I know the arguments and i know realism,there is NO way you could ever create the realistic sense of death in a game so the rest of the design approach has to follow suit.
Example in real life you might wander around as a fearsome Warrior back in 1592 and want to kill everything in your path.Well that si fine but there would ALWAYS be the risk of death that ENDS it all,meaning no more play time,no more life.As i said that is NOT going to happen in gaming so neither is the wanted greifing or negativity on game play.
This argument is based on a faulty premise. Just because you can't impose a punishment equal to real life death or prison in a game doesn't mean you can't have any consequences in the game for dying or undesirable behavior. Games can be like virtual societies and you can create a sense of danger within the game. If you think you will lose a month's worth of progress on your character if you die or if you are caught killing an "innocent" player, you will certainly think twice before doing it.
EQN:L is not the full mmorpg it is the one that let's you create stuff so NO you wont be able to destroy things. Would not make sense.
EQN is the version like wow, gw2, etc. but with a twist where everything in there can be destroyed and rebuild like in the vid we saw a few months back where the warrior jumps on the bridge and destroys it then you see it after a while getting restored. And if your creation are really that good then it could be voted to get added to that part of the game.
Could be wrong about this but that what i read on EQN:L website where it says what EQN:L is in the feature section .
Here is what i see on there webpage :
Have you ever wanted to build a game?Landmark gives you all the tools you need to design anything you can imagine. Your creations could even end up as a part of EverQuest Next.
What possible reason could you want to be able to affect other peoples creations other than grief?
There are plenty of games out there where you can do that, this clearly isnt one of them, give me one reason adding the ability to break other peoples stuff would add to this game in a positive way?
What possible reason could you want to be able to affect other peoples creations other than grief?
There are plenty of games out there where you can do that, this clearly isnt one of them, give me one reason adding the ability to break other peoples stuff would add to this game in a positive way?
Oh I don't know territory control, politics, taxes? guild wars, alliance wars? War games?
No one wants to go knocking down the art people are making... Who the hell would want to do that? There needs to be a combat off server or something. Trust me there is plenty of room...
What possible reason could you want to be able to affect other peoples creations other than grief?
There are plenty of games out there where you can do that, this clearly isnt one of them, give me one reason adding the ability to break other peoples stuff would add to this game in a positive way?
The games are being used interchangable these days, so:
For EQL:
Creation game. Small death penalty.
for EQN:
It's a matter of making the player grief him or herself. Dying was made an unpleasant experience in EQ1. We're not talking about perma-death .. but rather a "grief" one imposes when they die, or do something so reckless that death is inevitable. Solo or group. If solo then walk away .. it a group encounter seems to end with demise, run away.
As you say, there are plenty of games that allow zero penalty for death. EQL and EQN are linked though, and EQL spills into EQN. So there is an established dependency.
As such, I think a basic death penalty should be included with EQL, to accostume players to EQN, which I hope has a nice death penalty to equal EQ1.
I was pretty sure they made it very clear from the start that Landmark is basically just a tool. You are building, creating, harvesting, and designing the world of Everquest Next. Now if in EQNext they said there would be no possible way for others to interact with you negatively, we might have a complaint. But Landmark is completely different, and stifling creativity in a game like that is not where they want to be.
Only people on my friends list in limited ways.- 14%
Only people on my friends list, but in significant/game-altering ways.- 6%
Everyone, all the time, but only in minor ways.- 25% I want to be able to cause death and destruction!- 24%
Wait a second. The "majority" (32%) answered "Not at all" and when they go that route, you're upset?
While I agree with your sentiment 32% doesn't represent a majority, but rather a plurality. A majority of 50% +1. Yeah, sorry, I'm not usually a pedantic jerk, but I just couldn't look the other way. However, I do agree with your sentiments and that it shouldn't be surprising to see the largest percentage get the way they want. I also tend to agree with those that argue the issue of whether or not you should be building a game based on polling. So, I agree with everyone? Ok, no more beer.
Originally posted by Jimmydean I was pretty sure they made it very clear from the start that Landmark is basically just a tool. You are building, creating, harvesting, and designing the world of Everquest Next. Now if in EQNext they said there would be no possible way for others to interact with you negatively, we might have a complaint. But Landmark is completely different, and stifling creativity in a game like that is not where they want to be.
Very little that the players make will actually be part of Next. Landmark is basically a test bed for things that SOE wants to put in NEXT they are just making a game out of it because they had fun using it.
well they need a place that becomes a safe haven for creation, and another that allows for the politics of guilds and players.
This is Landmark and not the actual mmo with combat.
If they make a land mark with destruction it might as well be on a different server rule set dividing people more and also limiting creativity by slowing down construction by adding destruction.
Not sure land mark exists as an MMO other than building, and how suddenly destruction in landmark turns into something more than minecraft.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Originally posted by Cromica Originally posted by JimmydeanI was pretty sure they made it very clear from the start that Landmark is basically just a tool. You are building, creating, harvesting, and designing the world of Everquest Next. Now if in EQNext they said there would be no possible way for others to interact with you negatively, we might have a complaint. But Landmark is completely different, and stifling creativity in a game like that is not where they want to be.
Very little that the players make will actually be part of Next. Landmark is basically a test bed for things that SOE wants to put in NEXT they are just making a game out of it because they had fun using it.
Simply not true but yeah Landmark is going to be choose to PvP if you want to, nothing else. A ton of what is Landmark will end up in next though.
Originally posted by JimmydeanI was pretty sure they made it very clear from the start that Landmark is basically just a tool. You are building, creating, harvesting, and designing the world of Everquest Next. Now if in EQNext they said there would be no possible way for others to interact with you negatively, we might have a complaint. But Landmark is completely different, and stifling creativity in a game like that is not where they want to be.
Very little that the players make will actually be part of Next. Landmark is basically a test bed for things that SOE wants to put in NEXT they are just making a game out of it because they had fun using it.
Simply not true but yeah Landmark is going to be choose to PvP if you want to, nothing else. A ton of what is Landmark will end up in next though.
Actually it is true, they have said that contests will be held and the winners will get what they built in NEXT.
SOE have sunk a GREAT deal of money into the development of EQN so far. There is huge pressure on them to get the maximum amount of players in the door. Not only because they need to recover 7-8 years worth of development cost, but because its a F2P game.
EQN:L and EQN will closely follow WoW's implementation of PVP. That will satisfy the largest amount of players.
I'll never understand why EVERY SINGLE SOLITARY MMO that releases currently doesn't have PvP and PvE servers and potentially even HARDCORE servers.
It's not hard to implement and it ensures you satisfy all your players. GW2 and ESO not having OWPvP is the reason so many people didn't play the games or want to play them. I thought ESO was good but without OWPvP or dueling there's no long term PvP so it's not worth my purchase.
GW2 I got to max level, World vs World was fun for a week then it was boring fighting people with no names who never know who you are.
TERA I got to max level and PvPd for an entire YEAR with multiple guilds in 50v50 battles full of drama almost on a daily basis, it's such a simple thing to add to the game that satisfies so many players you'd otherwise not have stick with your game.
I'll never understand why EVERY SINGLE SOLITARY MMO that releases currently doesn't have PvP and PvE servers and potentially even HARDCORE servers.
It's not hard to implement and it ensures you satisfy all your players. GW2 and ESO not having OWPvP is the reason so many people didn't play the games or want to play them. I thought ESO was good but without OWPvP or dueling there's no long term PvP so it's not worth my purchase.
Not sure if people aren't reading, or just not comprehending. They are talking about EQN: LANDMARK, not EQ Next the MMORPG. Landmark is basically a crafting environment. EQ Next will be the "real" game.
What possible reason could you want to be able to affect other peoples creations other than grief?
There are plenty of games out there where you can do that, this clearly isnt one of them, give me one reason adding the ability to break other peoples stuff would add to this game in a positive way?
Oh I don't know territory control, politics, taxes? guild wars, alliance wars? War games?
No one wants to go knocking down the art people are making... Who the hell would want to do that? There needs to be a combat off server or something. Trust me there is plenty of room...
Yep, à la Shadowbane but with hopefully a better engine. I could see something like that rocking and would very much enjoy playing that too. Since half of the folks say that they would like something like this and the other half do not, why don't SOE open two different kinds of servers?
Do you even understand the concept that Everquest Next and Everquest Next: Landmark are two different things?
Everquest Next is the mmorpg.
Everquest Next: Landmark is the tool for all the "creative" ( or rather those who think they're creative at any rate ) people to stand around and waste time building crap in the hopes of it being added to EQN proper or selling it through the Player Studio in EQN.
You're crying about something that isn't even worth crying about.
This is like having a tantrum in EQ2 because you can't PvP in the mobile phone app.
Yeah but it is not just a tool. Otherwise, why are they adding combat and other typical MMORPG elements?
I'll never understand why EVERY SINGLE SOLITARY MMO that releases currently doesn't have PvP and PvE servers and potentially even HARDCORE servers.
It's not hard to implement and it ensures you satisfy all your players. GW2 and ESO not having OWPvP is the reason so many people didn't play the games or want to play them. I thought ESO was good but without OWPvP or dueling there's no long term PvP so it's not worth my purchase.
Not sure if people aren't reading, or just not comprehending. They are talking about EQN: LANDMARK, not EQ Next the MMORPG. Landmark is basically a crafting environment. EQ Next will be the "real" game.
Landmark is the testing grounds for the real game, they are also adding PvP and combat and all that typical MMO stuff so clearly it's not just a crafting environment and should be treated that way.
I'll never understand why EVERY SINGLE SOLITARY MMO that releases currently doesn't have PvP and PvE servers and potentially even HARDCORE servers.
It's not hard to implement and it ensures you satisfy all your players. GW2 and ESO not having OWPvP is the reason so many people didn't play the games or want to play them. I thought ESO was good but without OWPvP or dueling there's no long term PvP so it's not worth my purchase.
Not sure if people aren't reading, or just not comprehending. They are talking about EQN: LANDMARK, not EQ Next the MMORPG. Landmark is basically a crafting environment. EQ Next will be the "real" game.
Landmark is the testing grounds for the real game, they are also adding PvP and combat and all that typical MMO stuff so clearly it's not just a crafting environment and should be treated that way.
Well then it's basically just an Alpha version of the game, and serves no purpose whatsoever besides delaying the actual EQ Next game. I'm going to stick with the actual description of the game from SOE, which is that they are adding Monsters and Combat to provide some resistance in gathering your materials to, you guessed it, craft.
There is no way I am spending hours harvesting and collecting and building and then some clown comes and destroys it in like a minute. No way will I support such a game especially because of the sheer amount of time my work cost me and the other person puts nothing in except to destroy and grief me. I will vehemently support any suggestion to curtail any such negative behaviour.
Could always ask SOE to add a central hub campfire and then all /dance + /hold hands and sing kumbayaaaaaa on teamspeak for 10 hours straight.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
Could you clarify something for me- Are they saying "anything that can cause you death in the future...We will remove it" as in ANYTHING? Or is this relating to PVP or something another player can do to cause you death.
Thanks- My reply depends on this answer. =P
Its for griefing they dont want griefs to be able to kill somone.
Comments
This argument is based on a faulty premise. Just because you can't impose a punishment equal to real life death or prison in a game doesn't mean you can't have any consequences in the game for dying or undesirable behavior. Games can be like virtual societies and you can create a sense of danger within the game. If you think you will lose a month's worth of progress on your character if you die or if you are caught killing an "innocent" player, you will certainly think twice before doing it.
LMAO
I always thought EQN:L was SUPPOSED to be more of a tool than an MMO. I thought it was a tool for the community to create stuff for EQN.
What possible reason could you want to be able to affect other peoples creations other than grief?
There are plenty of games out there where you can do that, this clearly isnt one of them, give me one reason adding the ability to break other peoples stuff would add to this game in a positive way?
Oh I don't know territory control, politics, taxes? guild wars, alliance wars? War games?
No one wants to go knocking down the art people are making... Who the hell would want to do that? There needs to be a combat off server or something. Trust me there is plenty of room...
The games are being used interchangable these days, so:
For EQL:
Creation game. Small death penalty.
for EQN:
It's a matter of making the player grief him or herself. Dying was made an unpleasant experience in EQ1. We're not talking about perma-death .. but rather a "grief" one imposes when they die, or do something so reckless that death is inevitable. Solo or group. If solo then walk away .. it a group encounter seems to end with demise, run away.
As you say, there are plenty of games that allow zero penalty for death. EQL and EQN are linked though, and EQL spills into EQN. So there is an established dependency.
As such, I think a basic death penalty should be included with EQL, to accostume players to EQN, which I hope has a nice death penalty to equal EQ1.
Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.
Landmark is not going to be anything more than a prettier mincraft survival mode.... This saddens me very much so much wasted potential.
Hopefully Next will have the building aspect mixed in with the story and the pvp.
While I agree with your sentiment 32% doesn't represent a majority, but rather a plurality. A majority of 50% +1. Yeah, sorry, I'm not usually a pedantic jerk, but I just couldn't look the other way. However, I do agree with your sentiments and that it shouldn't be surprising to see the largest percentage get the way they want. I also tend to agree with those that argue the issue of whether or not you should be building a game based on polling. So, I agree with everyone? Ok, no more beer.
Very little that the players make will actually be part of Next. Landmark is basically a test bed for things that SOE wants to put in NEXT they are just making a game out of it because they had fun using it.
well they need a place that becomes a safe haven for creation, and another that allows for the politics of guilds and players.
This is Landmark and not the actual mmo with combat.
If they make a land mark with destruction it might as well be on a different server rule set dividing people more and also limiting creativity by slowing down construction by adding destruction.
Not sure land mark exists as an MMO other than building, and how suddenly destruction in landmark turns into something more than minecraft.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
Simply not true but yeah Landmark is going to be choose to PvP if you want to, nothing else. A ton of what is Landmark will end up in next though.
Dude, EQN:L is like minecraft.
You have Dust for this type of gameplay.
And dont forget that this is only prelude for EQN , where you will have proper PVP
Actually it is true, they have said that contests will be held and the winners will get what they built in NEXT.
Ehhh? what you consider wrong is right for many others. Unless you are the sole authority now to decide what is wrong and right direction for EQN?
SOE have sunk a GREAT deal of money into the development of EQN so far. There is huge pressure on them to get the maximum amount of players in the door. Not only because they need to recover 7-8 years worth of development cost, but because its a F2P game.
EQN:L and EQN will closely follow WoW's implementation of PVP. That will satisfy the largest amount of players.
I'll never understand why EVERY SINGLE SOLITARY MMO that releases currently doesn't have PvP and PvE servers and potentially even HARDCORE servers.
It's not hard to implement and it ensures you satisfy all your players. GW2 and ESO not having OWPvP is the reason so many people didn't play the games or want to play them. I thought ESO was good but without OWPvP or dueling there's no long term PvP so it's not worth my purchase.
GW2 I got to max level, World vs World was fun for a week then it was boring fighting people with no names who never know who you are.
TERA I got to max level and PvPd for an entire YEAR with multiple guilds in 50v50 battles full of drama almost on a daily basis, it's such a simple thing to add to the game that satisfies so many players you'd otherwise not have stick with your game.
Not sure if people aren't reading, or just not comprehending. They are talking about EQN: LANDMARK, not EQ Next the MMORPG. Landmark is basically a crafting environment. EQ Next will be the "real" game.
Yep, à la Shadowbane but with hopefully a better engine. I could see something like that rocking and would very much enjoy playing that too. Since half of the folks say that they would like something like this and the other half do not, why don't SOE open two different kinds of servers?
Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.
Yeah but it is not just a tool. Otherwise, why are they adding combat and other typical MMORPG elements?
Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.
Landmark is the testing grounds for the real game, they are also adding PvP and combat and all that typical MMO stuff so clearly it's not just a crafting environment and should be treated that way.
Well then it's basically just an Alpha version of the game, and serves no purpose whatsoever besides delaying the actual EQ Next game. I'm going to stick with the actual description of the game from SOE, which is that they are adding Monsters and Combat to provide some resistance in gathering your materials to, you guessed it, craft.
Could always ask SOE to add a central hub campfire and then all /dance + /hold hands and sing kumbayaaaaaa on teamspeak for 10 hours straight.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
Its for griefing they dont want griefs to be able to kill somone.
Welcome to real life, there is no death.