Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Can this mmo be ruined by carebears in the west?
maccarthur2004
Member UncommonPosts: 511
As everyone knows, archeage is a sandbox pvp focused game. It's endgame is all about the risk X reward system provided by the disputes of trade routes, packs, castles, mining spots and so on, what is intended to create a social experience far more lively and complex than what we are used in the mainstream western mmos (except EVE).
Because this, Archeage have world pvp planned from its very root and entangled in all its features, like the trade missions, the justice system and the piracy. So, world pvp cant be simply plucked off the game and it still continue to be a great mmo. Archeage with word pvp plucked off would become crap.
However, this mmo seens to arouse interest from carebears! I dont know the reason for this, if is the lack of information about the game or some other thing i cant understand (e.g: a hope that developers dumb down the mmo and reduce or remove its risks), and this is particularly source of concern to the people that awaited AA for almost 4 years for what it is intended to be when announced: a fantasy sandbox AAA mmo inspired in UO.
In my opinion, AA will only do well here in the west if it keep itself as a "different" mmo, with risks X reward, social tools and meaningful pvp, since is it what many players are waiting for and cant find in the countless AAA linear themepark mmos that is around. The carebear crowd already have plenty of AAA mmos to play and is somewhat "unfair" they wanting a complete domination in the genre, with no even a crumb to the pvp crowd.
AA will do very well in Russia because the playerbase wants a Lineage 3 and AA seens to fill well that role.
Comments
right here, you got it.
every mmorpg gets dumbdown doesn't matter if its sooner or later, you just have to defend the archeage forums from the onslaught of carebears for as long as possible but even that sometimes doesn't work because the devs cater to those who pay the most $$ and that's sometimes the carebears.
My theme song.
Every time i see someone post this nonsense just makes me shake my head.
There have been 0 --ZERO-- FFA PVP ( RPG) games that have drawn any type of player base in the "West"
Without the players that will tolerate some PVP, but will have nothing to do with a game that promotes griefing, AA will also be a ghost town of a game.
So, really, the only way to "ruin" games in the 'West" seems to be to cater to griefers.
Help support an artist and gamer who has lost his tools to create and play: http://www.gofundme.com/u63nzcgk
There are plenty of zerg guilds filled with carebears and PvPers that make the game plenty safe for carebear players. Just join one.
My theme song.
Hi, Hardcore PvP'er here.
Your post is absolutely correct... however, the problem is when the "carebears" leave in 2-3 months because all the PvE content is gone. The only people left are the PvP'ers because we are still enjoying the content the "carebears" chose not to participate in.
I understand the money aspect but selling a house to somebody with a terminal illness isn't a good business plan.
They won't be done with all the PvE content after 2-3 months tho.
Neither is making a 16 bedroom house for someone with limited income and only 2 friends.
Little forum boys with their polished cyber toys: whine whine, boo-hoo, talk talk.
Would be better if they remove the pve entirely, like Camelot Unchained will do.
I'm glad you agree with me.
There will be some that take longer than 2-3 months but 2-3 is the average.
You are correct.
If I may stay on the same comparison. The original designs were actually for a "Tank" not a "House" and a tank my friend is perfect for 2 people...
Then the game can go FTP after you finish up all the content
This would work out perfectly for "most" players on the West but for the developers on the West... not so much.
From what I understand people like me who like to pick and choose when to PvP can also play since if I avoid war zones and participate in the trade pack thing I can limit my PvP participation and still enjoy the rest of the game. I think it will a fun game I like the huge game this one seems to be and the fact that it is quite sandboxy.
I am part time PvPer . I enjoy PvP but not all the time so I am going to try this game .
1) A dream, open-world, PvP sandbox full of nothing but the hardest of hardcore PvPers--griefers, gankers, duelists, challenge enthusiasts, whatever you want to call them--or
2) The exact same game with a significantly larger population. The only difference being that you have to let some carebears play.
You'd be foolish to choose the first option, both as a player and a game developer. Carebears, in and of themselves, really only benefit the MMOs that they play. It's catering to their every design whim that can have detrimental effects. But don't hold the desire of game companies to make as much money as possible against the carebears playing your game; for the most part, they're simply providing you with prey for the slaughter.
Honestly, this is usually solved by having 2 serversets. Let the carebears have their own servers and the problem is solved.
It increases the potential number of players as well, only possible problem is that each group might complain because they think content aimed at the other group takes too much work.
Some people are of course against this because they think that a game only should have 1 serverset that is the way they prefer but choices are generally a good thing and it is not hard to implement either.
Otherwise you do get the risk that the devs try to make both groups happy on the same server and that only leads to bad compromises that makes neither group happy.
I agree, except that EVE might be considered the only successful FFA PvP game.
Whenever arguments like this topic are brought up, people seem to forget that playstyle preferences are on a sliding scale, not a purely "love" or "hate" scale. Just as some people will PvE only when they have to, PvE players will PvP when they have to. Some players who prefer PvE also (*gasp*) enjoy PvP to a degree.
The issue is that players who are jerks on the internet tend to grief other players when there are no restrictions (level-based, pvp zones, or flagging) in place to prevent them from disrupting other players' fun. Adding consequences makes the system a little better, but if you make them too harsh the PvP players will leave. Make them too light and the PvE players will leave. Finding a balance to please both crowds is difficult.
I'm probably going to check the game out when it releases, but I don't have my hopes very high for them finding a good balance between PvE and PvP.
I haven't played it a lot, but I think you are all worrying over nothing. PvP is the central feature of the game, without it there is very little to attract players to the game and it will die very quickly.
I would also add that western players aren't against PvP per se, Mobas and FPS and games like starcraft are enjoy a large following in the west and even games like WoW have a sizeable PvP community. The problem is that the quality of the MMO's that have made PVP the center of the game design have been poor.
If you look at Darkfall, MO and a number of others, they have been really shoddy and have given people the wrong impression of what PvP actually is. To make matters worse, in games like Rift, WoW, Secret World etc. PvP is added as an afterthought and isn;t particularly meaningful adding to this distorted impression.
If you mention PvP to the average MMO player they think about a low level player being ganked by several players and getting teabagged. Moreover, the absurd macho/elitist culture surrounding PvP hasn't helped. But my point is, there is a large community of PVPers in the west, it's just that MMOs are not the places they go to for their fix. Who can blame them?
I don't mind carebears. Even though I PvP I don't grief or camp unless the people I'm griefing or camping have a reputation of doing that. Carebears and crafters and merchants have their roles to play. I want them to have fun and stay in the game. I don't like carebears lobbying to remove the roles of pvpers.
My theme song.
Both solutions suck. You can of course make a great MMO with only PvP or PvE but you have to to plan that from the second you start making the game. It is not something you can take away later unless possibly if the game is 90% or so in one of the playstyles (you could easily take away the PvP from TOR as example but there it is just something very optional they added so they could have it on the featurelist).
In this case they have made the game so you need both, you could probably put less focus on one thing or the other now but not take away it completely or we would get half a game.
I don't understand how this "east good, west bad" bullshit works. Are us westerners all somehow just risk averse carebears? moreso than the chinese in the east who have their own EVE server all to themselves who RARELY fight but instead keep to their own space and pve all day?
Get your head out of your ass then ask the question again without this silly East vs. West mentality.
As a "westerner" I enjoy high risk so long as it comes with an appropiate reward, that's why I play EVE and will be playing ArcheAge aswell. I'm not a rare breed among "westerners" but there will always be people who just want to partake in the pve aspects of a game because they just genuinely do not enjoy pvp (some of them are russian too hurr hurr)
It's not as if we aren't allowing the carebears to play.
The problem is with the carebears, they can't play unless the game is changed. I have no problem playing with carebears.
This could work.
You seem to be confused.
Nobody is saying that the westerners are bad. The majority of the players on the West do not wish to partake in PvP. I am on the west and I do like to partake. If a game was released with just PvE it would do alot better on the west rather than a game that just had PvP (provided that it was a decent game).