Love how ppl claim open-world pvp games are doomed to fail. So far from the truth here people.
I can name 20+ L2 servers that have thousands++ of players logged in this very moment on each server... L2 is one of the top played mmorpg world wide currently and all-time. Its playerbase trumps almost every mmo brought up in this thread - on par with wow. Not bad for a 10 year old open-world pvp game.
I just wanted to chime in and say that Ive seen many logical fallacies in this thread from folks commenting about open world pvp. Many points have been unfairly used to illustrate how certain open-world pvp mechanics ruin the games culture. I just wanted to touch on a few of them and set them straight, so those viewing this thread that dont know better are not mislead.
Firstly, I would like to point out that every decent (imo) open-world pvp mmo had game mechanics in play that punished players that full-out pk other players. If you did not want to fight someone that is attacking you, you simply would not attack the player and if the attacking player did kill you, the punishment given to the player far out-weighed the inconvenience of your own death. Players rarely pk others unless they have reason. Open-world pvp does not not create an excessively chaotic atmosphere. No more than real life has open-world pvp, full-loot, the whole cabob. Its not like people are running around shanking eachother at the mall and shiz.
But this is going to be a FTP game...a player can just create a new email which means a new account inside of 5 minutes. Also the idea that open world PvP doesn't invite a player element that get off on creating chaos for others just for the sheet enjoyment of ticking others off....is naive at best.
Also, I have seen many comments in this thread where people say open-world pvp taints the game's culture as result of players pking with intent of looting its victim. Listen... being able to loot a dead player and open-world pvp are not mutually inclusive, as in the one game feature cannot occur without the other. The fact is they rarely do.
It taints the culture only so much as it invites the sort of player I described above...who could care less about community and especially in a FTP game would be near impossible to get rid of and police.
Lastly, "many open-world pvp supporters do not want "pve only" servers". This is true but it is not out of selfishness, as in wanting the pve'ers denied their way or something. Its because they understand that an open-world pvp game cannot work correctly unless the game is designed around the fact that it is open-world pvp. The economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all have to be chosen/designed with consideration that the game is in fact - open-world pvp.
And this is where the PvP point of view on this loses alot of people. So basically you want an entire game created to cater to your ONE gameplay style. Forget about any sort of innovation in other areas, or the wants of the majority, you want it to revolve around PvP. This, in spite of the fact EQ has historically been a PvE game, in spite of the fact that the people who want open world PvP are a small minority of the player base.
Games have been built around PvE and PvP for years, the idea that it can't be done is insanity. Furthermore what would be even more revolutionary is creating a sandbox devoid of any PvP, now that would be unique as there hasn't been on decent sandbox PvE game created since....well...I can't remember.
Bro. I honestly dont know where to start.
Firstly, it doesnt matter if its a free to play game and you can create new accounts all day. Its not like on a paid subsciption, you cant just create and delete players... and besides, who the heck is going to keep leveling up toons, to only ruin them for a few cheap kills? Very very few people.
Secondly bro, about the taint comment, i said full-loot and open-world pvp are not mutually inclusive. Read again and think.
The last thing you commented on. Sorry man but what I wrote is fact. What you said about the small minority of players wanting pvp is false btw. Read what I wrote about L2 private server scene a few comments up.
Originally posted by nerovipus32 They'd be stupid not to have pvp in the game. They should just do it through factions which means you can remain neutral if you don't want to pvp.
I think this is probably the closest to what it will be. Everyone starts as opted out of PvP but can choose to flag for it. You can be flagged for PvP but if someone does attack you then it is a criminal act. You can join a guild or a faction at war and all participants are exempt from any form of punishment against others you are at war with.
So those that don't want any PvP do not flag for it.
Those that do flag for it can either be part of a war or not.
If not part of a war they are still attackable and can attack others but depending on the location it might be considered a crime. So in a secure area it might be a crime but out in the wilds it isn't.
If you flag for PvP and are part of a war it is FFA with enemy guilds/factions.
Everyone gets what they want (except griefers cannot attack anyone who isn't flagged which is good) and no one is forced into a play style they dislike.
If you also introduce player made guilds/factions, player made tools to determine the level of law in an area and tools for law enforcement such as jails, a system of player chosen laws, buildings offering different deterrents to criminals etc... I think you might get close to a system that meets the 'sandbox' criteria without side-lining any single type of game style.
I just wanted to chime in and say that Ive seen many logical fallacies in this thread from folks commenting about open world pvp. Many points have been unfairly used to illustrate how certain open-world pvp mechanics ruin the games culture. I just wanted to touch on a few of them and set them straight, so those viewing this thread that dont know better are not mislead.
Firstly, I would like to point out that every decent (imo) open-world pvp mmo had game mechanics in play that punished players that full-out pk other players. If you did not want to fight someone that is attacking you, you simply would not attack the player and if the attacking player did kill you, the punishment given to the player far out-weighed the inconvenience of your own death. Players rarely pk others unless they have reason. Open-world pvp does not not create an excessively chaotic atmosphere. No more than real life has open-world pvp, full-loot, the whole cabob. Its not like people are running around shanking eachother at the mall and shiz.
But this is going to be a FTP game...a player can just create a new email which means a new account inside of 5 minutes. Also the idea that open world PvP doesn't invite a player element that get off on creating chaos for others just for the sheet enjoyment of ticking others off....is naive at best.
Also, I have seen many comments in this thread where people say open-world pvp taints the game's culture as result of players pking with intent of looting its victim. Listen... being able to loot a dead player and open-world pvp are not mutually inclusive, as in the one game feature cannot occur without the other. The fact is they rarely do.
It taints the culture only so much as it invites the sort of player I described above...who could care less about community and especially in a FTP game would be near impossible to get rid of and police.
Lastly, "many open-world pvp supporters do not want "pve only" servers". This is true but it is not out of selfishness, as in wanting the pve'ers denied their way or something. Its because they understand that an open-world pvp game cannot work correctly unless the game is designed around the fact that it is open-world pvp. The economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all have to be chosen/designed with consideration that the game is in fact - open-world pvp.
And this is where the PvP point of view on this loses alot of people. So basically you want an entire game created to cater to your ONE gameplay style. Forget about any sort of innovation in other areas, or the wants of the majority, you want it to revolve around PvP. This, in spite of the fact EQ has historically been a PvE game, in spite of the fact that the people who want open world PvP are a small minority of the player base.
Games have been built around PvE and PvP for years, the idea that it can't be done is insanity. Furthermore what would be even more revolutionary is creating a sandbox devoid of any PvP, now that would be unique as there hasn't been on decent sandbox PvE game created since....well...I can't remember.
Bro. I honestly dont know where to start.
Firstly, it doesnt matter if its a free to play game and you can create new accounts all day. Its not like on a paid subsciption, you cant just create and delete players... and besides, who the heck is going to keep leveling up toons, to only ruin them for a few cheap kills? Very very few people.
Secondly bro, about the taint comment, i said full-loot and open-world pvp are not mutually inclusive. Read again and think.
The last thing you commented on. Sorry man but what I wrote is fact. What you said about the small minority of players wanting pvp is false btw. Read what I wrote about L2 private server scene a few comments up.
Your first comment doesn't even make sense. Are you suggesting that people would not make new accounts and create new players if they were banned for some reason? I can go right now and create a new email address in 30 seconds and sign up in less than a minute to any number of FTP games out there. With some friends and minimal amount of help you can level pretty easily in all of them. Again I ask what are the ramifications and consequences especially in a FTP game?
As far as open world PvP and full loot PvP...again read what I wrote. Where did I say they were mutually inclusive? I simply said open world PvP done in a FFA way that many have suggested invite an element to a game that most games are better without. I say again EQ is a PvE game with a PvE fan base. SOE isn't in the business of alienating millions of fans by making EQnext a PvP FFA game or designing it around PvP...its just bad business.
And Lastly "bro" Lineage 2 was a huge hit....in Asia. Kinda like saying David Hasselhoff is a global music Icon. Also, You aren't really going to compare private servers from L2 to what they are trying to accomplish with EQnext are you? if you are...there really isn't a reason to discuss this further with you
Sorry, If I want to play in a world of people simply running around killing be so they feel good about themselves, I'll go play LoL
Play what you Like. I like SWOTR, Have a referral to get you going! --> http://www.swtor.com/r/nBndbs <-- Several Unlocks and a few days game time to make the F2P considerably easier
Haven't read a single thing about this game, but let's be honest, there are always going to be those of us who love open pvp, and those who don't. I can not stand quests and dungeons without some sort of thrill to leveling/skilling. Some people feel differently and rather just PVE without that worry. To each their own I suppose, although, I don't see the sense in playing a massive game just to fight AI. Just my opinion.
I just wanted to chime in and say that Ive seen many logical fallacies in this thread from folks commenting about open world pvp. Many points have been unfairly used to illustrate how certain open-world pvp mechanics ruin the games culture. I just wanted to touch on a few of them and set them straight, so those viewing this thread that dont know better are not mislead.
Firstly, I would like to point out that every decent (imo) open-world pvp mmo had game mechanics in play that punished players that full-out pk other players. If you did not want to fight someone that is attacking you, you simply would not attack the player and if the attacking player did kill you, the punishment given to the player far out-weighed the inconvenience of your own death. Players rarely pk others unless they have reason. Open-world pvp does not not create an excessively chaotic atmosphere. No more than real life has open-world pvp, full-loot, the whole cabob. Its not like people are running around shanking eachother at the mall and shiz.
But this is going to be a FTP game...a player can just create a new email which means a new account inside of 5 minutes. Also the idea that open world PvP doesn't invite a player element that get off on creating chaos for others just for the sheet enjoyment of ticking others off....is naive at best.
Also, I have seen many comments in this thread where people say open-world pvp taints the game's culture as result of players pking with intent of looting its victim. Listen... being able to loot a dead player and open-world pvp are not mutually inclusive, as in the one game feature cannot occur without the other. The fact is they rarely do.
It taints the culture only so much as it invites the sort of player I described above...who could care less about community and especially in a FTP game would be near impossible to get rid of and police.
Lastly, "many open-world pvp supporters do not want "pve only" servers". This is true but it is not out of selfishness, as in wanting the pve'ers denied their way or something. Its because they understand that an open-world pvp game cannot work correctly unless the game is designed around the fact that it is open-world pvp. The economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all have to be chosen/designed with consideration that the game is in fact - open-world pvp.
And this is where the PvP point of view on this loses alot of people. So basically you want an entire game created to cater to your ONE gameplay style. Forget about any sort of innovation in other areas, or the wants of the majority, you want it to revolve around PvP. This, in spite of the fact EQ has historically been a PvE game, in spite of the fact that the people who want open world PvP are a small minority of the player base.
Games have been built around PvE and PvP for years, the idea that it can't be done is insanity. Furthermore what would be even more revolutionary is creating a sandbox devoid of any PvP, now that would be unique as there hasn't been on decent sandbox PvE game created since....well...I can't remember.
Bro. I honestly dont know where to start.
Firstly, it doesnt matter if its a free to play game and you can create new accounts all day. Its not like on a paid subsciption, you cant just create and delete players... and besides, who the heck is going to keep leveling up toons, to only ruin them for a few cheap kills? Very very few people.
Secondly bro, about the taint comment, i said full-loot and open-world pvp are not mutually inclusive. Read again and think.
The last thing you commented on. Sorry man but what I wrote is fact. What you said about the small minority of players wanting pvp is false btw. Read what I wrote about L2 private server scene a few comments up.
Your first comment doesn't even make sense. Are you suggesting that people would not make new accounts and create new players if they were banned for some reason? I can go right now and create a new email address in 30 seconds and sign up in less than a minute to any number of FTP games out there. With some friends and minimal amount of help you can level pretty easily in all of them. Again I ask what are the ramifications and consequences especially in a FTP game?
As far as open world PvP and full loot PvP...again read what I wrote. Where did I say they were mutually inclusive? I simply said open world PvP done in a FFA way that many have suggested invite an element to a game that most games are better without. I say again EQ is a PvE game with a PvE fan base. SOE isn't in the business of alienating millions of fans by making EQnext a PvP FFA game or designing it around PvP...its just bad business.
And Lastly "bro" Lineage 2 was a huge hit....in Asia. Kinda like saying David Hasselhoff is a global music Icon. Also, You aren't really going to compare private servers from L2 to what they are trying to accomplish with EQnext are you? if you are...there really isn't a reason to discuss this further with you
Why would someone have their account banned for attacking someone in an open pvp game? Thats rediculous bro.
About the mutually inclusive thing: I simply stated that its not logical to conclude that they were inclusive. I never said full-loot is a good thing or something bro. I actually dislike it myself as well.
And no, L2 was a hit world-wide. Someone missinformed you big-time. L2's most poplular servers were NA in its prime and still are.. So much so that its considered rude to speak in any language but english publically in almost every server, official or private. There are tons of americans, brits, canadians, brazilians, greeks, pols, russians, etc. Asian : non-asian ratio is severely miss-proportioned.
Anyways, I'm done with these pyramid responses. Kinda rude I'm guessing
Originally posted by mrrshann618 Sorry, If I want to play in a world of people simply running around killing be so they feel good about themselves, I'll go play LoL
I fail to see how being turned away from human vs human competition is less insecure than being so.
Lastly, "many open-world pvp supporters do not want "pve only" servers". This is true but it is not out of selfishness, as in wanting the pve'ers denied their way or something. Its because they understand that an open-world pvp game cannot work correctly unless the game is designed around the fact that it is open-world pvp. The economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all have to be chosen/designed with consideration that the game is in fact - open-world pvp.
Although your entire post has been effectively refuted by others, I'd just like to quickly comment on your last paragraph. Your bias is clearly evident when you post that "it is not out of selfishness that PvPers deny PvEers "PvE only" servers, and that it is because they understand that an open-world pvp game cannot work correctly unless the game is designed around the fact that it is open-world pvp. The economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all have to be chosen/designed with consideration that the game is in fact - open-world pvp."
In this regard, are you, for even one minute, under the impression that PvEers do not exercise these same concerns out of their game? Do you not think that PvEers are equally of the opinion that a PvE game would work best if the game was designed around the fact that it is fully PvE oriented, and that the economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all be chosen and designed with consideration that the game is in fact a PvE game."
So why is it that you only see this concern as a PvP concern and not a PvE concern?
The truth of the matter is that PvPers realize that their niche is a small one and in order for their game populations to survive and thrive they must include the masses of PvE gamers. The fact of the matter is that although large game populations are obviously the preferrence in both game styles, there is no doubt that a PvE game is able to better withstand a dwindling player population than a PvP game. This is because PvE games pit players against NPC content, PvE games on the other hand require other warm bodies for their content.
It is primarily because of this reason that the established norm has generally been that PvE do not mind PvP elements in their game so long as it is not forced. PvPers, however, are known to persistently attempt to infiltrate PVE game bases and attempt to impose their non consensual PvP game style on the masses of PvE gamers. Why? Because it increases the prey population exponentially. That is what PvP is all about. Merely that, and nothing more.
Even as we debate this most recent of the PvE vs PvP debate as it relates to EQN, the debate is not whether or not EQN should have open world PvP, it is whether or not that PvP should be consensual or non consensual (Ie., bring me the masses of warm prey, whether they like it or not, because without the masses of sheep to target the game is no fun).
So let's stop it with the bias view points and tell it like it is. There is no shame in facts. Personally, I am both a PvPer and a PvEer. I don not, however, like my PvP in my MMORPGs. If I want to PvP, I will satisfy my PvP craving playing my FPS games. I do, however, believe that PvP and PvE can co-exist. But it has to be done right, and with an objective point of view in mind. We will never accomplish anything slinging around our extremist points of views. The answers do not lie in the outer extremist view points of the spectrum, they lie somewhere in the middle.
Unfortunately, even developers carry these extreme game style biases. It is only when we get developers to finally agree to listen and understand both play styles and concerns from unbiased points of view, and find an equal and fair compromise as it pertains to both play styles, that we will finally have a game that will satisfactorily benefit both play styles.
Lastly, "many open-world pvp supporters do not want "pve only" servers". This is true but it is not out of selfishness, as in wanting the pve'ers denied their way or something. Its because they understand that an open-world pvp game cannot work correctly unless the game is designed around the fact that it is open-world pvp. The economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all have to be chosen/designed with consideration that the game is in fact - open-world pvp.
Although your entire post has been effectively refuted by others, I'd just like to quickly comment on your last paragraph. Your bias is clearly evident when you post that "it is not out of selfishness that PvPers deny PvEers "PvE only" servers, and that it is because they understand that an open-world pvp game cannot work correctly unless the game is designed around the fact that it is open-world pvp. The economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all have to be chosen/designed with consideration that the game is in fact - open-world pvp."
In this regard, are you, for even one minute, under the impression that PvEers do not exercise these same concerns out of their game? Do you not think that PvEers are equally of the opinion that a PvE game would work best if the game was designed around the fact that it is fully PvE oriented, and that the economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all be chosen and designed with consideration that the game is in fact a PvE game."
So why is it that you only see this concern as a PvP concern and not a PvE concern?
The truth of the matter is that PvPers realize that their niche is a small one and in order for their game populations to survive and thrive they must include the masses of PvE gamers. The fact of the matter is that although large game populations are obviously the preferrence in both game styles, there is no doubt that a PvE game is able to better withstand a dwindling player population than a PvP game. This is because PvE games pit players against NPC content, PvE games on the other hand require other warm bodies for their content.
It is primarily because of this reason that the established norm has generally been that PvE do not mind PvP elements in their game so long as it is not forced. PvPers, however, are known to persistently attempt to infiltrate PVE game bases and attempt to impose their non consensual PvP game style on the masses of PvE gamers. Why? Because it increases the prey population exponentially. That is what PvP is all about. Merely that, and nothing more.
Even as we debate this most recent of the PvE vs PvP debate as it relates to EQN, the debate is not whether or not EQN should have open world PvP, it is whether or not that PvP should be consensual or non consensual (Ie., bring me the masses of warm prey, whether they like it or not, because without the masses of sheep to target the game is no fun).
So let's stop it with the bias view points and tell it like it is. There is no shame in facts. Personally, I am both a PvPer and a PvEer. I don not, however, like my PvP in my MMORPGs. If I want to PvP, I will satisfy my PvP craving playing my FPS games. I do, however, believe that PvP and PvE can co-exist. But it has to be done right, and with an objective point of view in mind. We will never accomplish anything slinging around our extremist points of views. The answers do not lie in the outer extremist view points of the spectrum, they lie somewhere in the middle.
Unfortunately, even developers carry these extreme game style biases. It is only when we get developers to finally agree to listen and understand both play styles and concerns from unbiased points of view, and find an equal and fair compromise as it pertains to both play styles, that we will finally have a game that will satisfactorily benefit both play styles.
In response to your highlighted text explaing my supposed biasedness..... I was simply bringing up and stating that "it is not out of selfishness, as in wanting the pve'ers denied their way or something." As in that not being their direct motive.
The motive is they want a pvp game designed around pvp. Not a game designed so there does or does not have to have pvp involoved. If its looked at as selfish, it is, but not their intention for wanting it...
-Wanting a pvp only game because they want the game designed around pvp. Wanting a pvp only game so pve'ers wont have their way. = Totally different motives. If that makes it easier.
Originally posted by mrrshann618 Sorry, If I want to play in a world of people simply running around killing be so they feel good about themselves, I'll go play LoL
I fail to see how being turned away from human vs human competition is less insecure than being so.
I'll play this game if its open-world.
Because non-consesual PvP WILL be about ganking, griefing, smack talk high school style.... pretty much a stereotype of an immature insecure little shit. EVE has these elements like how people will gate camp, go suicide to blow your ship up in high sec, tricking people into flaggin themselves for PvP in high sec, and numerous other things.
True the same can be applied to carebears with nerd raging over loot, drama BS, and whatever else but there is a much higher presence in open world PvP.
Is the discussion surrounding a quote stating "Open world PvP is needed in a sandbox game" (or close to that) and all the PvP nutjobs have come out the closet cheering 'non consensual FFA PvP'? Not even close to the same thing....
Is the discussion surrounding a quote stating "Open world PvP is needed in a sandbox game" (or close to that) and all the PvP nutjobs have come out the closet cheering 'non consensual FFA PvP'? Not even close to the same thing....
Because that is what it looks like to me.
That is because you are right.
People hear what they want to hear...made worse by those people then spreading their opinion as fact and many more believing it. If only such things had happened before we could have learned from them...
Is the discussion surrounding a quote stating "Open world PvP is needed in a sandbox game" (or close to that) and all the PvP nutjobs have come out the closet cheering 'non consensual FFA PvP'? Not even close to the same thing....
Because that is what it looks like to me.
That is because you are right.
People hear what they want to hear...made worse by those people then spreading their opinion as fact and many more believing it. If only such things had happened before we could have learned from them...
Regardless of what people want, the only thing that I think is highly unlikely is EQ Next not having open world PvP. Now what that means, we'll have to wait for August 2nd.
Just cant understand why if you like pvp you dont stick to those exelent pvp games there are loads of.Why do you have the need to harm the fantasy pve games with your whining.Pvp does not need any content so why bother trying to forse pvp in our games?
Originally posted by Vidir Just cant understand why if you like pvp you dont stick to those exelent pvp games there are loads of.Why do you have the need to harm the fantasy pve games with your whining.Pvp does not need any content so why bother trying to forse pvp in our games?
I don't even know how to respond to this. No player can force anything. Whatever EQ Next has, the die has already been cast.
SOE doesn't know how to do PvP, so I'm a tad worried here. I'm sure EQN will be a fairly good PvE game, as SOE's core audience has always been the PvE playerbase. The only time SOE did PvP right was back during the first few years, when they held PvP arena events, and opened Zek servers to let players build the PvP world they enjoyed without too much interference.
Unfortunately SOE let those Zek servers to rot by not patching bugs and exploits, by not balancing classes because their core audience was always the PvE crowd, and they even had a disclaimer telling you if you play on Zek you would get zero customer support. Fast forward to EQ2, SOE somewhat supports PvP in EQ2, but EQ2's PvP has got to be one of the worst PvP experiences I've had in MMO's.
So for the PvP enthusiasts like myself, I'm quite worried about what SOE will do to ruin PvP experiences. And more importantly, what SOE will not do to keep supporting PvP and fix PvP issues, as well as balance classes and items based on PvP. SOE has never done PvP well in the Everquest franchise, so it'll be a first if they do it right with EQ Next.
is it going to be only one huge server with only one ruleset?? if thats the case i dont want non-consensual open world pvp where overpowered gankers one shot me and dont let me progress.
If they add different servers then yes i would make a character in a pve focused server as main, and also have one character in a non-c pvp server just to have some open world pvp and slower progression.
I'm so convinced already. Bring on the open-world, non-consensual PVP.
If the game is good, half of the 500 respondents here will still play it - for whatever that's worth - plus many more players who love PVP. Plus a lot of Playstation 4 gamers who are newer to MMOs and many of whom are competitive folks. The game will flourish.
Comments
Love how ppl claim open-world pvp games are doomed to fail. So far from the truth here people.
I can name 20+ L2 servers that have thousands++ of players logged in this very moment on each server... L2 is one of the top played mmorpg world wide currently and all-time. Its playerbase trumps almost every mmo brought up in this thread - on par with wow. Not bad for a 10 year old open-world pvp game.
Bro. I honestly dont know where to start.
Firstly, it doesnt matter if its a free to play game and you can create new accounts all day. Its not like on a paid subsciption, you cant just create and delete players... and besides, who the heck is going to keep leveling up toons, to only ruin them for a few cheap kills? Very very few people.
Secondly bro, about the taint comment, i said full-loot and open-world pvp are not mutually inclusive. Read again and think.
The last thing you commented on. Sorry man but what I wrote is fact. What you said about the small minority of players wanting pvp is false btw. Read what I wrote about L2 private server scene a few comments up.
I think this is probably the closest to what it will be. Everyone starts as opted out of PvP but can choose to flag for it. You can be flagged for PvP but if someone does attack you then it is a criminal act. You can join a guild or a faction at war and all participants are exempt from any form of punishment against others you are at war with.
So those that don't want any PvP do not flag for it.
Those that do flag for it can either be part of a war or not.
If not part of a war they are still attackable and can attack others but depending on the location it might be considered a crime. So in a secure area it might be a crime but out in the wilds it isn't.
If you flag for PvP and are part of a war it is FFA with enemy guilds/factions.
Everyone gets what they want (except griefers cannot attack anyone who isn't flagged which is good) and no one is forced into a play style they dislike.
If you also introduce player made guilds/factions, player made tools to determine the level of law in an area and tools for law enforcement such as jails, a system of player chosen laws, buildings offering different deterrents to criminals etc... I think you might get close to a system that meets the 'sandbox' criteria without side-lining any single type of game style.
Your first comment doesn't even make sense. Are you suggesting that people would not make new accounts and create new players if they were banned for some reason? I can go right now and create a new email address in 30 seconds and sign up in less than a minute to any number of FTP games out there. With some friends and minimal amount of help you can level pretty easily in all of them. Again I ask what are the ramifications and consequences especially in a FTP game?
As far as open world PvP and full loot PvP...again read what I wrote. Where did I say they were mutually inclusive? I simply said open world PvP done in a FFA way that many have suggested invite an element to a game that most games are better without. I say again EQ is a PvE game with a PvE fan base. SOE isn't in the business of alienating millions of fans by making EQnext a PvP FFA game or designing it around PvP...its just bad business.
And Lastly "bro" Lineage 2 was a huge hit....in Asia. Kinda like saying David Hasselhoff is a global music Icon. Also, You aren't really going to compare private servers from L2 to what they are trying to accomplish with EQnext are you? if you are...there really isn't a reason to discuss this further with you
--> http://www.swtor.com/r/nBndbs <--
Several Unlocks and a few days game time to make the F2P considerably easier
Why would someone have their account banned for attacking someone in an open pvp game? Thats rediculous bro.
About the mutually inclusive thing: I simply stated that its not logical to conclude that they were inclusive. I never said full-loot is a good thing or something bro. I actually dislike it myself as well.
And no, L2 was a hit world-wide. Someone missinformed you big-time. L2's most poplular servers were NA in its prime and still are.. So much so that its considered rude to speak in any language but english publically in almost every server, official or private. There are tons of americans, brits, canadians, brazilians, greeks, pols, russians, etc. Asian : non-asian ratio is severely miss-proportioned.
Anyways, I'm done with these pyramid responses. Kinda rude I'm guessing
I fail to see how being turned away from human vs human competition is less insecure than being so.
I'll play this game if its open-world.
Isnt it going to be F2P, im sure most mmo players will try it even if they say they wont.
Although your entire post has been effectively refuted by others, I'd just like to quickly comment on your last paragraph. Your bias is clearly evident when you post that "it is not out of selfishness that PvPers deny PvEers "PvE only" servers, and that it is because they understand that an open-world pvp game cannot work correctly unless the game is designed around the fact that it is open-world pvp. The economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all have to be chosen/designed with consideration that the game is in fact - open-world pvp."
In this regard, are you, for even one minute, under the impression that PvEers do not exercise these same concerns out of their game? Do you not think that PvEers are equally of the opinion that a PvE game would work best if the game was designed around the fact that it is fully PvE oriented, and that the economy, class selection, balance and general game features, and major development decisions all be chosen and designed with consideration that the game is in fact a PvE game."
So why is it that you only see this concern as a PvP concern and not a PvE concern?
The truth of the matter is that PvPers realize that their niche is a small one and in order for their game populations to survive and thrive they must include the masses of PvE gamers. The fact of the matter is that although large game populations are obviously the preferrence in both game styles, there is no doubt that a PvE game is able to better withstand a dwindling player population than a PvP game. This is because PvE games pit players against NPC content, PvE games on the other hand require other warm bodies for their content.
It is primarily because of this reason that the established norm has generally been that PvE do not mind PvP elements in their game so long as it is not forced. PvPers, however, are known to persistently attempt to infiltrate PVE game bases and attempt to impose their non consensual PvP game style on the masses of PvE gamers. Why? Because it increases the prey population exponentially. That is what PvP is all about. Merely that, and nothing more.
Even as we debate this most recent of the PvE vs PvP debate as it relates to EQN, the debate is not whether or not EQN should have open world PvP, it is whether or not that PvP should be consensual or non consensual (Ie., bring me the masses of warm prey, whether they like it or not, because without the masses of sheep to target the game is no fun).
So let's stop it with the bias view points and tell it like it is. There is no shame in facts. Personally, I am both a PvPer and a PvEer. I don not, however, like my PvP in my MMORPGs. If I want to PvP, I will satisfy my PvP craving playing my FPS games. I do, however, believe that PvP and PvE can co-exist. But it has to be done right, and with an objective point of view in mind. We will never accomplish anything slinging around our extremist points of views. The answers do not lie in the outer extremist view points of the spectrum, they lie somewhere in the middle.
Unfortunately, even developers carry these extreme game style biases. It is only when we get developers to finally agree to listen and understand both play styles and concerns from unbiased points of view, and find an equal and fair compromise as it pertains to both play styles, that we will finally have a game that will satisfactorily benefit both play styles.
oh look seems like non-consensual PvP is not that niche after all!
who had thought that.
Hey Smed make it happen, we need a real sandbox not a half baked lukewarm sandcake
In response to your highlighted text explaing my supposed biasedness..... I was simply bringing up and stating that "it is not out of selfishness, as in wanting the pve'ers denied their way or something." As in that not being their direct motive.
The motive is they want a pvp game designed around pvp. Not a game designed so there does or does not have to have pvp involoved. If its looked at as selfish, it is, but not their intention for wanting it...
-Wanting a pvp only game because they want the game designed around pvp. Wanting a pvp only game so pve'ers wont have their way. = Totally different motives. If that makes it easier.
Because non-consesual PvP WILL be about ganking, griefing, smack talk high school style.... pretty much a stereotype of an immature insecure little shit. EVE has these elements like how people will gate camp, go suicide to blow your ship up in high sec, tricking people into flaggin themselves for PvP in high sec, and numerous other things.
True the same can be applied to carebears with nerd raging over loot, drama BS, and whatever else but there is a much higher presence in open world PvP.
Can someone clarify.
Is the discussion surrounding a quote stating "Open world PvP is needed in a sandbox game" (or close to that) and all the PvP nutjobs have come out the closet cheering 'non consensual FFA PvP'? Not even close to the same thing....
Because that is what it looks like to me.
That is because you are right.
People hear what they want to hear...made worse by those people then spreading their opinion as fact and many more believing it. If only such things had happened before we could have learned from them...
Regardless of what people want, the only thing that I think is highly unlikely is EQ Next not having open world PvP. Now what that means, we'll have to wait for August 2nd.
I don't even know how to respond to this. No player can force anything. Whatever EQ Next has, the die has already been cast.
SOE doesn't know how to do PvP, so I'm a tad worried here. I'm sure EQN will be a fairly good PvE game, as SOE's core audience has always been the PvE playerbase. The only time SOE did PvP right was back during the first few years, when they held PvP arena events, and opened Zek servers to let players build the PvP world they enjoyed without too much interference.
Unfortunately SOE let those Zek servers to rot by not patching bugs and exploits, by not balancing classes because their core audience was always the PvE crowd, and they even had a disclaimer telling you if you play on Zek you would get zero customer support. Fast forward to EQ2, SOE somewhat supports PvP in EQ2, but EQ2's PvP has got to be one of the worst PvP experiences I've had in MMO's.
So for the PvP enthusiasts like myself, I'm quite worried about what SOE will do to ruin PvP experiences. And more importantly, what SOE will not do to keep supporting PvP and fix PvP issues, as well as balance classes and items based on PvP. SOE has never done PvP well in the Everquest franchise, so it'll be a first if they do it right with EQ Next.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
is it going to be only one huge server with only one ruleset?? if thats the case i dont want non-consensual open world pvp where overpowered gankers one shot me and dont let me progress.
If they add different servers then yes i would make a character in a pve focused server as main, and also have one character in a non-c pvp server just to have some open world pvp and slower progression.
I'm so convinced already. Bring on the open-world, non-consensual PVP.
If the game is good, half of the 500 respondents here will still play it - for whatever that's worth - plus many more players who love PVP. Plus a lot of Playstation 4 gamers who are newer to MMOs and many of whom are competitive folks. The game will flourish.
EQN will not have full pvp loot, not a SOE trait.
....Being Banned from MMORPG's forums since 2010, for Trolling the Trolls!!!