something else to play.
Your view has been noted, no need to repeat it.
But...look at the OP again.
Have you anything to add on what it actually talks about, or will you just keep repeating your little mantra?
I think the best way to do PvP rules is the way Eve did PvP rules. And that involves item destruction and all that. It's great for the in-game economy and it makes players think twice before trying to attack someone in high-sec.
I agree
Open PvP don't work in the West because there are not consequences therefore it is subject to grief
EvE PvP works but no one tried to copy it.
Reading the PvP information it looks like PvP actions will have consequences, so it might just work.
Comments
Most MMO devs are bottom-line oriented. They have to be, even if they love their MMOs, they need to turn a profit, or they won't get the resources to continue developing them. So why would developers ever refuse to offer pveers a server where they can play without fear of being ganked?
It looks like this game will attract a population large enough to support a range of servers, from FFA PvP, to faction based, to a system similar to Eve's where some areas are safer than others, to a pure pve server with very limited or no open world pvp.
Offering as many choices as possible should bring in and then retain the largest possible playerbase. And only one portion of that playerbase will dislike being separated from people who do not want to pvp with them. And that is the people who delight in annoying, harassing, and driving away other players.
And I would never try to interfere with your server choice, pew pew away on whatever type of pvp server suits your fancy. Even the griefer type. I, however, know that the best way to avoid griefers in an MMO isn't to stay alert, look over your shoulder, and travel in packs, it's to not play games that cater to your crowd at all.
I don't actually mind open world, full loot, ffa pvp with few restrictions, the only game I'm subbed to right now is Xsyon, and I had no issues with getting ganked in Darkfall or Eve, either (although I managed to avoid this in Eve, even when I ventured out of hisec, because I was careful about when I did it and where I went in the short time I played).
What I do mind are gankers who complain when pveers are allowed to play in peace on a different server. You don't deserve to be able to ruin the fun for another player unless that player had a choice not to play on a pvp server and knowingly chose the pvp server anyway. In which case, have fun. Anyway, it won't be your fault if you and other griefers kill the game, it will be the fault of the devs who didn't see it coming a thousand miles away.
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
Well, that's great. Heck, i played L2 for 4 1/2 years so I get it. But his statement was assuming that getting the adrenaliine up is a good thing. Not for everyone. And even someone like yourself admits that it can get a bit nerve wracking. Now, imagine someone who hates it?
Also, isn't there an open pvp contientn in this game? If this is so why are anti ffa players upset?
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
Well I'm not upset. They have already said that they will have both types and I'm happy their doing that. That way I can play on a PvP server with my friends that love ffa open PvP, and people that don't like it can play on a PvE server.
I would like to know more specifics on how the rules are going to differ. At this time they've really only said they will have PvP servers and PvE servers and mentioned something about a jail but that's really it. Well and the whole two existing factions that you can be apart of, not apart of, or create your own. I guess I'm looking foward to finding out the detailed specifics of the differences of the two.
We all need more information about this game. It looks really good but any number of factors could turn people off. f2p would likely kill it for me.
As to the third continent being ffa, I think it's a great approach.
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?"
Again, proof?
AC1's darktide is now their most popular server.
Mordred was opened well after DAOC's release, which would account for lower subs. Besides, it was clearly designed for FvFvF.
Vanguard's team servers were merged into their FFA servers due to lack of subs on their TEAM servers.
Now, i'll refer you to http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart2.html
Notice UO: ~200k subs pre-tram.
EVE: ~250k subs in 08, now has over 300k subs.
do you really believe this? people don't like being ganked every 5 minutes while leveling. Thats why WOW has10 million subs, and Darkfall has a few thouseand.
Eve has optional pvp, thats why its doing well.
when UO came out it was the only game out there , so people had no choice.
Now that people have a choice nobody plays open PVP servers.
{mod edit}
Sorry OP but you are just plain wrong, there is a balance to be found in open world pvp and how hardcore it should be but the existence of open world pvp is 100% positive for a game. Also there has never been an open world pvp game with this kind of budget and production in the history of MMO's.
From what I understand with Archage pvp is something you choose to do and can just as easily avoid, I could be wrong but that is what I have understood and it seem to me that Archage is aiming to appeal more to the casual serious gamers.
I have never said this about any MMO before but this is the first game that I have ever considered a potential wow killer.
How do you look over your shoulder in a MMO? never seen that in any game?
Oh wait, you mean constantly turning the camera around to see if there are any stalkers trying to gank me. ic
Unless they include some form of retribution system or bounty system for player to hunt their griefers, I don't see any good in FFA PvP
As ironically as it sounds, I think FFA PVP needs a system to support it, anything without rules can't be that much fun, its like playing tabletop dungeons and dragons but with no ruleset, as many have said MMO is a virtual world, but a world without rules is basically anarchy, where players just keep killing others because there isn't any potential consequences for doing the wrong thing.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
Rift is faction based, not FFA.Name one FFA mmorpg that is popular in the US. There isn't one. {mod edit}
You didn't even mention FFA in your original post so fail, but nice try.
Your claim was simply that: "nobody plays open PVP servers given the choice."
Yet the evidence he's given shows that even in PVE games, a large percentage of players still chose Open PVP servers.
Now you are backpedalling to save face.
The end.
Its a small percentage.. Not a large percentage. And in games that offer both server types many play them both and are not exlusive to one or the other. Its probably not even 10%.
I can't be stuffed counting them, but it looks to be about 40-50% which to me is a large %, is it not? It's also just one example, and it's an example that stands on it's own merits.. as rift is a very PVE orientated MMO.
And 40% is a far cry from the so called "NOBODY" that he claims, yet you call me out on being wrong, lol.
{mod edit}
Oh, just had another quick look at the rift subs. Guess which server has a queue, and which server type it belongs to? Answer: it's not PVE.
Read the rest of this thread. We've already provided data showing succesful FFA PVP games in the west.
And yes, let's look at the OP... look at his first sentence, and thread title: "The one thing that could 'kill' this game's mass appeal in the West.......is the open world PvP, IMO." In case you missed it, he said.. OPEN WORLD PVP.
He didn't mention FFA PVP anywhere in his post. So sorry, but LMAO.
Also, as you are obviously clueless, this game will likely have both faction AND limited FFA PVP servers:
"there will be a PvP server where you can even PK characters of your own faction or alliance and a separate server where you can only PK those of the opposing sides.
"there will be strict penalties for PvP between groups within the same faction (e.g. going to jail for a certain time, being expelled from the faction and becoming a pirate faction if continuously repeated). A pirate faction can be an enemy of all factions."
source: http://archeage-online.com/post/1718108615
{mod edit}
Ah, fail OP opnion is fail. Please, look at similar games with less funding and tell me how many thousands of people they would lose to a game with actually intelligent design. All the Ultima and SWG fans who haven't gone to anything new yet would instantly try this game. There WOULD be mainstream gamers intrigued by the concept to varying degrees, and at least a few thousand people would play it from that mindset. I guarantee that if the game were good, many EVE players would leave because of the ability to directly control your character.
I can see this game stealing away all current MMO players who loved an old sandbox before trying a new stlye of MMO, as well as grabbing the people who don't currently play a game and hate the WoW and EQ2 style themepark. There are many dying games and games on life support that, if good, this game would instantly grab people away from.
And, most importantly, games like Perpetuuum, Earthrise, Fallen Earth, Xsyon, Dawntide, Mortal Online, and Darkfall would see their populations have huge drops. None of these games individually have large populations, but combined, they would provide something rather substantial. I guarantee that a AAA developed sandbox would lure 40-60% of those gamers away.
Western players are generally less pvp loving, so in terms of numbers I see the point of not translating a eastern style game into english and think it will attract huge numbers.
Why is that ? Well Eastern players are just younger compared to Western players. Older players don't have the same need to boost their ego and find their place, and therefore don't engage as much in actions designed to make them feel good by making others feel bad (the word griefing describes it completely with the definition of "Causing others grief").
As players grow older, he will find other ways to find pleasure in games, or simply stop playing, maybe because they never liked games itself, only what they could do with them. Young people grew up on console games, and see games as no more than a thing to use on their way in life. Older people have seen how there were no games when they were born, to really advanced games nowadays .. games are not a natural part of the world for them since they didn't grow up with them. And there is probably an important difference, that some find games exciting and interesting still, while others just see them the same way as they see a car - It was always here, taking people from a to b.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
You still can't name one successfull FFA game is the west. Because there aren't any . {mod edit}Darkfall is a miserble failure.
as for strict pk penalties. those things have never worked in other games. {mod edit}
I dont wish to defend anyone but his assertion is partially correct, he mentions Open World PVP and then you go to say that there are no FFA mmos that are successfull in the west which is true but misses the point, WoW has open world faction vs faction pvp in the same way it is presented in AA, there are no penalties for killing the other faction as you see it. And I wouldnt call WoW a failure.
The fact that you can attack your own faction is another detail that is actually presented differently with a penalty system involved, also the OP seems to want to convince everyone that you can just go perma red and go unchecked without any penalties, which to me is silly and would defeat the purpose of there even being a blood system. I can guarantee there will be faction penalties for ppl going perma red, access to cities amongst other things, thinking otherwise would be stupid because it means they spent time building up a blood system that does nothing, that is a pretty naive view of things and pretty black and white.
Now the core of the question is whether this will be slightly less appealing to the west or not, the short answer is we dont know, we can speculate but because we never actually had this sort of mix of systems before and we dont actually know how everything will pan out in the political game and between the factions it is not black and white, with this sort of system I even expect things to be very different on a per server basis, servers more guild politically driven will probably create different scenarios to servers where guilds are not really interested in the political game but more on just pvp.
The problem is that no penalty system will ever stop people from just ganking randoms for the joy of ganking randoms. What will jail be? Game spent sitting there? Oh noes. Gank a bunch of people, go to jail, afk. That system would be great in the East, where you pay per hour, but it does nothing here.
It doesn't help that you can't turn in blood from your own gank, so you basically can get ganked by anyone anytime anywhere as long as you and the griefer are the only ones around, with no penalty. At least that's how I've understood how it's been written.
I will say it again, please stop trying to change our open world pvp game into a care bear game just because you want to play it, either deal with the game play mechancis or find something else to play.
lol, I think XL would probably want more then this
You have called my OP 'fail' and then actually backed it up... you have talked about niche games and then stated a niche mumber, showing clearly that open world gankfest PvP s niche and that it would limit this game severly in the West to a niche playerbase.
Your view has been noted, no need to repeat it.
But...look at the OP again.
Have you anything to add on what it actually talks about, or will you just keep repeating your little mantra?
I agree
Open PvP don't work in the West because there are not consequences therefore it is subject to grief
EvE PvP works but no one tried to copy it.
Reading the PvP information it looks like PvP actions will have consequences, so it might just work.