Open World PVP is niche not because people inherently dislike risk. It is niche because of the track record of the PVPers themselves. Given an inch, they take a mile.
Crafting, exploring, socializing, questing...all those activities build community. PVP can build community as well, if it occurs in the context of being just one of many enjoyable activities.
But "hard-core" PVPers want to do one thing, and one thing only - kill everything that moves. They could care less about the rest of the game, other game systems, lore, server population. It is kill, kill, kill, 24/7 and 365, and usually of the RPK style where anyone who is not you is fair game at anytime.
The natural result was what happened to old UO - they had to create Trammel to keep players from leaving.
When they created original UO, they thought open world PVP would work because people would kill for a reason, for a purpose, as part of their character's story, world politics, etc. They didn't expect the mindless Pavlovian slaughtering that actually occurred.
Same thing with wildlife. Raph Koster and company tried to design an ecosystem. Then they watched with jaws agape as people just fanned out like locusts attacking everything, regardless of whether they needed meat, hides, etc. Kill, kill, kill. Because I can hit something with this sword, I MUST hit something!
We have themeparks because people cannot or will not control themselves. Hence, few companies outside the niche in their right mind have completely open world PVP. Even Eve has safe areas.
Maybe EQN can square the circle. If so, hats off to them. I would support open world PVP if it was something that made for an interesting game world. If its the usual herd of psychopath zombies - no thanks.
Smart post here
Yup that was a truly eye opening post and one that I agree with 100% as through 14 years of MMO gameplay that mentality has been the rule rather then the exception. No matter how many people come here claiming FFA PvP is good for a game or how many of these so called aficionados of PvP claim risk versus reward is inherently pure gaming.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Open World PVP is niche not because people inherently dislike risk. It is niche because of the track record of the PVPers themselves. Given an inch, they take a mile.
Crafting, exploring, socializing, questing...all those activities build community. PVP can build community as well, if it occurs in the context of being just one of many enjoyable activities.
But "hard-core" PVPers want to do one thing, and one thing only - kill everything that moves. They could care less about the rest of the game, other game systems, lore, server population. It is kill, kill, kill, 24/7 and 365, and usually of the RPK style where anyone who is not you is fair game at anytime.
The natural result was what happened to old UO - they had to create Trammel to keep players from leaving.
When they created original UO, they thought open world PVP would work because people would kill for a reason, for a purpose, as part of their character's story, world politics, etc. They didn't expect the mindless Pavlovian slaughtering that actually occurred.
Same thing with wildlife. Raph Koster and company tried to design an ecosystem. Then they watched with jaws agape as people just fanned out like locusts attacking everything, regardless of whether they needed meat, hides, etc. Kill, kill, kill. Because I can hit something with this sword, I MUST hit something!
We have themeparks because people cannot or will not control themselves. Hence, few companies outside the niche in their right mind have completely open world PVP. Even Eve has safe areas.
Maybe EQN can square the circle. If so, hats off to them. I would support open world PVP if it was something that made for an interesting game world. If its the usual herd of psychopath zombies - no thanks.
Except not.
Eve proves the first two paragraphs of your dribble to be not only wrong, but factually so incorrect its not funny. EVE is open pvp, even if safe zones you still get ganked. Its full loot, player driven sandbox, yet not every single player in eve who is a hardcore pvp'r just pirates all day long.
Andred, and Mordred proved that wrong also. Although population and other changes would ruin the pvp environment there, you still have complete guilds of "protectors" and guilds of "gankers" both filled to the brim with "hard core pvprs" The problem is here that people like you, preconceived notions and all want it ALL. You aren't happy that 99.5% of the market is care bear, theme park no risk, no life, no story bs because its easy for you to just faceroll through it so you have to change ANY game on the market coming out with as much of this non factual spewage as you can in hopes you can rally the other drones in an attempt to change a game before you even try it.
Also, you can say you would support an open world pvp "if it does this, or that" all you want, but the blatant mis-characterization of pvp'rs and the cherry picking of systems you find to be a problem while ignoring ones that work, won't actually make those of us who do love pvp believe you anymore.
Except he is 100% right and it isn't drivel because posts like his exist and Themepark games exist. The day that a forced FFA PvP game comes out with sever limitations in restrictions is the day I will buy your argument.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Originally posted by strangiato2112 Originally posted by Ehliya Open World PVP is niche not because people inherently dislike risk. It is niche because of the track record of the PVPers themselves. Given an inch, they take a mile.Crafting, exploring, socializing, questing...all those activities build community. PVP can build community as well, if it occurs in the context of being just one of many enjoyable activities.But "hard-core" PVPers want to do one thing, and one thing only - kill everything that moves. They could care less about the rest of the game, other game systems, lore, server population. It is kill, kill, kill, 24/7 and 365, and usually of the RPK style where anyone who is not you is fair game at anytime.The natural result was what happened to old UO - they had to create Trammel to keep players from leaving. When they created original UO, they thought open world PVP would work because people would kill for a reason, for a purpose, as part of their character's story, world politics, etc. They didn't expect the mindless Pavlovian slaughtering that actually occurred.Same thing with wildlife. Raph Koster and company tried to design an ecosystem. Then they watched with jaws agape as people just fanned out like locusts attacking everything, regardless of whether they needed meat, hides, etc. Kill, kill, kill. Because I can hit something with this sword, I MUST hit something!We have themeparks because people cannot or will not control themselves. Hence, few companies outside the niche in their right mind have completely open world PVP. Even Eve has safe areas.Maybe EQN can square the circle. If so, hats off to them. I would support open world PVP if it was something that made for an interesting game world. If its the usual herd of psychopath zombies - no thanks.
Smart post here
Yup that was a truly eye opening post and one that I agree with 100% as through 14 years of MMO gameplay that mentality has been the rule rather then the exception. No matter how many people come here claiming FFA PvP is good for a game or how many of these so called aficionados of PvP claim risk versus reward is inherently pure gaming.
Also agree. The reason why ffa PvP games don't work is because of the players. The type of players that are attracted to a ffa PvP game are the ones that revel in griefing others to get their jollys and don't contribute anything else to the game or community, just want to kill players or otherwise cause them hassle
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
Open World PVP is niche not because people inherently dislike risk. It is niche because of the track record of the PVPers themselves. Given an inch, they take a mile.
Crafting, exploring, socializing, questing...all those activities build community. PVP can build community as well, if it occurs in the context of being just one of many enjoyable activities.
But "hard-core" PVPers want to do one thing, and one thing only - kill everything that moves. They could care less about the rest of the game, other game systems, lore, server population. It is kill, kill, kill, 24/7 and 365, and usually of the RPK style where anyone who is not you is fair game at anytime.
The natural result was what happened to old UO - they had to create Trammel to keep players from leaving.
When they created original UO, they thought open world PVP would work because people would kill for a reason, for a purpose, as part of their character's story, world politics, etc. They didn't expect the mindless Pavlovian slaughtering that actually occurred.
Same thing with wildlife. Raph Koster and company tried to design an ecosystem. Then they watched with jaws agape as people just fanned out like locusts attacking everything, regardless of whether they needed meat, hides, etc. Kill, kill, kill. Because I can hit something with this sword, I MUST hit something!
We have themeparks because people cannot or will not control themselves. Hence, few companies outside the niche in their right mind have completely open world PVP. Even Eve has safe areas.
Maybe EQN can square the circle. If so, hats off to them. I would support open world PVP if it was something that made for an interesting game world. If its the usual herd of psychopath zombies - no thanks.
Except not.
Eve proves the first two paragraphs of your dribble to be not only wrong, but factually so incorrect its not funny. EVE is open pvp, even if safe zones you still get ganked. Its full loot, player driven sandbox, yet not every single player in eve who is a hardcore pvp'r just pirates all day long.
Andred, and Mordred proved that wrong also. Although population and other changes would ruin the pvp environment there, you still have complete guilds of "protectors" and guilds of "gankers" both filled to the brim with "hard core pvprs" The problem is here that people like you, preconceived notions and all want it ALL. You aren't happy that 99.5% of the market is care bear, theme park no risk, no life, no story bs because its easy for you to just faceroll through it so you have to change ANY game on the market coming out with as much of this non factual spewage as you can in hopes you can rally the other drones in an attempt to change a game before you even try it.
Also, you can say you would support an open world pvp "if it does this, or that" all you want, but the blatant mis-characterization of pvp'rs and the cherry picking of systems you find to be a problem while ignoring ones that work, won't actually make those of us who do love pvp believe you anymore.
Except he is 100% right and it isn't drivel because posts like his exist and Themepark games exist. The day that a forced FFA PvP game comes out with sever limitations in restrictions is the day I will buy your argument.
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
Open World PVP is niche not because people inherently dislike risk. It is niche because of the track record of the PVPers themselves. Given an inch, they take a mile.
Crafting, exploring, socializing, questing...all those activities build community. PVP can build community as well, if it occurs in the context of being just one of many enjoyable activities.
But "hard-core" PVPers want to do one thing, and one thing only - kill everything that moves. They could care less about the rest of the game, other game systems, lore, server population. It is kill, kill, kill, 24/7 and 365, and usually of the RPK style where anyone who is not you is fair game at anytime.
The natural result was what happened to old UO - they had to create Trammel to keep players from leaving.
When they created original UO, they thought open world PVP would work because people would kill for a reason, for a purpose, as part of their character's story, world politics, etc. They didn't expect the mindless Pavlovian slaughtering that actually occurred.
Same thing with wildlife. Raph Koster and company tried to design an ecosystem. Then they watched with jaws agape as people just fanned out like locusts attacking everything, regardless of whether they needed meat, hides, etc. Kill, kill, kill. Because I can hit something with this sword, I MUST hit something!
We have themeparks because people cannot or will not control themselves. Hence, few companies outside the niche in their right mind have completely open world PVP. Even Eve has safe areas.
Maybe EQN can square the circle. If so, hats off to them. I would support open world PVP if it was something that made for an interesting game world. If its the usual herd of psychopath zombies - no thanks.
Smart post here
Yup that was a truly eye opening post and one that I agree with 100% as through 14 years of MMO gameplay that mentality has been the rule rather then the exception. No matter how many people come here claiming FFA PvP is good for a game or how many of these so called aficionados of PvP claim risk versus reward is inherently pure gaming.
Also agree. The reason why ffa PvP games don't work is because of the players. The type of players that are attracted to a ffa PvP game are the ones that revel in griefing others to get their jollys and don't contribute anything else to the game or community, just want to kill players or otherwise cause them hassle
Want to throw in my support for Ehliya's post as well.
I am a PKer myself in and I love FFA PvP but to most people's surprise I am also an RPer, so my kills are always for some kind of purpose.
This can exist. This can occur, as long as the devs create an atmosphere where this works. Usually that means realistic discouragement for those who would seek to murder indiscriminately.
This means crime AND punishment, but not just red-flagging or anything like that. Create a world where just because something is possible, doesn't mean it's encouraged.
I think Louis CK says this a lot better than me, but basically the gist can be applied to an FFA MMO. There needs to be LAW that is ENFORCED and creates a real CHALLENGE for PKers such as myself. If I want to murder and rob people, I should make that choice with the full understanding that I am choosing likely the most dangerous, challenging path the game has to offer.
Open World PVP is niche not because people inherently dislike risk. It is niche because of the track record of the PVPers themselves. Given an inch, they take a mile.
Crafting, exploring, socializing, questing...all those activities build community. PVP can build community as well, if it occurs in the context of being just one of many enjoyable activities.
But "hard-core" PVPers want to do one thing, and one thing only - kill everything that moves. They could care less about the rest of the game, other game systems, lore, server population. It is kill, kill, kill, 24/7 and 365, and usually of the RPK style where anyone who is not you is fair game at anytime.
The natural result was what happened to old UO - they had to create Trammel to keep players from leaving.
When they created original UO, they thought open world PVP would work because people would kill for a reason, for a purpose, as part of their character's story, world politics, etc. They didn't expect the mindless Pavlovian slaughtering that actually occurred.
Same thing with wildlife. Raph Koster and company tried to design an ecosystem. Then they watched with jaws agape as people just fanned out like locusts attacking everything, regardless of whether they needed meat, hides, etc. Kill, kill, kill. Because I can hit something with this sword, I MUST hit something!
We have themeparks because people cannot or will not control themselves. Hence, few companies outside the niche in their right mind have completely open world PVP. Even Eve has safe areas.
Maybe EQN can square the circle. If so, hats off to them. I would support open world PVP if it was something that made for an interesting game world. If its the usual herd of psychopath zombies - no thanks.
Except not.
Eve proves the first two paragraphs of your dribble to be not only wrong, but factually so incorrect its not funny. EVE is open pvp, even if safe zones you still get ganked. Its full loot, player driven sandbox, yet not every single player in eve who is a hardcore pvp'r just pirates all day long.
Andred, and Mordred proved that wrong also. Although population and other changes would ruin the pvp environment there, you still have complete guilds of "protectors" and guilds of "gankers" both filled to the brim with "hard core pvprs" The problem is here that people like you, preconceived notions and all want it ALL. You aren't happy that 99.5% of the market is care bear, theme park no risk, no life, no story bs because its easy for you to just faceroll through it so you have to change ANY game on the market coming out with as much of this non factual spewage as you can in hopes you can rally the other drones in an attempt to change a game before you even try it.
Also, you can say you would support an open world pvp "if it does this, or that" all you want, but the blatant mis-characterization of pvp'rs and the cherry picking of systems you find to be a problem while ignoring ones that work, won't actually make those of us who do love pvp believe you anymore.
Except he is 100% right and it isn't drivel because posts like his exist and Themepark games exist. The day that a forced FFA PvP game comes out with sever limitations in restrictions is the day I will buy your argument.
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
That's because those games all consist of like minded individuals. Hence the reason why they are inherently small in dynamics and even smaller is player size. Even Eve the best PvP MMO (which I would argue isn't really an MMO In the traditional sense but that's for another topic altogether) the majority of the player base spends their time in Hi Sec.
I have zero percent of the market to choose from because there's not ONE single PvE focused Sandbox game. Plus I am almost 100% sure that EQN is not going to be a FFA PvP game. But we'll all see on August 2nd.
I do play some of those games but they are not what I want out an MMO, what I want out of an MMO is divergent gameplay, polish, longevity and a PvE centric world. PvP can be included but it should be consensual.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
The irony is actually that you are accusing the PvE sandbox crowd of doing the EXACT thing you are doing: Instead of being happy with the fact that the current sandbox options are PvP, you have to gang together to try to make a PvE franchise embrace PvP too.
Furthermore, everyone seems to support having a FFA PvP server anyway, even though the other games dont have a PvE server.
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
Thing is most of the PvE'er posts have been a 'Don't care as long as I can opt out' sorta post, while a lot of the PvPer posts have been "Everyone should have to PvP"
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
Thing is most of the PvE'er posts have been a 'Don't care as long as I can opt out' sorta post, while a lot of the PvPer posts have been "Everyone should have to PvP"
and? Like others have said, pvp'rs know what happens when you take an open world pvp game and break it down for the 99.5% of the market who are care bears, no one is asking that you don't care bear, we are asking that you let ONE game this millenium get made with the original design intent for pvp before crying the world is ending because we got ONE game in the next 3 years that offers it.
So what happens? The game turns out like crap, both for the pve crowd and pvp crowd because they try to make both sides happy. so instead, how about you let the pvprs have their game for a month or two then when it fails you come here laughing at all of us instead of never letting those systems see the light of the day because of the care bear crusades that happen during alpha, beta and launch.
I guess I don't understand why the pvprs have to be the ones to just give up all their wants and desires for a game just because the largest group who already has the largest pool of GREAT games to play from has to have EVERY single game that hits the horizon to be an exact copy of the ones previous to it.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
Thing is most of the PvE'er posts have been a 'Don't care as long as I can opt out' sorta post, while a lot of the PvPer posts have been "Everyone should have to PvP"
I think if a fantasy MMO could find the same balance that EVE did with its security levels, where PvP isn't opt-out but if you stay in certain places the chances of you being attacked are incredibly low. You CAN be attacked at any time, but depending on where you are, you can be "safe." Makes more sense that way IMO.
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
The irony is actually that you are accusing the PvE sandbox crowd of doing the EXACT thing you are doing: Instead of being happy with the fact that the current sandbox options are PvP, you have to gang together to try to make a PvE franchise embrace PvP too.
Furthermore, everyone seems to support having a FFA PvP server anyway, even though the other games dont have a PvE server.
except Smedly said this game isn't going to be a franchise game, its a reboot. so yea. next argument please? You want a reboot with better graphics, choose from the myriad of other games on the market today that fit that same genre of playstyle!
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
Thing is most of the PvE'er posts have been a 'Don't care as long as I can opt out' sorta post, while a lot of the PvPer posts have been "Everyone should have to PvP"
I think if a fantasy MMO could find the same balance that EVE did with its security levels, where PvP isn't opt-out but if you stay in certain places the chances of you being attacked are incredibly low. You CAN be attacked at any time, but depending on where you are, you can be "safe." Makes more sense that way IMO.
Anarchy Online - They had suppression levels in areas. Some were 0 suppression which you could attack or be attacked, some were 25% where you had to flag yourself by shooting an opposing factions tower or flagged player. It worked well and the fact that these areas were built so there wasn't a major reason to head into them unless you wanted to was even better.
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
I guess I don't understand why the pvprs have to be the ones to just give up all their wants and desires for a game just because the largest group who already has the largest pool of GREAT games to play from has to have EVERY single game that hits the horizon to be an exact copy of the ones previous to it.
Ya if it is ffa pvp I will not play it, now if it lewts you flag your self like swg did then I would give it a try I should not have to pvp if I dont want to if I did I would be playing darkfall.
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
The irony is actually that you are accusing the PvE sandbox crowd of doing the EXACT thing you are doing: Instead of being happy with the fact that the current sandbox options are PvP, you have to gang together to try to make a PvE franchise embrace PvP too.
Furthermore, everyone seems to support having a FFA PvP server anyway, even though the other games dont have a PvE server.
except Smedly said this game isn't going to be a franchise game, its a reboot. so yea. next argument please? You want a reboot with better graphics, choose from the myriad of other games on the market today that fit that same genre of playstyle!
Actually he never said its not going to be 'franchise game'. He said it was the next game in the franchise and they wanted it to be different from the previous two games as well as a majority of what we have on the market today.
The game is still part of the EQ franchise, they are banking on the name recognition to draw people in, they said the game would be familiar while being different at the same time. They said players would be able to choose how they live in the world and won't be told how to live by the developer/content.
There are 3 types of people in the world. 1.) Those who make things happen 2.) Those who watch things happen 3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
Thing is most of the PvE'er posts have been a 'Don't care as long as I can opt out' sorta post, while a lot of the PvPer posts have been "Everyone should have to PvP"
I think if a fantasy MMO could find the same balance that EVE did with its security levels, where PvP isn't opt-out but if you stay in certain places the chances of you being attacked are incredibly low. You CAN be attacked at any time, but depending on where you are, you can be "safe." Makes more sense that way IMO.
Anarchy Online - They had suppression levels in areas. Some were 0 suppression which you could attack or be attacked, some were 25% where you had to flag yourself by shooting an opposing factions tower or flagged player. It worked well and the fact that these areas were built so there wasn't a major reason to head into them unless you wanted to was even better.
No see that's the kind of thing I would want to avoid, some arbitrary mechanic that suppresses PvP. PvP should always be possible, but without consent from another player or in the situation of a war, it should rarely be encouraged or a smart thing to try and do.
Like real life: where you CAN kill anyone you want anytime you want. But doing so is for the most part a REALLY bad idea.
I guess I don't understand why the pvprs have to be the ones to just give up all their wants and desires for a game just because the largest group who already has the largest pool of GREAT games to play from has to have EVERY single game that hits the horizon to be an exact copy of the ones previous to it.
Where is the developer supported PvE sandbox?
I can name several PvP ones...
Of course not because the ones they try to put out you carebears drop after 2 months like a bad habit *(Cough SWG, Asherons Call, etc anyone?)* or get so radically changed in beta because it doesn't follow the hold your hand themepark that they change it.
Hence my argument from post #1. Let change actually have a chance before you denounce how bad it is!
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
The irony is actually that you are accusing the PvE sandbox crowd of doing the EXACT thing you are doing: Instead of being happy with the fact that the current sandbox options are PvP, you have to gang together to try to make a PvE franchise embrace PvP too.
Furthermore, everyone seems to support having a FFA PvP server anyway, even though the other games dont have a PvE server.
except Smedly said this game isn't going to be a franchise game, its a reboot. so yea. next argument please? You want a reboot with better graphics, choose from the myriad of other games on the market today that fit that same genre of playstyle!
Actually he never said its not going to be 'franchise game'. He said it was the next game in the franchise and they wanted it to be different from the previous two games as well as a majority of what we have on the market today.
The game is still part of the EQ franchise, they are banking on the name recognition to draw people in, they said the game would be familiar while being different at the same time. They said players would be able to choose how they live in the world and won't be told how to live by the developer/content.
and you can still choose in eve how to live with out being told by the developers and guess what *GASP* its an open pvp non consensual sandbox OMGRRRRD!!! Why didn't the world end?!
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
except Smedly said this game isn't going to be a franchise game, its a reboot. so yea. next argument please? You want a reboot with better graphics, choose from the myriad of other games on the market today that fit that same genre of playstyle!
So "Everquest Next" is not going to be a part of the "Everquest" franchise? talk about a bait and switch...
Ugh, people are reading way to much into the tidbits that have been dropped. Mass assumptions happening on both sides of the fence. I assume EQN will be PvE primarily, because it's EQ. When someone credible states that they are indeed going to ignore their current client base and pursue a game built upon open world pvp from the ground up, I'll change my mind. Until then logic dictates that the third game in a series will be in the same vein as the previous two, it further dictates that they won't throw away the free money from the client base the EQ franchise has built over the last ten years.
I guess I don't understand why the pvprs have to be the ones to just give up all their wants and desires for a game just because the largest group who already has the largest pool of GREAT games to play from has to have EVERY single game that hits the horizon to be an exact copy of the ones previous to it.
Where is the developer supported PvE sandbox?
I can name several PvP ones...
Exactly. There are Zero PvE focused Sandbox games to choose from where if I was into PvP I could choose Eve, Darkfall, Mortal Online and soon ArcheAge, Repopulation, Star Citizen and CU.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I guess I don't understand why the pvprs have to be the ones to just give up all their wants and desires for a game just because the largest group who already has the largest pool of GREAT games to play from has to have EVERY single game that hits the horizon to be an exact copy of the ones previous to it.
Where is the developer supported PvE sandbox?
I can name several PvP ones...
Of course not because the ones they try to put out you carebears drop after 2 months like a bad habit *(Cough SWG, Asherons Call, etc anyone?)* or get so radically changed in beta because it doesn't follow the hold your hand themepark that they change it.
Hence my argument from post #1. Let change actually have a chance before you denounce how bad it is!
SWG: not around anymore. And it failed when it tried to go themepark, but was doing pretty well as a very broken sandbox.
AC: open world, non themepark. It is NOT a sandbox
except Smedly said this game isn't going to be a franchise game, its a reboot. so yea. next argument please? You want a reboot with better graphics, choose from the myriad of other games on the market today that fit that same genre of playstyle!
So "Everquest Next" is not going to be a part of the "Everquest" franchise? talk about a bait and switch...
Not in the way the poster I was quoting was referring no, its not. They are not taking design implementations from the previous franchise years and rebuilding it, they are starting from scratch with some of the lore and making a completely new experience in the mmo marketplace.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
Comments
Yup that was a truly eye opening post and one that I agree with 100% as through 14 years of MMO gameplay that mentality has been the rule rather then the exception. No matter how many people come here claiming FFA PvP is good for a game or how many of these so called aficionados of PvP claim risk versus reward is inherently pure gaming.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Except he is 100% right and it isn't drivel because posts like his exist and Themepark games exist. The day that a forced FFA PvP game comes out with sever limitations in restrictions is the day I will buy your argument.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Smart post here
Yup that was a truly eye opening post and one that I agree with 100% as through 14 years of MMO gameplay that mentality has been the rule rather then the exception. No matter how many people come here claiming FFA PvP is good for a game or how many of these so called aficionados of PvP claim risk versus reward is inherently pure gaming.
Also agree. The reason why ffa PvP games don't work is because of the players. The type of players that are attracted to a ffa PvP game are the ones that revel in griefing others to get their jollys and don't contribute anything else to the game or community, just want to kill players or otherwise cause them hassleCluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
opinions don't make fact, no matter how you try and make it so by plugging your ears and screaming no no no pvp is baaaaad mkaaaay! The truth is, in every game where open pvp was the intent from the start these mechanics have not been a problem but for the smallest of percentage of players, its only the games who try to implement open world pvp in a theme park setting that wasn't originally designed for it do these balance issues exist.
So I said before:
You have 99.5% of the market to choose from, quit trying to mangina up the one game coming out in the next couple of years with some actual vision to change the oversimplified facebook online for sheeple genre of mmo gaming. You want to be a perfect little carebear protected from evil?
play: WoW, Gw2, Rift, Secret World, WAR, FF XIV, Neverwinter, STO, EQ, EQ2, Perfect World, Wildstar, etc etc etc etc etc and let ONE fn game this century have a CHANCE at actually changing your mind before you throw it in the mud with your little tantrums and falsehoods over pvp or those who enjoy the gameplay style.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
Want to throw in my support for Ehliya's post as well.
I am a PKer myself in and I love FFA PvP but to most people's surprise I am also an RPer, so my kills are always for some kind of purpose.
This can exist. This can occur, as long as the devs create an atmosphere where this works. Usually that means realistic discouragement for those who would seek to murder indiscriminately.
This means crime AND punishment, but not just red-flagging or anything like that. Create a world where just because something is possible, doesn't mean it's encouraged.
I think Louis CK says this a lot better than me, but basically the gist can be applied to an FFA MMO. There needs to be LAW that is ENFORCED and creates a real CHALLENGE for PKers such as myself. If I want to murder and rob people, I should make that choice with the full understanding that I am choosing likely the most dangerous, challenging path the game has to offer.
EVERYONE in this argument needs to watch this: IF MURDER WAS LEGAL
That's because those games all consist of like minded individuals. Hence the reason why they are inherently small in dynamics and even smaller is player size. Even Eve the best PvP MMO (which I would argue isn't really an MMO In the traditional sense but that's for another topic altogether) the majority of the player base spends their time in Hi Sec.
I have zero percent of the market to choose from because there's not ONE single PvE focused Sandbox game. Plus I am almost 100% sure that EQN is not going to be a FFA PvP game. But we'll all see on August 2nd.
I do play some of those games but they are not what I want out an MMO, what I want out of an MMO is divergent gameplay, polish, longevity and a PvE centric world. PvP can be included but it should be consensual.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
1. This is one of the reasons people dont want non consensual PvP: because of condescending shit like this. You are simultaneously being condescending and acting like a bratty 2 year old.
2. Your last paragraph is the exact opposite of what PvE sandbox fans are going through. PvE players have been waiting for a sandbox ever since the NGE destroyed SWG's population. PvP sandboxers at least have EvE, Darkfall, and ArcheAge soon.
and the most ironic part is, its ok when its a passive aggressive non pvp'r doing it, but if you are overtly aggressive all the sudden its not politically correct to be so "mean!" Give me a break with your strawman argument, please.
Just because the tone of my voice makes your heartstrings get pulled a certain way doesn't make the truth any less true.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
The irony is actually that you are accusing the PvE sandbox crowd of doing the EXACT thing you are doing: Instead of being happy with the fact that the current sandbox options are PvP, you have to gang together to try to make a PvE franchise embrace PvP too.
Furthermore, everyone seems to support having a FFA PvP server anyway, even though the other games dont have a PvE server.
Thing is most of the PvE'er posts have been a 'Don't care as long as I can opt out' sorta post, while a lot of the PvPer posts have been "Everyone should have to PvP"
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
and? Like others have said, pvp'rs know what happens when you take an open world pvp game and break it down for the 99.5% of the market who are care bears, no one is asking that you don't care bear, we are asking that you let ONE game this millenium get made with the original design intent for pvp before crying the world is ending because we got ONE game in the next 3 years that offers it.
So what happens? The game turns out like crap, both for the pve crowd and pvp crowd because they try to make both sides happy. so instead, how about you let the pvprs have their game for a month or two then when it fails you come here laughing at all of us instead of never letting those systems see the light of the day because of the care bear crusades that happen during alpha, beta and launch.
I guess I don't understand why the pvprs have to be the ones to just give up all their wants and desires for a game just because the largest group who already has the largest pool of GREAT games to play from has to have EVERY single game that hits the horizon to be an exact copy of the ones previous to it.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
I think if a fantasy MMO could find the same balance that EVE did with its security levels, where PvP isn't opt-out but if you stay in certain places the chances of you being attacked are incredibly low. You CAN be attacked at any time, but depending on where you are, you can be "safe." Makes more sense that way IMO.
except Smedly said this game isn't going to be a franchise game, its a reboot. so yea. next argument please? You want a reboot with better graphics, choose from the myriad of other games on the market today that fit that same genre of playstyle!
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
Anarchy Online - They had suppression levels in areas. Some were 0 suppression which you could attack or be attacked, some were 25% where you had to flag yourself by shooting an opposing factions tower or flagged player. It worked well and the fact that these areas were built so there wasn't a major reason to head into them unless you wanted to was even better.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
Where is the developer supported PvE sandbox?
I can name several PvP ones...
Actually he never said its not going to be 'franchise game'. He said it was the next game in the franchise and they wanted it to be different from the previous two games as well as a majority of what we have on the market today.
The game is still part of the EQ franchise, they are banking on the name recognition to draw people in, they said the game would be familiar while being different at the same time. They said players would be able to choose how they live in the world and won't be told how to live by the developer/content.
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
No see that's the kind of thing I would want to avoid, some arbitrary mechanic that suppresses PvP. PvP should always be possible, but without consent from another player or in the situation of a war, it should rarely be encouraged or a smart thing to try and do.
Like real life: where you CAN kill anyone you want anytime you want. But doing so is for the most part a REALLY bad idea.
Again, required viewing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQUr2RkjykU
Also, killing non-hostile NPCs should be possible but should be treated with the exact same level of punishment as murdering a player.
Of course not because the ones they try to put out you carebears drop after 2 months like a bad habit *(Cough SWG, Asherons Call, etc anyone?)* or get so radically changed in beta because it doesn't follow the hold your hand themepark that they change it.
Hence my argument from post #1. Let change actually have a chance before you denounce how bad it is!
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
and you can still choose in eve how to live with out being told by the developers and guess what *GASP* its an open pvp non consensual sandbox OMGRRRRD!!! Why didn't the world end?!
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
So "Everquest Next" is not going to be a part of the "Everquest" franchise? talk about a bait and switch...
Ugh, people are reading way to much into the tidbits that have been dropped. Mass assumptions happening on both sides of the fence. I assume EQN will be PvE primarily, because it's EQ. When someone credible states that they are indeed going to ignore their current client base and pursue a game built upon open world pvp from the ground up, I'll change my mind. Until then logic dictates that the third game in a series will be in the same vein as the previous two, it further dictates that they won't throw away the free money from the client base the EQ franchise has built over the last ten years.
Exactly. There are Zero PvE focused Sandbox games to choose from where if I was into PvP I could choose Eve, Darkfall, Mortal Online and soon ArcheAge, Repopulation, Star Citizen and CU.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
SWG: not around anymore. And it failed when it tried to go themepark, but was doing pretty well as a very broken sandbox.
AC: open world, non themepark. It is NOT a sandbox
Not in the way the poster I was quoting was referring no, its not. They are not taking design implementations from the previous franchise years and rebuilding it, they are starting from scratch with some of the lore and making a completely new experience in the mmo marketplace.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley