How odd. Most early MMO's who's Dev teams had far fewer resources than most AAA titles today found a way to offer alternate rules model servers.
Lineage 1, UO, AC1, EQ1, EQ2, DAOC and even WOW to name a few. Heck, Mythic not only offered the standard (blue) servers, but had FFA PVP (red) and even a Cooperative (PVE) server which you can argue all day about how successful they were, but many people enjoyed.
I had the most fun on Mordred (FFA PVP) and I am a carebear and in no way a ganker so please watch your sterotypes. In fact I always thought the FFA servers would have been more successful if Mythic had put more resources into it but realized they were small and it wasn't possible.
I was actually looking forward to the terrific FFA PVP server that I was sure Blizzard would be able to provide but realized by the time BC came out they were never going to do it so left them for good.
I guess when more like virtual worlds it made more sense to offer alternate rules model servers, but in todays theme park "games" (and make no mistake, GW2 is more game than world) it is viewed strictly from a business perspective and catering only to the mass market.
Sorrry guys. MMORPG's really were better in the early days, it's not just nostalgia.
Oh yeah, and to all those who want to say GW2 isn't for you, go play something else, too bad, I'm buying it anyways. (And probably complaining about it here on the forums)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
It just wouldnt work with the way end-game PvP and leveling PvE are set up. Although you can level up in the Mists (realm vs realm), so there should be no shortage of open world PvP action while leveling if thats what you want, its just you have to have a side.
Yeah, it "encourages" guilds/individuals to decide to gang up on players who are trying to enjoy the game and not assert their phallic dominance on everyone else. There are plenty of games like that to choose from already.
this
How would a FFA PVP server effect anyone who doesn't want to PVP? Faulty logic is faulty.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
How odd. Most early MMO's who's Dev teams had far fewer resources than most AAA titles today found a way to offer alternate rules model servers. Lineage 1, UO, AC1, EQ1, EQ2, DAOC and even WOW to name a few.
Heck, Mythic not only offered the standard (blue) servers, but had FFA PVP (red) and even a Cooperative (PVE) server which you can argue all day about how successful they were, but many people enjoyed.
I had the most fun on Mordred (FFA PVP) and I am a carebear and in no way a ganker so please watch your sterotypes.
In fact I always thought the FFA servers would have been more successful if Mythic had put more resources into it but realized they were small and it wasn't possible.
I was actually looking forward to the terrific FFA PVP server that I was sure Blizzard would be able to provide but realized by the time BC came out they were never going to do it so left them for good.
I guess when more like virtual worlds it made more sense to offer alternate rules model servers, but in todays theme park "games" (ande make no mistake, GW2 is more game than world) it is viewed strictly from a business perspective and catering only to the mass market.
Sorrry guys. MMORPG's really were better in the early days, it's not just nostalgia.
Oh yeah, and to all those who want to say GW2 isn't for you, go play something else, too bad, I'm buying it anyways. (And probably complaining about it here on the forums)
You can complain and moan all you want and if i find something i dislike i will too, just dont complain about there not being FFA pvp or anything that they havent said they will add to the game.
It would take less work to make a GW2 PvP server but it would still take plenty of work.
When you just add FFA PvP to a game not made for it you get AoC all over again. and I opersonally thought that EQ made a really crappy job with PvP. In DaoC it kinda messed up the endgame but it was still a lot better than EQ. never played AC.
I agree, and I said as much in my original post. HOWEVER, other people seem to really like FFA PVP servers in those games, so there's really no reason NOT to do it.
It would not be possible to do FFA PVP well in GW2, but the people looking for a Mordred type server aren't looking for FFA PVP done well. They're looking for Guild Wars, plus PvP.
All the base game is still there, with some extra PvP.
With Darkfall, you're TAKING AWAY. And by taking something away, you break the game. Massive numbers of items become completely useless. The market becomes broken and oversaturated. There's no overarching end game. No point to any of it really.
Only if you can do it well. Adding broken servers wont really help the game in any way. It will instead hurt your name to have half @ssed servers.
While it probably would make a few players happy it have the possibility to turn off a lot of players. Anet can still add them but in that case they really need to make it good.
I know FFA PvP servers are the VAST minority but i think theres a good 10,000+ people who would love to have a Rallos Zek / Mordred type server.
Sorry, but the entire game focuses on the server being a cooperative community. They aren't going to recode an entirely new game for one server, to cater to a small cross section of gamers that won't play otherwise.
You can complain and moan all you want and if i find something i dislike i will too, just dont complain about there not being FFA pvp or anything that they havent said they will add to the game.
Because MMO Developers have never offered something different post launch, like say alternate rules servers in the past?
Oh yeah, that's right, they have. I think I'll keep complaining, even if there's no chance of it ever doing any good.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I know FFA PvP servers are the VAST minority but i think theres a good 10,000+ people who would love to have a Rallos Zek / Mordred type server.
NOPE because the Developers at Anet will not bastardize their game and vision just to pul lin a few more box sales.
Really? Because they've already done that with instancing and instant teleportation.
How would an optional server "bastardize" the game? Almost every MMO has a FFA PVP server.
Instant Teleportation and Instancing was a feature of GW1 so it is not inclusive to being some anti-MMO concept that only becaame a feature in GW2.
As for your 2nd question, how would it bastardize the game.......Simple google searches will show that the concept for GW2 and it is engrained in their foundational and genre re-defining manefesto at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he3jqbDq5hA Anet wants to build a game for the community, of the community and by the community whereby at no point whatsoever in the course of a gamers adventures will he/she despise to see another player. I am sorry if you think otherwise but your inability to actually understand the core concepts of what will make GW2 truely innovative and "fun" for the majority is not my fault. Besides as has been stated elsewhere, this might not be the game for you, check out some of the other FFA type MMO's that are already out and or are soon to be released.
Looks like we've got a fanboy our on hands. I was about to respond, and point out how your precious vision of the game won't be impacted by a PvP server... and then support that, but... you're head is clearly in the clouds.
And as for your first point, since GW1 wasn't an MMO, I'd say features like instancing and teleporation are inclusive in being anti-MMO. In fact, instancing is about as anti MMO as you can get.
Sorry that you can't help but to be completely obtuse about all this, but the fact remains that the entire game revolves around *cooperative* events, requiring a free flow of *cooperative* gamers moving them through them, *working together* to complete them. This cannot exist in a FFA PvP environment. To make it work would require rewriting the fundamental code at the core of the game. Not. Going. To. Happen. I don't know how to say it any clearer.
If you can't accept that, please, take your business eleswhere. No one will care, least of all ArenaNet because you aren't the audience they're marketing to in the first place. I guess that probably chaps your ass, but just man up and deal with it.
I know FFA PvP servers are the VAST minority but i think theres a good 10,000+ people who would love to have a Rallos Zek / Mordred type server.
Sorry, but the entire game focuses on the server being a cooperative community. They aren't going to recode an entirely new game for one server, to cater to a small cross section of gamers that won't play otherwise.
Because its impossible to offer an alternate rules server in a game that is focused on cooperative PVP in a faction vs faction setting, oh say like Mythic did with DAOC back in the day?
Oh wait, they were able to.
Please look past the business limitations and consider the possibilities, even if they aren't likely to happen for strictly business reason. (which is why MMO's have lost so much of their charm these days)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Because its impossible to offer an alternate rules server in a game that is focused on cooperative PVP in a faction vs faction setting, oh say like Mythic did with DAOC back in the day?
Oh wait, they were able to.
Please look past the business limitations and consider the possibilities, even if they aren't likely to happen for strictly business reason. (which is why MMO's have lost so much of their charm these days)
Following that reasoning, Anet should provide grindy version of GW2, time sink version of GW2 (no fast travel) and perhaps even PvP progression version of GW2, because there are people who enjoy those alternate rules.
It's bad idea. They focus on single, coherent experience they consider most fun, instead of trying to please everyone, and that's perfectly valid decision (from both business and game design perspective). Loss of focus is one of the main reasons why products fail.
Because its impossible to offer an alternate rules server in a game that is focused on cooperative PVP in a faction vs faction setting, oh say like Mythic did with DAOC back in the day? Oh wait, they were able to. Please look past the business limitations and consider the possibilities, even if they aren't likely to happen for strictly business reason. (which is why MMO's have lost so much of their charm these days)
Because GW2 gameplay isn't based on cooperative PVP, it's based on cooperative PVE. The fact that you play server verses server doesn't matter for the cooperative part. people can pvp beside each other in WvW and never have to help each other. Yet you can't do that with the DE's. Furthermore openworld PvP would destroy the DE's because important chain events would never get out of the starting blocks unless 1 guild dominates the entire area. That would make PvP pointless in my opinion due to how massive their presence would need to be.
I know FFA PvP servers are the VAST minority but i think theres a good 10,000+ people who would love to have a Rallos Zek / Mordred type server.
Sorry, but the entire game focuses on the server being a cooperative community. They aren't going to recode an entirely new game for one server, to cater to a small cross section of gamers that won't play otherwise.
Because its impossible to offer an alternate rules server in a game that is focused on cooperative PVP in a faction vs faction setting, oh say like Mythic did with DAOC back in the day?
Oh wait, they were able to.
Please look past the business limitations and consider the possibilities, even if they aren't likely to happen for strictly business reason. (which is why MMO's have lost so much of their charm these days)
It's not that it's impossible, it's just that that part of the game world wasn't designed for PvP and as such wouldn't be a perticularly good enviroment for PvP. Now you (and others) may be fine with that, but for how long? How long until you are back on the forums asking for changes to accomodate FFA PvP that will adversely affect, or at the very least take development reasource away from, the PvE experience, which btw, that part of the game has been heavily market as.
I know FFA PvP servers are the VAST minority but i think theres a good 10,000+ people who would love to have a Rallos Zek / Mordred type server.
Sorry, but the entire game focuses on the server being a cooperative community. They aren't going to recode an entirely new game for one server, to cater to a small cross section of gamers that won't play otherwise.
Because its impossible to offer an alternate rules server in a game that is focused on cooperative PVP in a faction vs faction setting, oh say like Mythic did with DAOC back in the day?
Oh wait, they were able to.
Please look past the business limitations and consider the possibilities, even if they aren't likely to happen for strictly business reason. (which is why MMO's have lost so much of their charm these days)
Dynamic events are the foundation of the game, the same as DAOC ... oh wait...
They are designed so that players cooperating with one another can complete them.
Every system in the game supports this foundation.
FFA PvP will make many events impossible to complete (if you have to ask why, you've got a really tenuous grip on reality).
To make them completable requires recoding that foundation to allow DEs to be completed in a non-cooperative environment. That or throw out DEs altogether, which makes the game an un-game.
All the mechanics and systems that supported the old foundation will need to be altered to fit into the new one.
The only business limitations here is having *umlimited* time and resources to recode, rebalance, and retest the game to make it playable with the new ruleset, all to support a handful of PvP complainers, for whom WvW just isn't enough.
Some ideas (stolen ideas) that could maybe make an FFA server pretty fun and interesting.
Server wouldnt be on the Elo-Bi Weekly server list.
The servers guilds fight eachother over Keep/Objective controls (would have to increase the amount Guilds can claim)
Objective control would give Guild bonuses instead of server bonuses.
Open world PvP would have a level restriction, something like + or - 5 levels (pretty much a must in a level based game)
Sidekick system would not change
The Mist and Battlegrounds Bolster system wouldn't change
PvP Loot would not change
Assuming ALL players want to watch the world burn... is idiotic, you need friends and alliances to accomplish ANYHTING in GW2.
Suggesting i go play Darkfall or something else is about as logical as asking me to go play Toontown Online, its a completely different game with absolutely nothing in common with GW2. Even with FFA mechanics, things like the loot system, the Seige pvp, Bolstering etc etc.. Darkfall has none of that.
I think people don't give enough credit to what players in a self governing political PvP system can accomplish, The world leaders in PvE progression durring Everquest up until PoP was Rallos Zek, the (only) FFA PvP server. In DAOC the threat of ganking on Mordred(Andred) never stopped them from completeing every PvE encounter and still participated in Frontier Keep Seiging.
There is a lot of interesting gameplay that could come from a server like this.
Decide to watch the world burn, become labled as a greifer and go through your days hunting people down for that rare loot you want?
Assist as many as you can to make a name for yourself as a reliable person with future guild prospects?
If you see a fight going on over a DE, who do you help? Do you even help? Do you know what politics are taking place? Which guilds might be more likely to help you or gank you?
ect...
These sorts of interactions which are entirely player fabircated seem a lot more interesting to me than "we rolled on the same server by chance, i guess we're supposed to be friends".
I guess it's been too many years since i last lit up a j for me to take this topic even half seriously and treat it as a flight of fantasy or pseudo intellectual exercise.
Charr: Outta my way. Human: What's your problem? Charr: Your thin skin.
Some ideas (stolen ideas) that could maybe make an FFA server pretty fun and interesting.
Server wouldnt be on the Elo-Bi Weekly server list.
The servers guilds fight eachother over Keep/Objective controls (would have to increase the amount Guilds can claim)
Objective control would give Guild bonuses instead of server bonuses.
Open world PvP would have a level restriction, something like + or - 5 levels (pretty much a must in a level based game)
Sidekick system would not change
The Mist and Battlegrounds Bolster system wouldn't change
PvP Loot would not change
Assuming ALL players want to watch the world burn... is idiotic, you need friends and alliances to accomplish ANYHTING in GW2.
Suggesting i go play Darkfall or something else is about as logical as asking me to go play Toontown Online, its a completely different game with absolutely nothing in common with GW2. Even with FFA mechanics, things like the loot system, the Seige pvp, Bolstering etc etc.. Darkfall has none of that.
I think people don't give enough credit to what players in a self governing political PvP system can accomplish, The world leaders in PvE progression durring Everquest up until PoP was Rallos Zek, the (only) FFA PvP server. In DAOC the threat of ganking on Mordred(Andred) never stopped them from completeing every PvE encounter and still participated in Frontier Keep Seiging.
There is a lot of interesting gameplay that could come from a server like this.
Decide to watch the world burn, become labled as a greifer and go through your days hunting people down for that rare loot you want?
Assist as many as you can to make a name for yourself as a reliable person with future guild prospects?
If you see a fight going on over a DE, who do you help? Do you even help? Do you know what politics are taking place? Which guilds might be more likely to help you or gank you?
ect...
These sorts of interactions which are entirely player fabircated seem a lot more interesting to me than "we rolled on the same server by chance, i guess we're supposed to be friends".
You have nice ideas but what you are asking is for more than just adding a switch of "on" and "off" for pvp, which is quite complicated. For that to work they would have to completely redisign every DE in the game making it so that the way it scales is different(since people will not be always fighting monsters but eachother also) the reward system(Damage done to other players has to be accounted for) and a load of other things.
Listen at the end of the day you are asking in the OP if its possible, like most things IT IS possible to be MADE but it will require a lot of work and development time. This is because arenanet doesnt do things half assedly and reiteriate alot on ideas.
HOWEVER it is very very very unlikely that it will happen. Why? well in your example your asking yourself a question that the developers are in every way avoiding for you to have to ask.
Arenanet has a vision and in it everytime you see a player in the PvE world, i repeat EVERYTIME, you should feel happy and work with him in some way. It may not be the best for some and because of that they may not like it, but its their game and they have every right to show us the experience they want us to experience.
FFA won't happen because it goes against one of the of the main features of guild wars 2, DE. Anet has never been the type to intentionally make half ass design decisions. In gw2, FFA will be more destructive and it would fragment the playerbase and possibly affect WvW.
just think how awesomely bad the shatterer fight would be on a FFA server, boss kills players while other players kill other players. I would jump to that server for short periods of time just to mock up that DE.
edit: FFA will never happen because Anet has said in the pass Everybody is working together and you cannot play an evil character . Just to add the Very niche population of players that like exclusively Pm or FFA and hate other forms of PvP is small enough that its negligible. Also WvW was created to appease to the excitement of a FFA server.
I know FFA PvP servers are the VAST minority but i think theres a good 10,000+ people who would love to have a Rallos Zek / Mordred type server.
NOPE because the Developers at Anet will not bastardize their game and vision just to pul lin a few more box sales.
Really? Because they've already done that with instancing and instant teleportation.
How would an optional server "bastardize" the game? Almost every MMO has a FFA PVP server.
A lot of you "civlized" PvE folks are acting like total snobs. "No it's NOT possible because I don't like it!"
Bastardized? Significantly less instancing, and map travel is a part of GW lore, so those arguments bring into question your actual knowledge of the game right off the bat.
The GW world isn't designed at all for world FFA PvP. Everything about the game is based on cooperation, Us vs. The Dragons. Besides, there's only one faction, how would you even come up with a means for sides? Races against each other? Would have to bastardize the game for that. Completely FFA? Would have to bastardize the game for that.
There are games that type of concept would work... this isn't one of them. It's not going to happen, ever, so don't stress over it. You'll either play or you won't, and no one will care either way.
PvP is a boolean value. On, or off. No rewritten code.
You're wrong, in GW2. Some things to consider: No ally targeting and shared experience and loot for cooperative play, like in dynamic events. If you allow open world PvP you screw with these systems... how can you tell if someone is acting like an ally, helping with a dynamic event, or an enemy and should be taking AoE damage and be targetable?
It's simple. When you're mature enough to handle it, go to the Mists and fight people that can fight back. You'll have all the open world PvP you can handle, and it'll be a challenge.
I never said it wasn't something I would mind having in a server contained all to itself; that's variety, and variety is good. However, that doesn't equal it being possible if the devs don't think it's worthwhile. I'd ask them or post this on GW2Guru, where they regularly read, if you want them to think about it.
As it stands though, they created WvW for a reason.
Hmm... come to think of it, OP would probably soil himself and rage-quit when he went to gank a 1-15 zone and found himself levelled down and wiped out by a couple low-levels.
But again... it would break the system... the work they'd have to do recoding dynamic events for scaling purposes, loot distribution, AoE damage effects, etc are simply not worth it, especially when the Mists beckon.
So i have to laugh at the pvp people defending their right to gank "noobs"
let me just remind you people that the whole POINT of GW2 according to the Devs actions with this game's design is to eliminate all of the negatives of the mmo genre in one game, literally.
separated pve pvp code so when pvp is adjusted pve won't be affected
pve only servers so some idiot won't be hanging out ganking people
none traditional trinity so people can find groups without que times
etc etc
the list goes on, this is just another example of one of those fixes to the genre that anet is doing with this game and it's the reason why it's so exciting to most of us.
Comments
How odd. Most early MMO's who's Dev teams had far fewer resources than most AAA titles today found a way to offer alternate rules model servers.
Lineage 1, UO, AC1, EQ1, EQ2, DAOC and even WOW to name a few. Heck, Mythic not only offered the standard (blue) servers, but had FFA PVP (red) and even a Cooperative (PVE) server which you can argue all day about how successful they were, but many people enjoyed.
I had the most fun on Mordred (FFA PVP) and I am a carebear and in no way a ganker so please watch your sterotypes. In fact I always thought the FFA servers would have been more successful if Mythic had put more resources into it but realized they were small and it wasn't possible.
I was actually looking forward to the terrific FFA PVP server that I was sure Blizzard would be able to provide but realized by the time BC came out they were never going to do it so left them for good.
I guess when more like virtual worlds it made more sense to offer alternate rules model servers, but in todays theme park "games" (and make no mistake, GW2 is more game than world) it is viewed strictly from a business perspective and catering only to the mass market.
Sorrry guys. MMORPG's really were better in the early days, it's not just nostalgia.
Oh yeah, and to all those who want to say GW2 isn't for you, go play something else, too bad, I'm buying it anyways. (And probably complaining about it here on the forums)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
It just wouldnt work with the way end-game PvP and leveling PvE are set up. Although you can level up in the Mists (realm vs realm), so there should be no shortage of open world PvP action while leveling if thats what you want, its just you have to have a side.
How would a FFA PVP server effect anyone who doesn't want to PVP? Faulty logic is faulty.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You can complain and moan all you want and if i find something i dislike i will too, just dont complain about there not being FFA pvp or anything that they havent said they will add to the game.
Only if you can do it well. Adding broken servers wont really help the game in any way. It will instead hurt your name to have half @ssed servers.
While it probably would make a few players happy it have the possibility to turn off a lot of players. Anet can still add them but in that case they really need to make it good.
Sorry, but the entire game focuses on the server being a cooperative community. They aren't going to recode an entirely new game for one server, to cater to a small cross section of gamers that won't play otherwise.
Because MMO Developers have never offered something different post launch, like say alternate rules servers in the past?
Oh yeah, that's right, they have. I think I'll keep complaining, even if there's no chance of it ever doing any good.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Sorry that you can't help but to be completely obtuse about all this, but the fact remains that the entire game revolves around *cooperative* events, requiring a free flow of *cooperative* gamers moving them through them, *working together* to complete them. This cannot exist in a FFA PvP environment. To make it work would require rewriting the fundamental code at the core of the game. Not. Going. To. Happen. I don't know how to say it any clearer.
If you can't accept that, please, take your business eleswhere. No one will care, least of all ArenaNet because you aren't the audience they're marketing to in the first place. I guess that probably chaps your ass, but just man up and deal with it.
Because its impossible to offer an alternate rules server in a game that is focused on cooperative PVP in a faction vs faction setting, oh say like Mythic did with DAOC back in the day?
Oh wait, they were able to.
Please look past the business limitations and consider the possibilities, even if they aren't likely to happen for strictly business reason. (which is why MMO's have lost so much of their charm these days)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Following that reasoning, Anet should provide grindy version of GW2, time sink version of GW2 (no fast travel) and perhaps even PvP progression version of GW2, because there are people who enjoy those alternate rules.
It's bad idea. They focus on single, coherent experience they consider most fun, instead of trying to please everyone, and that's perfectly valid decision (from both business and game design perspective). Loss of focus is one of the main reasons why products fail.
Because GW2 gameplay isn't based on cooperative PVP, it's based on cooperative PVE. The fact that you play server verses server doesn't matter for the cooperative part. people can pvp beside each other in WvW and never have to help each other. Yet you can't do that with the DE's. Furthermore openworld PvP would destroy the DE's because important chain events would never get out of the starting blocks unless 1 guild dominates the entire area. That would make PvP pointless in my opinion due to how massive their presence would need to be.
It's not that it's impossible, it's just that that part of the game world wasn't designed for PvP and as such wouldn't be a perticularly good enviroment for PvP. Now you (and others) may be fine with that, but for how long? How long until you are back on the forums asking for changes to accomodate FFA PvP that will adversely affect, or at the very least take development reasource away from, the PvE experience, which btw, that part of the game has been heavily market as.
Dynamic events are the foundation of the game, the same as DAOC ... oh wait...
They are designed so that players cooperating with one another can complete them.
Every system in the game supports this foundation.
FFA PvP will make many events impossible to complete (if you have to ask why, you've got a really tenuous grip on reality).
To make them completable requires recoding that foundation to allow DEs to be completed in a non-cooperative environment. That or throw out DEs altogether, which makes the game an un-game.
All the mechanics and systems that supported the old foundation will need to be altered to fit into the new one.
The only business limitations here is having *umlimited* time and resources to recode, rebalance, and retest the game to make it playable with the new ruleset, all to support a handful of PvP complainers, for whom WvW just isn't enough.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
Once again I tought it might be something interesting behind this threads name, and again it failed...
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life."
-------------------------------
Some ideas (stolen ideas) that could maybe make an FFA server pretty fun and interesting.
Server wouldnt be on the Elo-Bi Weekly server list.
The servers guilds fight eachother over Keep/Objective controls (would have to increase the amount Guilds can claim)
Objective control would give Guild bonuses instead of server bonuses.
Open world PvP would have a level restriction, something like + or - 5 levels (pretty much a must in a level based game)
Sidekick system would not change
The Mist and Battlegrounds Bolster system wouldn't change
PvP Loot would not change
Assuming ALL players want to watch the world burn... is idiotic, you need friends and alliances to accomplish ANYHTING in GW2.
Suggesting i go play Darkfall or something else is about as logical as asking me to go play Toontown Online, its a completely different game with absolutely nothing in common with GW2. Even with FFA mechanics, things like the loot system, the Seige pvp, Bolstering etc etc.. Darkfall has none of that.
I think people don't give enough credit to what players in a self governing political PvP system can accomplish, The world leaders in PvE progression durring Everquest up until PoP was Rallos Zek, the (only) FFA PvP server. In DAOC the threat of ganking on Mordred(Andred) never stopped them from completeing every PvE encounter and still participated in Frontier Keep Seiging.
There is a lot of interesting gameplay that could come from a server like this.
Decide to watch the world burn, become labled as a greifer and go through your days hunting people down for that rare loot you want?
Assist as many as you can to make a name for yourself as a reliable person with future guild prospects?
If you see a fight going on over a DE, who do you help? Do you even help? Do you know what politics are taking place? Which guilds might be more likely to help you or gank you?
ect...
These sorts of interactions which are entirely player fabircated seem a lot more interesting to me than "we rolled on the same server by chance, i guess we're supposed to be friends".
I guess it's been too many years since i last lit up a j for me to take this topic even half seriously and treat it as a flight of fantasy or pseudo intellectual exercise.
Charr: Outta my way.
Human: What's your problem?
Charr: Your thin skin.
You have nice ideas but what you are asking is for more than just adding a switch of "on" and "off" for pvp, which is quite complicated. For that to work they would have to completely redisign every DE in the game making it so that the way it scales is different(since people will not be always fighting monsters but eachother also) the reward system(Damage done to other players has to be accounted for) and a load of other things.
Listen at the end of the day you are asking in the OP if its possible, like most things IT IS possible to be MADE but it will require a lot of work and development time. This is because arenanet doesnt do things half assedly and reiteriate alot on ideas.
HOWEVER it is very very very unlikely that it will happen. Why? well in your example your asking yourself a question that the developers are in every way avoiding for you to have to ask.
Arenanet has a vision and in it everytime you see a player in the PvE world, i repeat EVERYTIME, you should feel happy and work with him in some way. It may not be the best for some and because of that they may not like it, but its their game and they have every right to show us the experience they want us to experience.
Whatever floats your boat, OP. Arenanet won't do it though. FFA kind of messes too much with their idea about the game.
... I haven't been around much lately, but...
.. when did MMO Exposed change his name? ._.
FFA won't happen because it goes against one of the of the main features of guild wars 2, DE. Anet has never been the type to intentionally make half ass design decisions. In gw2, FFA will be more destructive and it would fragment the playerbase and possibly affect WvW.
just think how awesomely bad the shatterer fight would be on a FFA server, boss kills players while other players kill other players. I would jump to that server for short periods of time just to mock up that DE.
edit: FFA will never happen because Anet has said in the pass Everybody is working together and you cannot play an evil character . Just to add the Very niche population of players that like exclusively Pm or FFA and hate other forms of PvP is small enough that its negligible. Also WvW was created to appease to the excitement of a FFA server.
Bastardized? Significantly less instancing, and map travel is a part of GW lore, so those arguments bring into question your actual knowledge of the game right off the bat.
The GW world isn't designed at all for world FFA PvP. Everything about the game is based on cooperation, Us vs. The Dragons. Besides, there's only one faction, how would you even come up with a means for sides? Races against each other? Would have to bastardize the game for that. Completely FFA? Would have to bastardize the game for that.
There are games that type of concept would work... this isn't one of them. It's not going to happen, ever, so don't stress over it. You'll either play or you won't, and no one will care either way.
Oderint, dum metuant.
You're wrong, in GW2. Some things to consider: No ally targeting and shared experience and loot for cooperative play, like in dynamic events. If you allow open world PvP you screw with these systems... how can you tell if someone is acting like an ally, helping with a dynamic event, or an enemy and should be taking AoE damage and be targetable?
It's simple. When you're mature enough to handle it, go to the Mists and fight people that can fight back. You'll have all the open world PvP you can handle, and it'll be a challenge.
Oderint, dum metuant.
I never said it wasn't something I would mind having in a server contained all to itself; that's variety, and variety is good. However, that doesn't equal it being possible if the devs don't think it's worthwhile. I'd ask them or post this on GW2Guru, where they regularly read, if you want them to think about it.
As it stands though, they created WvW for a reason.
Hmm... come to think of it, OP would probably soil himself and rage-quit when he went to gank a 1-15 zone and found himself levelled down and wiped out by a couple low-levels.
But again... it would break the system... the work they'd have to do recoding dynamic events for scaling purposes, loot distribution, AoE damage effects, etc are simply not worth it, especially when the Mists beckon.
Oderint, dum metuant.
So i have to laugh at the pvp people defending their right to gank "noobs"
let me just remind you people that the whole POINT of GW2 according to the Devs actions with this game's design is to eliminate all of the negatives of the mmo genre in one game, literally.
separated pve pvp code so when pvp is adjusted pve won't be affected
pve only servers so some idiot won't be hanging out ganking people
none traditional trinity so people can find groups without que times
etc etc
the list goes on, this is just another example of one of those fixes to the genre that anet is doing with this game and it's the reason why it's so exciting to most of us.