Originally posted by Benedikt Originally posted by FusionSandboxes 'need' player interaction and conflict to last (since they rarely have "PVE-endgame", raids and whatnot).Take away PVP and corporation conflict out of EVE and see how long it would last... i'd say about a week.PVP does not mean FFA full loot, everytime someone mentions PVP and sandbox in the same sentence.Flagging system PVP has and always will be a BAD way of going about it.We can all pretty much agree upon that Minecraft is a pretty good milestone for the word "sandbox", but even when you play that with PVP turned off (or solo), you can only build so many houses and kill so many zombies/endermen untill it gets boring and have no purpose left to play again.
actually i am pretty sure there is at least as many people who do play mincraft w/o pvp at least as long as longest playing pvper, so no - it just mean that it is boring to you, not that it is boring to everyone else.
I've run a few Minecraft servers for almost two years now, and we've had PvP turned on for all of them, but we've never used the PvP. With no PvP and no conflict, we got months worth of game play out of a vanilla server, and months worth of game play out of a FTB server. Total of about a year or so, with no PvP.
I've seen what happens on Minecraft servers with FFA PvP. Players end up building tiny obsidian houses, usually underground where the only entrance is typing "/home" and the only exit is through some hidden water drop. New players always end up running through a gauntlet of old players, getting farmed for their starting resources that are useless to the players doing the farming. The landscape usually looks like it's been eaten by nuclear fallout to make running out of the starting portal that much harder. It's not pretty and it's apparently not fun for anyone other than the players who just want to kill other players.
I've also seen what happens on servers with player run factions, player created safe zones, server towns as safe zones and a focus on role playing and it's pretty awesome. There is PvP in the world, but it's not the zerg/gank fest you see on other servers. A lot of it is political. I think an MMORPG developer that could duplicate or enhance that type of game play would do very well. The people who do this the best are at massivecraft.com. <- My opinion of course.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Sandbox doesn't discriminate NPC from PC, in a silly immersion breaking theme parkish way with no logical explanation for invincible god mode.
EvE is the sandbox gold standard. Break the formula, fine, but then a dev should be sued for false advertising if they call it sandbox.
You want to eat T-Bone steak because you think it's the new hip thing to eat, but you don't want to kill the cow. So much for demonstrating the hilarious absurdity of this thread once more.
Again there is only a PvAll vs. PvE-only discussion, in a sandbox you can't opt out of realism.
If you can, you're already playing another theme park.
You don't even want sandbox, you want theme park with more fluff. This thread is hilariously misleading.
I don't get how PvP makes a gameworld more realistic in an MMO. I see it as just another medium to have conflict with other real people, no different than forum PvP. It has less of a real connection to the gameworld immersion than NPCs do. If you get too close to a enemy city, the guards don't attack you and spend the next hour with 20 of his buddys trying to camp you. I get the freedom aspect of full OWPvP but I think it's less realistic within the confines of the game.
The whole sanbox = PvP doesn't make any sense either because you're not throwing the sand into other people's faces. I take terms to thier literal meaning and a "sandbox" is just that, the freedom to CREATE as in not needing to be destroyed. "but how do you account for too much expansion?". You have heavy upkeep and degredation. Sorry, PvPers don't get "sandbox" all to themselves and not having PvP doesn't suddenly make it a themepark. Again, think of the literal meaning and it has nothing to do with PvP's inclusion or ommision. The "freedom" should be to each player to be who they want to be in a gameworld, not be concerned with that they can do to the person nect to them. Freedom wasted.
The problem with a lot of MMOs IMO hasn't been the lack of PvP making the game stale and cushy, it's been the ease of the PvE content itself. It's been way too faceroll and if it does change into something challenging along with penalties for dying all of those "PvP does..." bulletpoints all go away except for those that like conflict with real people behind computers. In fact, every benefit of PvP to the gameworld can be handled in game if the right systems are in place.
Did I say PvP? DID I ? Where?
Your Dodge skill has increased (100)
Don't play coy with me
Fine, so you say
"I don't get how PvP makes a gameworld more realistic in an MMO."
ok question,
Do godmode systems like PvE-only-flagging systems and invincible players make a gameworld more realistic?
PvPvE, PvAll as in exhibit A, the sandbox, defined by CCP's EvE
You want to opt out of one "P".
By all means, PLEASE do so! In your theme park of choice this is perfectly valid.
Did not address anything I said but that's okay, it's looking through two different color glasses, we're never going to see the same colors. EvE may have defined a sandbox for you but that doesn't apply to everyone or the genre. Like I said above, the "freedom" in a sandbox should be about what you create with the sand, not the ability to conflict with other people. You see that as a "freedom" while I see that as a way to take away other people's "freedom". Again, it's a selfish point of view that instead of worrying about what someone can do themself in a world they worry about what they can do to others.
There really is no response, it's a matter of personal preference. Labels applied by a group of people cannot be based on personal preference.
Sandbox has nothing to do with PvP.
Edit: I was wrong, you did address the "realism" aspect. There are many things you can't do in any game, it's based on it's programmed "principles". Being restricted to who you can attack may affect realism for you but it doesn't to me because I see "realism" from the gameworld persepctive. Often times I've seen the PvP side get far too personal and detract from the game immersion. Look at EvE. The stories you hear are reflected through the people themselves even though they use avatar names. The setting makes no difference other that to help explain what's going on. It's another medium for conclict with others behind a keyboard.
This may be what you are looking for when being immersed in an MMO but not for me.
"I don't get how PvP makes a gameworld more realistic in an MMO."
ok question,
Do godmode systems like PvE-only-flagging systems and invincible players make a gameworld more realistic?
no, but they are not any less realistic like a lot of other features you dont seems to have problem (chars can be days w/o sleep, dont need to go to bathroom, are never tired from fighting or wearing/carrying heavy objects etc.)
edit: not to mention that the invurnerability can be easily explained through game mechanics like gods and their protection.
PvPvE, PvAll as in exhibit A, the sandbox, defined by CCP's EvE
You want to opt out of one "P".
By all means, PLEASE do so! In your theme park of choice this is perfectly valid.
no, ccp didnt defined anything. ccp made a sandbox game. show me where they said "definition of sandbox is ....."
not to mention that if they did, it would still be just their definition, not the only definition everyone agrees with
and btw, when you say "ccp'e eve defined sandbox" - that means that sandbox can only be a space game where you are controling ships instead of human avatars, right?
and btw, when you say "ccp'e eve defined sandbox" - that means that sandbox can only be a space game where you are controling ships instead of human avatars, right?
And i don't like the lack of terraforming. Or the lack of player made cities.. and no a space station is not a player city, or the lack of planting stuff. ;(
Ok... all not really spaceish.
But hell.. you can't even destroy a planet.. or at least a little moon. You really should be able to blow up a moon.
Conclusion: Eve is a nice little game. I call it a sandbox. But it is not the be-all and end-all of sandbox gaming. (with or without pvp )
Edit/PS: To end all those useless threads about pvp/pve/sandbox is or is not.
As long as everyone argues about their own definition of a sandbox everyone will be right and you can argue ad nauseam. And as we all know, that we will never conclude for one defintion of a sandbox....
But as long as everyone having fun doing so.. let's go for it!
you want sandbox without FFA PvP? Go play the countless theme parks they made for YOU.
not wanting PvP in a sandbox is like wanting a quarterpounder burger without meat.
Eat something different then if you don't want meat
btw PvP is not a feature, it's a realistic setting - you are there, you are not invincible. the immersion breaking invincible mode of theme parks -> that way please
so you are saying that sandbox w/o ffa pvp is not a sandbox? why?
Comments
I've run a few Minecraft servers for almost two years now, and we've had PvP turned on for all of them, but we've never used the PvP. With no PvP and no conflict, we got months worth of game play out of a vanilla server, and months worth of game play out of a FTB server. Total of about a year or so, with no PvP.
I've seen what happens on Minecraft servers with FFA PvP. Players end up building tiny obsidian houses, usually underground where the only entrance is typing "/home" and the only exit is through some hidden water drop. New players always end up running through a gauntlet of old players, getting farmed for their starting resources that are useless to the players doing the farming. The landscape usually looks like it's been eaten by nuclear fallout to make running out of the starting portal that much harder. It's not pretty and it's apparently not fun for anyone other than the players who just want to kill other players.
I've also seen what happens on servers with player run factions, player created safe zones, server towns as safe zones and a focus on role playing and it's pretty awesome. There is PvP in the world, but it's not the zerg/gank fest you see on other servers. A lot of it is political. I think an MMORPG developer that could duplicate or enhance that type of game play would do very well. The people who do this the best are at massivecraft.com. <- My opinion of course.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Did not address anything I said but that's okay, it's looking through two different color glasses, we're never going to see the same colors. EvE may have defined a sandbox for you but that doesn't apply to everyone or the genre. Like I said above, the "freedom" in a sandbox should be about what you create with the sand, not the ability to conflict with other people. You see that as a "freedom" while I see that as a way to take away other people's "freedom". Again, it's a selfish point of view that instead of worrying about what someone can do themself in a world they worry about what they can do to others.
There really is no response, it's a matter of personal preference. Labels applied by a group of people cannot be based on personal preference.
Sandbox has nothing to do with PvP.
Edit: I was wrong, you did address the "realism" aspect. There are many things you can't do in any game, it's based on it's programmed "principles". Being restricted to who you can attack may affect realism for you but it doesn't to me because I see "realism" from the gameworld persepctive. Often times I've seen the PvP side get far too personal and detract from the game immersion. Look at EvE. The stories you hear are reflected through the people themselves even though they use avatar names. The setting makes no difference other that to help explain what's going on. It's another medium for conclict with others behind a keyboard.
This may be what you are looking for when being immersed in an MMO but not for me.
no, but they are not any less realistic like a lot of other features you dont seems to have problem (chars can be days w/o sleep, dont need to go to bathroom, are never tired from fighting or wearing/carrying heavy objects etc.)
edit: not to mention that the invurnerability can be easily explained through game mechanics like gods and their protection.
no, ccp didnt defined anything. ccp made a sandbox game. show me where they said "definition of sandbox is ....."
not to mention that if they did, it would still be just their definition, not the only definition everyone agrees with
and btw, when you say "ccp'e eve defined sandbox" - that means that sandbox can only be a space game where you are controling ships instead of human avatars, right?
And i don't like the lack of terraforming. Or the lack of player made cities.. and no a space station is not a player city, or the lack of planting stuff. ;(
Ok... all not really spaceish.
But hell.. you can't even destroy a planet.. or at least a little moon. You really should be able to blow up a moon.
Conclusion: Eve is a nice little game. I call it a sandbox. But it is not the be-all and end-all of sandbox gaming. (with or without pvp
)
Edit/PS: To end all those useless threads about pvp/pve/sandbox is or is not.
As long as everyone argues about their own definition of a sandbox everyone will be right and you can argue ad nauseam. And as we all know, that we will never conclude for one defintion of a sandbox....
But as long as everyone having fun doing so.. let's go for it!
so you are saying that sandbox w/o ffa pvp is not a sandbox? why?