"Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy. It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from."
Seems this game is designed a lot like this, maybe it will turn out better.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Stop on by and let SOE know how you feel. This is the thread that actual poll was attached to, on the EQN forums. Everyone can post here. There's a lot of other topics and pools too.
How awful, another game will have to survive without the griefer no life minority that enjoys ruining games for everyone else... err wait, isn't that just like the very vast majority of MMOs?
I'm not really worried for EQN and EQN:L. I'm more worried about people who need to play games in which they are able to grief the hell out of fellow players. But the fact that they won't be in the games I'll be playing is a big positive point to me.
If someone is killed in Null Sec space in EVE, was he griefed?
If someone is questing in enemy territory in WoW, and is killed, is he being griefed?
If someone is escorting a cart, or transporting goods in Wushu, and is killed, is that griefing?
Besides, no one wants to destroy the statues, or the house that these artist are making. They need their own server, their own mode, where they are safe, where their creations are protected. The entire game should not be developed that way though.
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
How awful, another game will have to survive without the griefer no life minority that enjoys ruining games for everyone else... err wait, isn't that just like the very vast majority of MMOs?
I'm not really worried for EQN and EQN:L. I'm more worried about people who need to play games in which they are able to grief the hell out of fellow players. But the fact that they won't be in the games I'll be playing is a big positive point to me.
I'd even support a "hardcore" mode server for EQN:L with FFA PvP and free destruction of other people's buildings so that those people stay far far away from any server I will be playing on. But I guess that just like it did for games like DAoC (Mordred server), that server would be a huge failure with a microscopic population.
Oh, it might have been smaller (at around 1000K online avg it wasn't the smallest) but the battles were glorious.
It was my favorite server, and I'm a carebear by nature.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Besides, no one wants to destroy the statues, or the house that these artist are making. They need their own server, their own mode, where they are safe, where their creations are protected. The entire game should not be developed that way though.
Uh, I'm pretty sure many would love to blow up someone's amazing looking creation (I would if it is an option). You think way too highly of people.
Have they set servers yet for release? Have they introduced combat or PVP yet? You seem to be making a lot of conclusions based on a video that basically said "we won't allow griefing."
If I want to PVP, set my claim to be attacked and or play on a PVP server, I'm never going to be griefed. I've accepted all that comes with the territory.
In the video they gave examples of people trying to grief. Like building huge holes in starting areas or other obstacles that others didn't sign up for.
Maybe I missed it, but I'm doubting THE ENTIRE GAME is going to be the same. They've talked about and have another video about different rulesets for servers.
The seem to want players to be able to go hardcore FFA kill them all, if they want.
If they didn't want people to die, it wouldn't be in the game. They don't want players being able to kill, harm, or have negative impact on those that don't want it.
Again, maybe I missed it, but you seem to be connected dots and making conclusions off of things they aren't saying.
Edit: You seem to be assuming LM will be like EVE. LM is not EVE, nor anywhere close. It is way closer to a "sandbox" on the scale of the word.
Unless a server is set for total freedom to do whatever you want, you can't roll in and conquer the server through politics, economics, or brute force, you are assuming any and all of those things are even present.
EQN PVP servers might cater a bit more in that direction, but what you seem to be looking for probably isn't easily accomplished in a fantasy mmorpg.
Now if SOE gives players free control, something never before seen could develop over time, but I'm doubting it with how people are. No matter what, there will always be those trying to spoil others fun, even if it comes at a cost to themselves.
Also, despite what the poll and video say, if there is an overwhelming request/demand for something during Alpha/Beta, I'm betting they will at least test it. No reason not. That is kind of the entire point of this whole development shift. Give the players what they want. That doesn't me tailor it to mine or your specific needs, but what the whole wants.
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...
How would you accomplish this list? Control land or taxes for example. In a game where you can do whatever you want, how does one exert power over another? I don't know of any games that allow this. EVE is probably what many envision, but it's system can't work in EQN or LM without a lot of dev system in place beforehand, which goes against being "free" and a sandbox.
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
I can forgive you because you obviously never played Minecraft, so what you're posting is just out of sheer ignorance. There are more people spending all their time building stuff in MC than there are people playing whatever your favorite MMORPG is, including the king WoW.
My son is playing it right now with 5 of his friends, and his cousin. A cousin who he has never met outside of MC and Xbox Live. Ther're playing on a survival server, pvp, like they always do. This is what everyone of his friends with an Xbox does, everyone, boy or girl, everyone of them.
MC is much much more than a block building game. It's probably the most complex, detailed, and flexible mmo ever made. I'm not about to sit down and play with him and them, but I know and he knows who's got the better product.
You didn't know?
edit - That part you quoted, is not a prediction. That's how it is, as we speak, in Landmark.
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
I can forgive you because you obviously never played Minecraft, so what you're posting is just out of sheer ignorance. There are more people spending all their time building stuff in MC than there are people playing whatever your favorite MMORPG is, including the king WoW.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
I can forgive you because you obviously never played Minecraft, so what you're posting is just out of sheer ignorance. There are more people spending all their time building stuff in MC than there are people playing whatever your favorite MMORPG is, including the king WoW.
My son is playing it right now with 5 of his friends, and his cousin
Yep, sure, my mom and grandmother are both playing Minecraft too, which makes me an expert. Hey, stop this... I'm actually paying that game MYSELF, and not the cousin of my sister who said his remote friend was playing it.
More seriously, you don't have the beginning of a clue of what you are talking about here. Just go watch MC movies on youtube. There are almost none about PvP, all about building and about the PvE survival mode, which Landmark will also be mostly about.
I was pretty amused when you started to believe this would be some kind of hardcore survival PvP game with FFA PvP and the ability to destroy what others spent days to build. I actually understood what Dave Georgeson said, instead of trying to interprete it into what I wanted the game to be. I saw this thread of yours come from miles away, and I was just right.
Welcome to EQ Landmark. I hope you enjoy your stay. If not... you know where the door is.
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?
I agree. Furthermore, 52% wanted it to be limited to friends, or not at all. Over half of those surveyed wanted it to be grief proof essentially, it sounds to me like they more or less listened to the majority, or am I missing something?
I have yet to play a game where greifing was allowed that I enjoyed. They have my attention now.
Same here. After Smedley's EVE remark, I wrote Landmark and Next off my list of games to try some day. But after seeing a recent video talking about rulesets for servers (which indicated at least some servers will be PvE or RP) and now this video about anti-griefing measures, it's back on the potential play radar.
I doubt I'll do the Founder thing, though. Was going to but Smedley's ill-conceived PVP remarks killed that impulse. Perhaps when it's released I'll take a look now, at least.
In ways, I feel they should have been more up front. While I care not that they pull the open world griefing rug out from under the 24% of death and destruction fanboys, they drove away potential customers by not being clear and trying to get the griefers to pony up. It's amusing in a way, like they stole the lunch money of the playground bullies and then said, ha ha, you can't hit anyone despite having paid your Fight Club fees.
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
I can forgive you because you obviously never played Minecraft, so what you're posting is just out of sheer ignorance. There are more people spending all their time building stuff in MC than there are people playing whatever your favorite MMORPG is, including the king WoW.
My son is playing it right now with 5 of his friends, and his cousin. A cousin who he has never met outside of MC and Xbox Live. Ther're playing on a survival server, pvp, like they always do. This is what everyone of his friends with an Xbox does, everyone, boy or girl, everyone of them.
MC is much much more than a block building game. It's probably the most complex, detailed, and flexible mmo ever made. I'm not about to sit down and play with him and them, but I know and he knows who's got the better product.
What gives you the impression that EQN:LM or EQN will not have the exact same thing plus a whole lot more?
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
I can forgive you because you obviously never played Minecraft, so what you're posting is just out of sheer ignorance. There are more people spending all their time building stuff in MC than there are people playing whatever your favorite MMORPG is, including the king WoW.
My son is playing it right now with 5 of his friends, and his cousin. A cousin who he has never met outside of MC and Xbox Live. Ther're playing on a survival server, pvp, like they always do. This is what everyone of his friends with an Xbox does, everyone, boy or girl, everyone of them.
MC is much much more than a block building game. It's probably the most complex, detailed, and flexible mmo ever made. I'm not about to sit down and play with him and them, but I know and he knows who's got the better product.
What gives you the impression that EQN:LM or EQN will not have the exact same thing plus a whole lot more?
Alpha. There is no game to Landmark right now, none. There is no pve, or pvp.
Beta is slated to begin in 3 weeks. I've seen SOE do amazing things in two weeks. I saw them do it with Planetside 2 on a couple different occasions, but to take Landmark from a straight building tool, to a game, from no till then? It's nearly beyond the realm of reason. If they pull it off, I will be the first to say "they did it!"
That being said, a year from now maybe, if they stay on it and keep pushing. Again though this is "technically" alpha. I don't know if there is a better time to say "What about this?"
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
I can forgive you because you obviously never played Minecraft, so what you're posting is just out of sheer ignorance. There are more people spending all their time building stuff in MC than there are people playing whatever your favorite MMORPG is, including the king WoW.
My son is playing it right now with 5 of his friends, and his cousin. A cousin who he has never met outside of MC and Xbox Live. Ther're playing on a survival server, pvp, like they always do. This is what everyone of his friends with an Xbox does, everyone, boy or girl, everyone of them.
MC is much much more than a block building game. It's probably the most complex, detailed, and flexible mmo ever made. I'm not about to sit down and play with him and them, but I know and he knows who's got the better product.
What gives you the impression that EQN:LM or EQN will not have the exact same thing plus a whole lot more?
Alpha. There is no game to Landmark right now, none. There is no pve, or pvp.
Beta is slated to begin in 3 weeks. I've seen SOE do amazing things in two weeks. I saw them do it with Planetside 2 on a couple different occasions, but to take Landmark from a straight building tool, to a game, from no till then? It's nearly beyond the realm of reason. If they pull it off, I will be the first to say "they did it!"
That being said, a year from now maybe, if they stay on it and keep pushing. Again though this is "technically" alpha. I don't know if there is a better time to say "What about this?"
I'm starting to think you do not understand what Landmark is or what it will become.
What sort of PVE or PVP are you expecting, that they haven't already said is on the way?
Landmark is a game. It is what it is. It isn't nor will it ever be some fleshed out mmorpg with everything provided magically for us. They are making the tools and groundwork, we are supposed to take it from there.
PVP servers are pretty easy to add. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you want that isn't in the pipeline. Alpha, Beta, Release makes no difference. It's a F2P game and they don't have to follow any strict schedule. They can make drastic changes whenever they want if it pleases the fans and makes for a better game.
What we have now is probably 65% of the "game". There is a whole lot more to add.
From your previous posts, I'm assuming that Landmark won't be anything like what you want until it is almost 100% release ready. Not to say it will ever be 100% finished. We are still in the early stages of development, making a thriving world/continent/server is a long ways off.
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
I can forgive you because you obviously never played Minecraft, so what you're posting is just out of sheer ignorance. There are more people spending all their time building stuff in MC than there are people playing whatever your favorite MMORPG is, including the king WoW.
My son is playing it right now with 5 of his friends, and his cousin. A cousin who he has never met outside of MC and Xbox Live. Ther're playing on a survival server, pvp, like they always do. This is what everyone of his friends with an Xbox does, everyone, boy or girl, everyone of them.
MC is much much more than a block building game. It's probably the most complex, detailed, and flexible mmo ever made. I'm not about to sit down and play with him and them, but I know and he knows who's got the better product.
What gives you the impression that EQN:LM or EQN will not have the exact same thing plus a whole lot more?
Alpha. There is no game to Landmark right now, none. There is no pve, or pvp.
Beta is slated to begin in 3 weeks. I've seen SOE do amazing things in two weeks. I saw them do it with Planetside 2 on a couple different occasions, but to take Landmark from a straight building tool, to a game, from no till then? It's nearly beyond the realm of reason. If they pull it off, I will be the first to say "they did it!"
That being said, a year from now maybe, if they stay on it and keep pushing. Again though this is "technically" alpha. I don't know if there is a better time to say "What about this?"
I'm starting to think you do not understand what Landmark is or what it will become.
What sort of PVE or PVP are you expecting, that they haven't already said is on the way?
Landmark is a game. It is what it is. It isn't nor will it ever be some fleshed out mmorpg with everything provided magically for us. They are making the tools and groundwork, we are supposed to take it from there.
This is why I bought. The thought of players building their own worlds, with the same system development/rule set tools that will be making EQN. The thought of letting players build everything from vendor NPCs to mobs with storybricks, from bunkers to castles in a fully destructible world.
I didn't buy it to be confined to a box. You want to see the coolest thing I've seen so far in Landmark? Check this out.
The guy took a tree prop and enlarged it to make a walk way! This is world building! Functional building! This is awesome!
This is what the forum response was -
"Yeah, looks like a bug. I do not think the dev team intended for trees to be quite that large"
"Trees scale too large and can extend outside one's claim too easily..."
"It would be better if one could not extend any part of a prop off one's own claim. It should fail to place, resize, rotate, or move and give an error message."
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
I can forgive you because you obviously never played Minecraft, so what you're posting is just out of sheer ignorance. There are more people spending all their time building stuff in MC than there are people playing whatever your favorite MMORPG is, including the king WoW.
My son is playing it right now with 5 of his friends, and his cousin. A cousin who he has never met outside of MC and Xbox Live. Ther're playing on a survival server, pvp, like they always do. This is what everyone of his friends with an Xbox does, everyone, boy or girl, everyone of them.
MC is much much more than a block building game. It's probably the most complex, detailed, and flexible mmo ever made. I'm not about to sit down and play with him and them, but I know and he knows who's got the better product.
What gives you the impression that EQN:LM or EQN will not have the exact same thing plus a whole lot more?
Alpha. There is no game to Landmark right now, none. There is no pve, or pvp.
Beta is slated to begin in 3 weeks. I've seen SOE do amazing things in two weeks. I saw them do it with Planetside 2 on a couple different occasions, but to take Landmark from a straight building tool, to a game, from no till then? It's nearly beyond the realm of reason. If they pull it off, I will be the first to say "they did it!"
That being said, a year from now maybe, if they stay on it and keep pushing. Again though this is "technically" alpha. I don't know if there is a better time to say "What about this?"
I'm starting to think you do not understand what Landmark is or what it will become.
What sort of PVE or PVP are you expecting, that they haven't already said is on the way?
Landmark is a game. It is what it is. It isn't nor will it ever be some fleshed out mmorpg with everything provided magically for us. They are making the tools and groundwork, we are supposed to take it from there.
This is why I bought. The thought of players building their own worlds, with the same system development/rule set tools that will be making EQN. The thought of letting players build everything from vendor NPCs to mobs with storybricks, from bunkers to castles in a fully destructible world.
I didn't buy it to be confined to a box. You want to see the coolest thing I've seen so far in Landmark? Check this out.
The guy took a tree prop and enlarged it to make a walk way! This is world building! Functional building! This is awesome!
This is what the forum response was -
"Yeah, looks like a bug. I do not think the dev team intended for trees to be quite that large"
"Trees scale too large and can extend outside one's claim too easily..."
"It would be better if one could not extend any part of a prop off one's own claim. It should fail to place, resize, rotate, or move and give an error message."
wtf??? I don't get it...
What has changed? They are still going to allow players to do what you are saying from what I understand. Claims are step one. Attached claims step 2. Beyond 2 claims added, guild claims, cities, islands, servers....the options are endless.
You seem to expect Z when we are on D. You must be aware of the plans they are currently working on, it is all listed very clearly on the forums and the last live stream touched on most of it. The things you speak of are on their way, how soon and to what degree we will have access to them is still unknown, but they've said over and over "the same as the devs". While obviously they will always have total control, we can get pretty dang close.
What don't you get, people would like bugs fixed? It isn't currently intended to work that way. Again, we aren't there yet. Normally players are allowed into closed betas with an almost complete game. SOE is doing it different. You are setting unrealistic expectations for them and others even.
People were digging huge pits at starting areas and new players were getting stuck not knowing wtf was going on. That isn't a feature of the game, that is players abusing the current systems. There is a huge difference between griefing aka taking advantage of unintended design and allowing players to do what they want.
The video in question seems to be discussing this. That they will not allow other players to abuse the game's features to harass others unwillingly. If you want to be apart of player vs player conflicts of whatever sort, I'm sure they will be more than happy to give you an outlet.
Most definitely not the title for me, I fully support "emergent griefing", heck, creativity should be rewarded and not removed.
Perhaps the title needs to be changed to Everquest Next: Safety Edition
Dude you have no idea how disgusting that video is to me.
AT THIS POINT EQN:L is more of a tool than an mmorpg. Who knows that could change in a month. Videos like this don't give me much hope though.
You could be disgusted at how software patents, if they become prevalent, could ruin general purpose computer. You could be disgusted at the disparity between the rich and poor world wide and probably in the country you live in. You could be disgusted at the amount of money the United States government pays out to corporations that have more money than most countries. But no. You are disgusted at a game that won't allow you to ruin another player's day. Nice.
Build a bigger strawman. Keep building them, so that your stance has relevance. While you're at it, get over yourself.
No one wants to kick over your sand castle.
OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoh! Big words!
Let me put it this way. You like a particular set of game mechanics, that have no social or cultural relevance. The opposite or inverse set of game mechanics don't either. They all represent entertainment preferences. Disgust, as a response, seems out of place. I would go so far as to say it seems bizarre, given what you're being disgusted by. A developer is providing a product that they think closely matches the majority of the target audience for their game. This isn't any different that Aventurine building a game with OW-FFA PvP built into the game. It's just a set of game mechanics that the target audience will hopefully enjoy.
It's amazing how many of these threads are down to the simple fact that someone isn't the target audience for a game, but who think they are the target audience for a game and the developer just has it wrong. The only people to blame for the hurt feelings are the people with the hurt feelings.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I will never understand why some demand those that don't want to be messed with be put into that position if they want to play. If it's popular enough that 24% want no holds barred then go be happy together, there will be enough people there to have fun with. Leave the other 76% alone to enjoy themselves on their terms.
Can someone make a reasonable claim as to why everyone must be involved in PvP/Griefing? Is it game breaking if only those that want to play like that have to participate?
You don't know why SoE has planned for PvP islands. The point they were trying to make is you won't be an unwilling participant to someone's else's fun at your expense.
I'd wait to see what they have planned for PvP before getting too worked up. Do you really want to PvP against those that don't want to? The point of PvP is challenge.
-.- After reading this entire thread, I still do not understand where BCBully is coming from. All I see is jumping to conclusions, and whining that he can't grief other people. Well guess his forum name suits his personality just fine.
As far as what SOE has said, I am fine with their decision, it makes perfect sense to me. I honestly do not get the people who complain about not being able to bully other people in a game.
-.- After reading this entire thread, I still do not understand where BCBully is coming from. All I see is jumping to conclusions, and whining that he can't grief other people. Well guess his forum name suits his personality just fine.
As far as what SOE has said, I am fine with their decision, it makes perfect sense to me. I honestly do not get the people who complain about not being able to bully other people in a game.
This is a portion of my post on the Landmark forums. It's linked to the OP of this thread. Maybe this will help. You seem to have the wrong impression of me. The entire post, and thread are there.
side note - About me, there is no way in the world, would I condone the destruction of the works of art created by these artist. In my opinion, only an heathen would want something like that.
I feel that the people who make these works of art, should have their own server, or game mode, be given the tools they need to create, and protections needed to preserve their art and creativity.
However, I do not believe that the entire scope of development of this "sandbox" should be designed with those restrictions on the entire game. There has to be a better way.
Comments
Agent Smith:
"Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world? Where none suffered, where everyone would be happy. It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from."
Seems this game is designed a lot like this, maybe it will turn out better.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/quotes"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
everquest landmark is a crafters MMO.
think this thru...
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
If someone is killed in Null Sec space in EVE, was he griefed?
If someone is questing in enemy territory in WoW, and is killed, is he being griefed?
If someone is escorting a cart, or transporting goods in Wushu, and is killed, is that griefing?
Besides, no one wants to destroy the statues, or the house that these artist are making. They need their own server, their own mode, where they are safe, where their creations are protected. The entire game should not be developed that way though.
That's exactly how the game is now. 0 combat, pvp or pve. The thing is. There is no one playing. Imagine areas the size of WvW maps without anyone on them. Nothing but abandoned claims, island (map) after island.
Oh, it might have been smaller (at around 1000K online avg it wasn't the smallest) but the battles were glorious.
It was my favorite server, and I'm a carebear by nature.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Uh, I'm pretty sure many would love to blow up someone's amazing looking creation (I would if it is an option). You think way too highly of people.
Have they set servers yet for release? Have they introduced combat or PVP yet? You seem to be making a lot of conclusions based on a video that basically said "we won't allow griefing."
If I want to PVP, set my claim to be attacked and or play on a PVP server, I'm never going to be griefed. I've accepted all that comes with the territory.
In the video they gave examples of people trying to grief. Like building huge holes in starting areas or other obstacles that others didn't sign up for.
Maybe I missed it, but I'm doubting THE ENTIRE GAME is going to be the same. They've talked about and have another video about different rulesets for servers.
The seem to want players to be able to go hardcore FFA kill them all, if they want.
If they didn't want people to die, it wouldn't be in the game. They don't want players being able to kill, harm, or have negative impact on those that don't want it.
Again, maybe I missed it, but you seem to be connected dots and making conclusions off of things they aren't saying.
Edit: You seem to be assuming LM will be like EVE. LM is not EVE, nor anywhere close. It is way closer to a "sandbox" on the scale of the word.
Unless a server is set for total freedom to do whatever you want, you can't roll in and conquer the server through politics, economics, or brute force, you are assuming any and all of those things are even present.
EQN PVP servers might cater a bit more in that direction, but what you seem to be looking for probably isn't easily accomplished in a fantasy mmorpg.
Now if SOE gives players free control, something never before seen could develop over time, but I'm doubting it with how people are. No matter what, there will always be those trying to spoil others fun, even if it comes at a cost to themselves.
Also, despite what the poll and video say, if there is an overwhelming request/demand for something during Alpha/Beta, I'm betting they will at least test it. No reason not. That is kind of the entire point of this whole development shift. Give the players what they want. That doesn't me tailor it to mine or your specific needs, but what the whole wants.
Andred was my favorite before it died, then Mordred before it died, then DAoC before it died lol
How would you accomplish this list? Control land or taxes for example. In a game where you can do whatever you want, how does one exert power over another? I don't know of any games that allow this. EVE is probably what many envision, but it's system can't work in EQN or LM without a lot of dev system in place beforehand, which goes against being "free" and a sandbox.
My son is playing it right now with 5 of his friends, and his cousin. A cousin who he has never met outside of MC and Xbox Live. Ther're playing on a survival server, pvp, like they always do. This is what everyone of his friends with an Xbox does, everyone, boy or girl, everyone of them.
MC is much much more than a block building game. It's probably the most complex, detailed, and flexible mmo ever made. I'm not about to sit down and play with him and them, but I know and he knows who's got the better product.
You didn't know?
edit - That part you quoted, is not a prediction. That's how it is, as we speak, in Landmark.
But why?
Because it's there?
I don't understand builders.
LOL. I don't understand art much either.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
These 5881 Minecraft PvP servers beg to differ...
EQN:L Front Page - "Have you ever wanted to build a game?Landmark gives you all the tools you need to design anything you can imagine..."
Man PvE only guy gets aggressive on the forms. Save it for the game buddy!
Same here. After Smedley's EVE remark, I wrote Landmark and Next off my list of games to try some day. But after seeing a recent video talking about rulesets for servers (which indicated at least some servers will be PvE or RP) and now this video about anti-griefing measures, it's back on the potential play radar.
I doubt I'll do the Founder thing, though. Was going to but Smedley's ill-conceived PVP remarks killed that impulse. Perhaps when it's released I'll take a look now, at least.
In ways, I feel they should have been more up front. While I care not that they pull the open world griefing rug out from under the 24% of death and destruction fanboys, they drove away potential customers by not being clear and trying to get the griefers to pony up. It's amusing in a way, like they stole the lunch money of the playground bullies and then said, ha ha, you can't hit anyone despite having paid your Fight Club fees.
What gives you the impression that EQN:LM or EQN will not have the exact same thing plus a whole lot more?
Alpha. There is no game to Landmark right now, none. There is no pve, or pvp.
Beta is slated to begin in 3 weeks. I've seen SOE do amazing things in two weeks. I saw them do it with Planetside 2 on a couple different occasions, but to take Landmark from a straight building tool, to a game, from no till then? It's nearly beyond the realm of reason. If they pull it off, I will be the first to say "they did it!"
That being said, a year from now maybe, if they stay on it and keep pushing. Again though this is "technically" alpha. I don't know if there is a better time to say "What about this?"
Thank goodness. I won't have to worry about some shit stain coming along and destroying my creation.
Where you really worried about that? Come on, no one thought that did they?
I'm starting to think you do not understand what Landmark is or what it will become.
What sort of PVE or PVP are you expecting, that they haven't already said is on the way?
Landmark is a game. It is what it is. It isn't nor will it ever be some fleshed out mmorpg with everything provided magically for us. They are making the tools and groundwork, we are supposed to take it from there.
PVP servers are pretty easy to add. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you want that isn't in the pipeline. Alpha, Beta, Release makes no difference. It's a F2P game and they don't have to follow any strict schedule. They can make drastic changes whenever they want if it pleases the fans and makes for a better game.
What we have now is probably 65% of the "game". There is a whole lot more to add.
From your previous posts, I'm assuming that Landmark won't be anything like what you want until it is almost 100% release ready. Not to say it will ever be 100% finished. We are still in the early stages of development, making a thriving world/continent/server is a long ways off.
This is why I bought. The thought of players building their own worlds, with the same system development/rule set tools that will be making EQN. The thought of letting players build everything from vendor NPCs to mobs with storybricks, from bunkers to castles in a fully destructible world.
I didn't buy it to be confined to a box. You want to see the coolest thing I've seen so far in Landmark? Check this out.
The guy took a tree prop and enlarged it to make a walk way! This is world building! Functional building! This is awesome!
This is what the forum response was -
"Yeah, looks like a bug. I do not think the dev team intended for trees to be quite that large"
"Trees scale too large and can extend outside one's claim too easily..."
"It would be better if one could not extend any part of a prop off one's own claim. It should fail to place, resize, rotate, or move and give an error message."
wtf??? I don't get it...
What has changed? They are still going to allow players to do what you are saying from what I understand. Claims are step one. Attached claims step 2. Beyond 2 claims added, guild claims, cities, islands, servers....the options are endless.
You seem to expect Z when we are on D. You must be aware of the plans they are currently working on, it is all listed very clearly on the forums and the last live stream touched on most of it. The things you speak of are on their way, how soon and to what degree we will have access to them is still unknown, but they've said over and over "the same as the devs". While obviously they will always have total control, we can get pretty dang close.
What don't you get, people would like bugs fixed? It isn't currently intended to work that way. Again, we aren't there yet. Normally players are allowed into closed betas with an almost complete game. SOE is doing it different. You are setting unrealistic expectations for them and others even.
People were digging huge pits at starting areas and new players were getting stuck not knowing wtf was going on. That isn't a feature of the game, that is players abusing the current systems. There is a huge difference between griefing aka taking advantage of unintended design and allowing players to do what they want.
The video in question seems to be discussing this. That they will not allow other players to abuse the game's features to harass others unwillingly. If you want to be apart of player vs player conflicts of whatever sort, I'm sure they will be more than happy to give you an outlet.
OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoh! Big words!
Let me put it this way. You like a particular set of game mechanics, that have no social or cultural relevance. The opposite or inverse set of game mechanics don't either. They all represent entertainment preferences. Disgust, as a response, seems out of place. I would go so far as to say it seems bizarre, given what you're being disgusted by. A developer is providing a product that they think closely matches the majority of the target audience for their game. This isn't any different that Aventurine building a game with OW-FFA PvP built into the game. It's just a set of game mechanics that the target audience will hopefully enjoy.
It's amazing how many of these threads are down to the simple fact that someone isn't the target audience for a game, but who think they are the target audience for a game and the developer just has it wrong. The only people to blame for the hurt feelings are the people with the hurt feelings.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Can someone make a reasonable claim as to why everyone must be involved in PvP/Griefing? Is it game breaking if only those that want to play like that have to participate?
You don't know why SoE has planned for PvP islands. The point they were trying to make is you won't be an unwilling participant to someone's else's fun at your expense.
I'd wait to see what they have planned for PvP before getting too worked up. Do you really want to PvP against those that don't want to? The point of PvP is challenge.
At least NGE is happening during closed beta. This will keep the number of bitter vets to a minimum.
-.- After reading this entire thread, I still do not understand where BCBully is coming from. All I see is jumping to conclusions, and whining that he can't grief other people. Well guess his forum name suits his personality just fine.
As far as what SOE has said, I am fine with their decision, it makes perfect sense to me. I honestly do not get the people who complain about not being able to bully other people in a game.
This is a portion of my post on the Landmark forums. It's linked to the OP of this thread. Maybe this will help. You seem to have the wrong impression of me. The entire post, and thread are there.
side note - About me, there is no way in the world, would I condone the destruction of the works of art created by these artist. In my opinion, only an heathen would want something like that.
I feel that the people who make these works of art, should have their own server, or game mode, be given the tools they need to create, and protections needed to preserve their art and creativity.However, I do not believe that the entire scope of development of this "sandbox" should be designed with those restrictions on the entire game. There has to be a better way.