Home › Game Forums › ArcheAge
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Can someone explain to me what 1.0 did to make it a Themepark
I'll be honest I have not followed the game, but I do know it was a 'sandbox' mmo. Can someone explain to me what 1.0 did to make it themepark?
I've read some stuff on 1.0, but since I didn't follow it from the beginning I don't know how it was before.
Thanks
Comments
- Expansion of the instanced content, which became more important too.
- Delphi Coins are obtained through daily quests instead of trade missions.
- The trade packs dropped will still return 40% of its value to the original crafter, which breaks the risk X reward system of the trade missions and the pirate faction.
There are another things i dont remember now.
I've always considered this argument BS.
The point of the 40% rule is obviously to encourage PVE types to do more unsafe trade runs, thus increasing the amount of player interaction and opportunities for piracy.
Some members of the PVP crowd can't even appreciate it when they are being catered to.
Clearly XL figured out that the vast bulk of the population is risk averse and not going to roll the dice on all-or-nothing gambles that cost them hours of work. No marks, no piracy.
I agree.
PVP'ers wanted to continually gank PVE'ers, and do 10-20% of the work, to hand the goods in for full rewards. All the while PVE'ers got diddly squat. Yes sandbox is all about freedom, but ganking other players like that was detrimental. XLGames realized this. So PVP'ers get to cry while PVE'ers rejoice!
IMO a good game has a mix of PVE and PVP.
It was never right, and will never be if PVE'ers get the shaft like they were getting. PVE'ers will just stop playing, or they will stop taking risky missions. Why spend a half hour+ of your time for ZERO reward, when a pirate at the finish line kills you, and gets everything you worked for?
Hence the reimbursements for trying. I'd be in favor of rewards based on distance traveled, but that may be too difficult to calculate.
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.
I've always considered this argument BS.
The point of the 40% rule is obviously to encourage PVE types to do more unsafe trade runs, thus increasing the amount of player interaction and opportunities for piracy.
Some members of the PVP crowd can't even appreciate it when they are being catered to.
Clearly XL figured out that the vast bulk of the population is risk averse and not going to roll the dice on all-or-nothing gambles that cost them hours of work. No marks, no piracy.
I agree.
PVP'ers wanted to continually gank PVE'ers, and do 10-20% of the work, to hand the goods in for full rewards. All the while PVE'ers got diddly squat. Yes sandbox is all about freedom, but ganking other players like that was detrimental. XLGames realized this. So PVP'ers get to cry while PVE'ers rejoice!
IMO a good game has a mix of PVE and PVP.
It was never right, and will never be if PVE'ers get the shaft like they were getting. PVE'ers will just stop playing, or they will stop taking risky missions. Why spend a half hour+ of your time for ZERO reward, when a pirate at the finish line kills you, and gets everything you worked for?
Hence the reimbursements for trying. I'd be in favor of rewards based on distance traveled, but that may be too difficult to calculate.
I disagree. The design of the trade mission VS piracy should be in a way that gives the traders a good chance to complete his mission and get extra rewards (obviusly the players with more skill or attention will have better success rates). Is absolutely normal and aceptable to lose some packs if in the sum of all your mission trades you get more rewards than if you would make them all in safe routes. Wouldn't be aceptable only if the loses always outweights the gains, which would be a bad design.
To lose some tradepacks when you in the final get more rewards isn't a big deal...is almost a investment.
"PVP'ers wanted to continually gank PVE'ers, and do 10-20% of the work, to hand the goods in for full rewards. All the while PVE'ers got diddly squat"
You described only ONE of the possible scenarios. There can be dozens more possibilities, like the "PVEr" arriving safe and profiting, dodging sucessfully the pirates, defeating them together with his friends, guildmates or paid bodyguards, etc. Are you pessimistic or lacks imagination?
If a trader goes alone on Liberty Island with 20 packages he should never ever be able to succesfully sell them. Liberty Island is supposed to be "strongest guild wins". If PvEers want to do business there they have to stick to the PvPers. Just as PvPers have to stick to PvEers for other business.
It's called player interaction, and I love it! The first time I was on Liberty Island in KR we actually payed pirates to escort us. 20 packages sold, 3 of them went to pirates(as a payment). We got attacked but they defended us.
It is beautiful. Is very good to see things like this again in a AAA mmo.how to turn a sandbox mmo into a themepark mmo:
1. add lots of dungeons instanced gear grind
2. make PvP irrelevant aka optional
3. destroy player run economy
4. kill any competition and create the illusion of competition in instanced battle arenas
5. dumb down all systems across the board to make the game more "accessible"
6. reward everyone for logging in / breathing / being in a 1mile radius of a kill
7. be safe all the time and lose nothing on death
voila, a fresh themepark is born
Roflmao!!! This^. So very much this^!!!!