I'm starting a petition to deny this petition to prevent the devs from wasting precious time and resources on this self-centered entitlement.
It'd be like asking CCP to make a purely PvE server - ludicrous. Stop trying to change game's core vision design.
I do understand your desire and love a good PvE sandbox, but it doesn't mean that every game should exclude PvP as its core.
yay, another person refusing to pay attention to everything I say.
1 server is already deemed Hardcore PVP server
The other is named "Normal" Server.
Normal has open PVP...if they are willing to make 2 servers, why not make 3? 1 without the open pvp?
Im not asking the devs to change their vision...their vision is make an all encompassing game that features everything, not just one thing.
So you admit The RePopulation is a PvP centric MMO?
I am paying attention to what you say.
If a MMO's ingame virtual world is two thirds PvP zones then there is no reasonable way anyone can argue that the MMO in question is not infact a PvP MMO. The 2/3's comment was yours.
The Dev's have categorized the open PvP server as "NORMAL". That's MMO speak for PvP centric if I ever heard it. Very illuminating.
Some of my knowledge may have been off, but in general I was right..... What you want to do is petition the Devs to attempt to force/coerce them to change RP by altering it's intended design goals to accommodate your preferred gameplay style.
Not Cool. It's made for PvP Players primarily so let them have it. It's not made for you and I and any attempt to change it now will cause problems with the game itself longterm.
Nah, that was actually a piece of misinformation by me that I fixed in later posts. It's 2/3 PVE and only 1/3 PVP (for the rogue factions)
If the "Normal" server is open PvP than it's a PvP centric MMO. End of line.
Anarchy Online has protected player cities (for orgs), Notum Wars (a complete expansion souly for PVP purposes), 3 factions including Neutrals...the only thing it was missing was deep crafting (but the crafting was there and very odd to say the least).
Would you have said that Anarchy Online was a PVP Centric game?
I might be crazy...that's okay, but I really do love the ideas behind this game, but I won't be playing if 2/3 of the world is open PVP and player made cities are siege ridden. That's why I ask you sign this request the devs to create a PVE only server.
The creators of The Repopulation recently put out a survey asking how you like to play the game and what you find to be important. I truly believe this was ignored since shortly thereafter they stated that 2/3 of the game world would be open PVP. Also, all player created cities were subject to sieges. Another form of forced PVP. This petition requests that the developers of The Repopulation reconsider hosting a PVE server. This game is to good to not fight for. I personally have been following this game for almost 3 years and have been itching to play it. Please sign this petition so they know what we want.
Maybe you and the other two people that signed your petition should find another game to play? There are many to choose from that fit your game style. You can't expect every game to be designed just for you.
Maybe they didn't ignore the poll. Maybe they reacted accordingly and you are a minority.
Today, I'm going to drive past 3 hotdog stands and go to McDonalds. I'm going to order a Big Mac. But, I'm going to demand that they replace the hamburger patties with long-sliced hotdogs. I don't like hamburger meat, so they should listen to me. I'm Billy Smith, damn it! Screw everyone else. This social injustice shall be met with a petition on Facebook!
wow...love the posts that make me out to be some douche...if the petition doesnt work, it doesnt and I move on...if it does, I send it to the repop devs and even then it might mean nothing. It's giving a voice where I was suspecting a voice might be needed...I understand that the PVP people that are very serious about their PVP, but this isnt about fighting against you....it's more giving PVE'ers who have been dying for a Sandbox to dig into a voice. Whether they take advantage or even trust me is another thing and I expect nothing.
In the end, I'm not understanding why all the attacks against someone just trying to see if there was enough concern to maybe fuel a debate. No "Weather Underground" style protests or anything...just a outreach on a petition.
I thank those that were civil and those that had good debates on the topic...for those that chose the other route, I hope you find your happy place one day :P
Originally posted by Lukooone Originally posted by oldschoolpunkI might be crazy...that's okay, but I really do love the ideas behind this game, but I won't be playing if 2/3 of the world is open PVP and player made cities are siege ridden. That's why I ask you sign this request the devs to create a PVE only server.http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/petition-for-the-repopulation-to-include-a-pveThe creators of The Repopulation recently put out a survey asking how you like to play the game and what you find to be important. I truly believe this was ignored since shortly thereafter they stated that 2/3 of the game world would be open PVP. Also, all player created cities were subject to sieges. Another form of forced PVP. This petition requests that the developers of The Repopulation reconsider hosting a PVE server. This game is to good to not fight for. I personally have been following this game for almost 3 years and have been itching to play it. Please sign this petition so they know what we want.
Aaah young gamers... Did you heard the word TRAMMEL? Like 20 years ago a pve server ruleset destroyed the best mmorpg of all times called Ultima Online... Wolfs need sheeps but sheeps need wolfs much more and they dont know, remember these words we learned 20 years ago...
I played UO when it was basically blue vs red and that was the BEST time i've ever had in a game, the EQ was released and UO decided to change their system .. it then sucked and I promptly left.
The only PvP I did was if attacked or when us blues all made a mob and went out to make the reds life hell :-)
A game with PvP only needs players to communicate and get help from each other .. not solo play the whole game ignoring everyone else.
Well it seems I misunderstood this MMO. Since the first I had heard of this one over a year ago The RePoP was going to be primarily a PvP centric MMO. That was my understanding. I liked much I saw in the emails except I kept getting the distinct impression that PvP was the main focus and non-PvPers like myself would not find it to out liking.
I was apparently wrong.
I rescind my earlier comments. Thanks for calling me on it.
(btw... if two thirds of each server is PvP areas... than this MMO *IS* a PvP MMO by most anyone's definition... but I could be wrong.)
I still will not sign this petition even after rescinding my comments.
Was vanilla WoW a PVP or a PVE game? Because if we say 2/3 of the map here is PVP, then 1/2 of WoW was PVP at launch (the "other" continent), plus whatever battleground instances/space there was.
Its the same here, except there's a "3rd continent" (the last 1/3 fo the game) where players can be in a Nation which chooses its alignment, which can result in MORE protection from PVP or LESS protection from PVP in that area and other opposing faction areas.
After the numerous posts from JC-Smith and Josh Halls on these forums explaining the PvE-PvP dynamics in the game, I'm a bit dumbfounded to see posts like these again.
The landmass in the game is the equivalent of many times what some other games offer; it's as though they had a PvE + a PvP server maps stitched together on the same server. And there is no forced PvP because ALL of the content tier is accessible from PvE-only zones.
I just hope that ALL content is a lot more time consuming to get in PVE zones than it would be in PVP zones, risk vrs reward and all that 'good stuff'.
The upside is that the game will be F2P, so players will be able to try it risk-free, without spending a dime and see if it works for them.
F2P and pay to win, have a very fine line between them in a game thats heavily focused on PVP. I hope they do a good job and look forward to the results!
On the PVE vs. PVP content front, most of their content is done the way Eve and SWG did it : dynamically generated from a huge pool of missions, along with some epic/special missions, dens, engagements and POIs/strongholds : https://www.therepopulation.com/index.php/game-features/pve-overview.
So my understanding is that all of that content, save for the "epic/special missions" will be able to pop, evolve and mutate in various places with a high degree of reusability. And this is a sandbox. So the rest of the content is coming from what the players choose to do; there's no hand-holding here.
So from that perspective, the PVP vs. PVE area content point is moot; I'm confident it will be fairly well distributed.
On the F2P front... yeah, there's always a chance its not done well, we'll have to see how they balance it out. However, one thing that points towards no p2w is the fact the game is crowdsourced and made by a small team; there are no big investors or shareholders behind pressuring them to make profits; its just two guys and a bunch of passionnate people who believe in the idea.
That's also the same idea behind why they have a flexible release schedule; they won't ship a crappy game to make investors feel less nervous, they'll ship when its ready.
I'm starting a petition to deny this petition to prevent the devs from wasting precious time and resources on this self-centered entitlement.
It'd be like asking CCP to make a purely PvE server - ludicrous. Stop trying to change game's core vision design.
I do understand your desire and love a good PvE sandbox, but it doesn't mean that every game should exclude PvP as its core.
yay, another person refusing to pay attention to everything I say.
1 server is already deemed Hardcore PVP server
The other is named "Normal" Server.
Normal has open PVP...if they are willing to make 2 servers, why not make 3? 1 without the open pvp?
Im not asking the devs to change their vision...their vision is make an all encompassing game that features everything, not just one thing.
Why 2 and not 3? Because occasional consensual PVP and full-on PVE are compatible together but full open PVP isn't with either of those. And because the more you fragment community in asking player to make game-life-long defining decision, the worse you're off.
Yeah UO did so well when EQ came out.......so well they had to change to ruleset to beg people to keep playing.
QFT...the demise of UO wasn't Trammel...it was EQ...make it and the PVE lovers will come. if we HAVE TO play a PVP game to get our fix, we will...but the minute a better alternative comes around, we'll be packing up and leaving
UO subscription numbers more then tripled with the release of Trammel. PvE servers were a godsend for that game.......And would be for any FFA PvP game. Hell to be fair I'd like to see FFA PvP servers in games like Rift, WoW or The Secret World. Not that I'd ever play it but my feeling has always been player choice is important. So instead of kowtowing to every demographic you make differing ruleset servers to pull in differing demographics.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
wow...love the posts that make me out to be some douche...if the petition doesnt work, it doesnt and I move on...if it does, I send it to the repop devs and even then it might mean nothing. It's giving a voice where I was suspecting a voice might be needed...I understand that the PVP people that are very serious about their PVP, but this isnt about fighting against you....it's more giving PVE'ers who have been dying for a Sandbox to dig into a voice. Whether they take advantage or even trust me is another thing and I expect nothing.
In the end, I'm not understanding why all the attacks against someone just trying to see if there was enough concern to maybe fuel a debate. No "Weather Underground" style protests or anything...just a outreach on a petition.
I thank those that were civil and those that had good debates on the topic...for those that chose the other route, I hope you find your happy place one day :P
Hey, I'll take that thanks and thank you right back. You came to this thread with your views and ideas and ready to debate to try and make something better, and I think that's totally the right way to approach thing in this game and genre
Yeah UO did so well when EQ came out.......so well they had to change to ruleset to beg people to keep playing.
QFT...the demise of UO wasn't Trammel...it was EQ...make it and the PVE lovers will come. if we HAVE TO play a PVP game to get our fix, we will...but the minute a better alternative comes around, we'll be packing up and leaving
UO subscription numbers more then tripled with the release of Trammel. PvE servers were a godsend for that game.......And would be for any FFA PvP game. Hell to be fair I'd like to see FFA PvP servers in games like Rift, WoW or The Secret World. Not that I'd ever play it but my feeling has always been player choice is important. So instead of kowtowing to every demographic you make differing ruleset servers to pull in differing demographics.
I'd also like to see those kind of servers, just for the science of it, just for fun, to see what people would do if it, what kind of community it would build, viability, etc.
I think the reason we're not seeing this in general is that you fragment your population and play style, you spread your community thinner which puts it more at risks. And in a lot of MMOs, people come for the features, for the vision, but stick around for the community, and you don't want to risk killing that.
A community, in MMOs as in RL, I believe is made of more than the sums of the its parts, and those parts will be your belligerent PK as much as your pink-glass wearing carebear. It takes of everyone to make a world.
That being said, at the end of the day, most organizations developing MMOs cannot afford risking their communities and they're better off for it.
One MMO that could have tried this experiment with little cost given its eco-system is WoW... Maybe someday they will, before they die out, who knows
UO subscription numbers more then tripled with the release of Trammel. PvE servers were a godsend for that game.......And would be for any FFA PvP game. Hell to be fair I'd like to see FFA PvP servers in games like Rift, WoW or The Secret World. Not that I'd ever play it but my feeling has always been player choice is important. So instead of kowtowing to every demographic you make differing ruleset servers to pull in differing demographics.
UO's normal rule set was what we'd consider Hardcore. Full looting, no protection other than being able to call for guards in town, free for all. It's true that the majority of players don't want that type of PvP, though the audience that does is pretty gung ho and generally sticks with those games for a good period of time.
That's very different from team based PvP with no looting and full protection in a large part of the world. The vast majority of MMO players can enjoy that. It's comparing apples to oranges.
The creators of The Repopulation recently put out a survey asking how you like to play the game and what you find to be important. I truly believe this was ignored since shortly thereafter they stated that 2/3 of the game world would be open PVP.
It was ignored, but only by you. When they asked : What do you find important in our game, the one that has been designed entirly around pvp? You answered pve.
This game is to good to not fight for. I personally have been following this game for almost 3 years and have been itching to play it. Please sign this petition so they know what we want.
Too good not to fight for? The game is over before is has begun without pvp, as the games CORE has been designed around PVP, and despite your refusal to accept this fact, It continues on the path it has always been on.
What we want is open world pvp. 11 people signed your petition, In the eleven days its been up. Get it now?
Your a PVE only player, following a PVP game. Please go away, find another game, one of the thousands of PVE games that have been released over the last few years, aimed directly at players like you, these games have not been plagued by stupid POLL's created by players like me.
I continue to question your motives here, partly due to difficulty accepting someone can be so ignorant of the facts that they follow a game like this, designed so fundamentaly around PVP, expecting a PVE server.
There seems to be so much misinformation floating around about this game the devs would really help themselves by doing a article to wipe out all the main concerns people seem to have from this misinformation
such as 1/3 of the map being safe from pvp, when infact it is 2/3 (this has come from a poorly worded article)
such as certain resources only being available in the pvp zone (i know the devs have addressed this but a formal article to cover this would put that rumour to bed imo)
they should state clearly the approx sizes of these 1/3rds, as many seem to think that not being able to go into 1/3 of a map without being in a pvp area is going to really hamper their experience in terms of land mass
they should clearly lay down the facts that on a normal server you can play it just like it is a pve server and have a enjoyable game
This would go some way to quash the amount of misinformation and worry there seems to be currently floating around
Pfffft! Read a post that I put up? Nonsense! This is the internet after all. There are appearances to keep up you know.
With a full compliment of PvE tiers (skills) and resources (crafting materials), it seems like the PvE players will have an entire game to play, with a small area where players can choose to engage in PvP. I do understand the idea behind a "PvE Server", but it still seems kind of unnecessary, even if I didn't read the entire page of the link I posted.
Is the PvE area limited in some way that isn't obvious? Like, is it half the size of the PvP area? Are there things you can't do in the PvE area like build a house, which you can do in the PvP area? If so, then yeah, I can see a need for a PvE server if the devs want to increase their audience.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
With a full compliment of PvE tiers (skills) and resources (crafting materials), it seems like the PvE players will have an entire game to play, with a small area where players can choose to engage in PvP. I do understand the idea behind a "PvE Server", but it still seems kind of unnecessary, even if I didn't read the entire page of the link I posted.
Is the PvE area limited in some way that isn't obvious? Like, is it half the size of the PvP area? Are there things you can't do in the PvE area like build a house, which you can do in the PvP area? If so, then yeah, I can see a need for a PvE server if the devs want to increase their audience.
It isn't a small area for PvP. Its 1/3 of the total landmass which is exclusively faction-based PvP, and the total landmass is touted as being many times that of most modern MMOs at launch, from what I understand. PvP can otherwise occur anywhere else player chose to have it happen (self-flagging mechanism).
You can do everything in a PvE area that you can do in a PvP area, including all tiers of encounters/missions/materials, except for building a siegeable player city.
Given that, I do no think it would make sense to fraction the community between "full PvE" and currently "normal" servers.
With a full compliment of PvE tiers (skills) and resources (crafting materials), it seems like the PvE players will have an entire game to play, with a small area where players can choose to engage in PvP. I do understand the idea behind a "PvE Server", but it still seems kind of unnecessary, even if I didn't read the entire page of the link I posted.
Is the PvE area limited in some way that isn't obvious? Like, is it half the size of the PvP area? Are there things you can't do in the PvE area like build a house, which you can do in the PvP area? If so, then yeah, I can see a need for a PvE server if the devs want to increase their audience.
It isn't a small area for PvP. Its 1/3 of the total landmass which is exclusively faction-based PvP, and the total landmass is touted as being many times that of most modern MMOs at launch, from what I understand. PvP can otherwise occur anywhere else player chose to have it happen (self-flagging mechanism).
You can do everything in a PvE area that you can do in a PvP area, including all tiers of encounters/missions/materials, except for building a siegeable player city.
Given that, I do no think it would make sense to fraction the community between "full PvE" and currently "normal" servers.
To me, this seems better than a PvE server. Players have a choice both in choosing the game and after they start playing the game. At the same time, players aren't being artificially limited by their choice of PvP style. I can imagine a lot of players in the PvE zone, doing PvE things, and then they get a call for some sort of clan war, and then armies of people show up in the PvP area for very large, protracted battles. That, to me, sounds really fun.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The problems with games that are developed around a PvP premise via a realm vs. realm type of scenario is that, these games end up boiling down to some simple, real-life principles that will in all cases ruin the original intent of the game:
Outside networking among player networks, friends, etc. create kill gangs that individual players or smaller groups of friends can not compete against.
One "side" ends up with most of the most skilled PvPers, the lopside ends up frustrating players as their "side" shrinks and shirinks, and they end up leaving the game or switching to the over powered side.
Griefer type of guilds, networks, etc. will always drive out the players who are more crafter/economy focused
Players can accept a certain amount of losses from time to time, but will not enjoy playing if it involves being on the losing team and never being able to advance or develop their side's infrastructure.
This is why PvE servers need to be available in all MMOs. I would offer a PvE server that includes organized AI that would be playing the role of the enemy realms.
The problems with games that are developed around a PvP premise via a realm vs. realm type of scenario is that, these games end up boiling down to some simple, real-life principles that will in all cases ruin the original intent of the game:
Outside networking among player networks, friends, etc. create kill gangs that individual players or smaller groups of friends can not compete against.
One "side" ends up with most of the most skilled PvPers, the lopside ends up frustrating players as their "side" shrinks and shirinks, and they end up leaving the game or switching to the over powered side.
Griefer type of guilds, networks, etc. will always drive out the players who are more crafter/economy focused
Players can accept a certain amount of losses from time to time, but will not enjoy playing if it involves being on the losing team and never being able to advance or develop their side's infrastructure.
This is why PvE servers need to be available in all MMOs. I would offer a PvE server that includes organized AI that would be playing the role of the enemy realms.
With The Repopulation it looks like the entirety of the game can occur on the PvE side of the map. There is Faction v Faction, but players can just hang out on the PvE side of the map. Their resources and the resources on the PvE side of the map are safe.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
why is it that PvPers can and do play on PvE servers / in PvE games and don't complain about rulesets but PvEers can't ever seem to let a game with a PvP ruleset go without criticism of both the developers and the players themselves? Why not accept the fact that not every game out there will fit your own very specific needs and learn to live with the differences? it's called compromise and the the ability to compromise is essential to living a healthy life in this very social world of ours. In short, you are why we can't have nice things. This game is being made for a specific audience and if you aren't part of the audience it would be nice if you could just move on and not inconvenience others with your opinions.
I would like to note that I will probably not be playing this game because it doesn't seem interesting to me. I tend to enjoy fantasy themed games more than sci-fi. There are people out there who enjoy sci-fi and they like/want an open world sandbox to play around in. Let's let them have what they want instead of being selfish assholes out to ruin other people's fun. Let's make this change as a community, please, for the love of god.
why is it that Pvers can and do play on PvE servers / in PvE games and don't complain about rulesets but PvPers can't ever seem to let a game with a PvE ruleset go without criticism of both the developers and the players themselves? Why not accept the fact that not every game out there will fit your own very specific needs and learn to live with the differences? it's called compromise and the the ability to compromise is essential to living a healthy life in this very social world of ours. In short, you are why we can't have nice things. This game is being made for a specific audience and if you aren't part of the audience it would be nice if you could just move on and not inconvenience others with your opinions.
I would like to note that I will probably not be playing this game because it doesn't seem interesting to me. I tend to enjoy fantasy themed games more than sci-fi. There are people out there who enjoy sci-fi and they like/want an open world sandbox to play around in. Let's let them have what they want instead of being selfish assholes out to ruin other people's fun. Let's make this change as a community, please, for the love of god.
why is it that Pvers can and do play on PvE servers / in PvE games and don't complain about rulesets but PvPers can't ever seem to let a game with a PvE ruleset go without criticism of both the developers and the players themselves? Why not accept the fact that not every game out there will fit your own very specific needs and learn to live with the differences? it's called compromise and the the ability to compromise is essential to living a healthy life in this very social world of ours. In short, you are why we can't have nice things. This game is being made for a specific audience and if you aren't part of the audience it would be nice if you could just move on and not inconvenience others with your opinions.
I would like to note that I will probably not be playing this game because it doesn't seem interesting to me. I tend to enjoy fantasy themed games more than sci-fi. There are people out there who enjoy sci-fi and they like/want an open world sandbox to play around in. Let's let them have what they want instead of being selfish assholes out to ruin other people's fun. Let's make this change as a community, please, for the love of god.
Lets reverse the question and ask the same thing
It's true. The question gets asked from both sides of the fence. "Why can't we have open world PvP?" "Why can't we have a PvE server?"
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Comments
If the "Normal" server is open PvP than it's a PvP centric MMO. End of line.
I recognize this game now. Last post.
Another thing I just thought about is this:
Anarchy Online has protected player cities (for orgs), Notum Wars (a complete expansion souly for PVP purposes), 3 factions including Neutrals...the only thing it was missing was deep crafting (but the crafting was there and very odd to say the least).
Would you have said that Anarchy Online was a PVP Centric game?
Maybe you and the other two people that signed your petition should find another game to play? There are many to choose from that fit your game style. You can't expect every game to be designed just for you.
Maybe they didn't ignore the poll. Maybe they reacted accordingly and you are a minority.
Today, I'm going to drive past 3 hotdog stands and go to McDonalds. I'm going to order a Big Mac. But, I'm going to demand that they replace the hamburger patties with long-sliced hotdogs. I don't like hamburger meat, so they should listen to me. I'm Billy Smith, damn it! Screw everyone else. This social injustice shall be met with a petition on Facebook!
wow...love the posts that make me out to be some douche...if the petition doesnt work, it doesnt and I move on...if it does, I send it to the repop devs and even then it might mean nothing. It's giving a voice where I was suspecting a voice might be needed...I understand that the PVP people that are very serious about their PVP, but this isnt about fighting against you....it's more giving PVE'ers who have been dying for a Sandbox to dig into a voice. Whether they take advantage or even trust me is another thing and I expect nothing.
In the end, I'm not understanding why all the attacks against someone just trying to see if there was enough concern to maybe fuel a debate. No "Weather Underground" style protests or anything...just a outreach on a petition.
I thank those that were civil and those that had good debates on the topic...for those that chose the other route, I hope you find your happy place one day :P
I figured that would be ALOT harder to implement...but Im no dev or anything...just a long time gamer with a craving for some sandbox pve
I played UO when it was basically blue vs red and that was the BEST time i've ever had in a game, the EQ was released and UO decided to change their system .. it then sucked and I promptly left.
The only PvP I did was if attacked or when us blues all made a mob and went out to make the reds life hell :-)
A game with PvP only needs players to communicate and get help from each other .. not solo play the whole game ignoring everyone else.
Was vanilla WoW a PVP or a PVE game? Because if we say 2/3 of the map here is PVP, then 1/2 of WoW was PVP at launch (the "other" continent), plus whatever battleground instances/space there was.
Its the same here, except there's a "3rd continent" (the last 1/3 fo the game) where players can be in a Nation which chooses its alignment, which can result in MORE protection from PVP or LESS protection from PVP in that area and other opposing faction areas.
On the PVE vs. PVP content front, most of their content is done the way Eve and SWG did it : dynamically generated from a huge pool of missions, along with some epic/special missions, dens, engagements and POIs/strongholds : https://www.therepopulation.com/index.php/game-features/pve-overview.
So my understanding is that all of that content, save for the "epic/special missions" will be able to pop, evolve and mutate in various places with a high degree of reusability. And this is a sandbox. So the rest of the content is coming from what the players choose to do; there's no hand-holding here.
So from that perspective, the PVP vs. PVE area content point is moot; I'm confident it will be fairly well distributed.
On the F2P front... yeah, there's always a chance its not done well, we'll have to see how they balance it out. However, one thing that points towards no p2w is the fact the game is crowdsourced and made by a small team; there are no big investors or shareholders behind pressuring them to make profits; its just two guys and a bunch of passionnate people who believe in the idea.
That's also the same idea behind why they have a flexible release schedule; they won't ship a crappy game to make investors feel less nervous, they'll ship when its ready.
Why 2 and not 3? Because occasional consensual PVP and full-on PVE are compatible together but full open PVP isn't with either of those. And because the more you fragment community in asking player to make game-life-long defining decision, the worse you're off.
The normal server is not open pvp. It has 1/3 of the map fully opened to pvp. A very, very large map.
UO subscription numbers more then tripled with the release of Trammel. PvE servers were a godsend for that game.......And would be for any FFA PvP game. Hell to be fair I'd like to see FFA PvP servers in games like Rift, WoW or The Secret World. Not that I'd ever play it but my feeling has always been player choice is important. So instead of kowtowing to every demographic you make differing ruleset servers to pull in differing demographics.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Hey, I'll take that thanks and thank you right back. You came to this thread with your views and ideas and ready to debate to try and make something better, and I think that's totally the right way to approach thing in this game and genre
I'd also like to see those kind of servers, just for the science of it, just for fun, to see what people would do if it, what kind of community it would build, viability, etc.
I think the reason we're not seeing this in general is that you fragment your population and play style, you spread your community thinner which puts it more at risks. And in a lot of MMOs, people come for the features, for the vision, but stick around for the community, and you don't want to risk killing that.
A community, in MMOs as in RL, I believe is made of more than the sums of the its parts, and those parts will be your belligerent PK as much as your pink-glass wearing carebear. It takes of everyone to make a world.
That being said, at the end of the day, most organizations developing MMOs cannot afford risking their communities and they're better off for it.
One MMO that could have tried this experiment with little cost given its eco-system is WoW... Maybe someday they will, before they die out, who knows
UO's normal rule set was what we'd consider Hardcore. Full looting, no protection other than being able to call for guards in town, free for all. It's true that the majority of players don't want that type of PvP, though the audience that does is pretty gung ho and generally sticks with those games for a good period of time.
That's very different from team based PvP with no looting and full protection in a large part of the world. The vast majority of MMO players can enjoy that. It's comparing apples to oranges.
https://www.therepopulation.com - Sci Fi Sandbox.
It was ignored, but only by you. When they asked : What do you find important in our game, the one that has been designed entirly around pvp? You answered pve.
Too good not to fight for? The game is over before is has begun without pvp, as the games CORE has been designed around PVP, and despite your refusal to accept this fact, It continues on the path it has always been on.What we want is open world pvp. 11 people signed your petition, In the eleven days its been up. Get it now?
Your a PVE only player, following a PVP game. Please go away, find another game, one of the thousands of PVE games that have been released over the last few years, aimed directly at players like you, these games have not been plagued by stupid POLL's created by players like me.
I continue to question your motives here, partly due to difficulty accepting someone can be so ignorant of the facts that they follow a game like this, designed so fundamentaly around PVP, expecting a PVE server.
There seems to be so much misinformation floating around about this game the devs would really help themselves by doing a article to wipe out all the main concerns people seem to have from this misinformation
such as 1/3 of the map being safe from pvp, when infact it is 2/3 (this has come from a poorly worded article)
such as certain resources only being available in the pvp zone (i know the devs have addressed this but a formal article to cover this would put that rumour to bed imo)
they should state clearly the approx sizes of these 1/3rds, as many seem to think that not being able to go into 1/3 of a map without being in a pvp area is going to really hamper their experience in terms of land mass
they should clearly lay down the facts that on a normal server you can play it just like it is a pve server and have a enjoyable game
This would go some way to quash the amount of misinformation and worry there seems to be currently floating around
Pfffft! Read a post that I put up? Nonsense! This is the internet after all. There are appearances to keep up you know.
With a full compliment of PvE tiers (skills) and resources (crafting materials), it seems like the PvE players will have an entire game to play, with a small area where players can choose to engage in PvP. I do understand the idea behind a "PvE Server", but it still seems kind of unnecessary, even if I didn't read the entire page of the link I posted.
Is the PvE area limited in some way that isn't obvious? Like, is it half the size of the PvP area? Are there things you can't do in the PvE area like build a house, which you can do in the PvP area? If so, then yeah, I can see a need for a PvE server if the devs want to increase their audience.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
It isn't a small area for PvP. Its 1/3 of the total landmass which is exclusively faction-based PvP, and the total landmass is touted as being many times that of most modern MMOs at launch, from what I understand. PvP can otherwise occur anywhere else player chose to have it happen (self-flagging mechanism).
You can do everything in a PvE area that you can do in a PvP area, including all tiers of encounters/missions/materials, except for building a siegeable player city.
Given that, I do no think it would make sense to fraction the community between "full PvE" and currently "normal" servers.
To me, this seems better than a PvE server. Players have a choice both in choosing the game and after they start playing the game. At the same time, players aren't being artificially limited by their choice of PvP style. I can imagine a lot of players in the PvE zone, doing PvE things, and then they get a call for some sort of clan war, and then armies of people show up in the PvP area for very large, protracted battles. That, to me, sounds really fun.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The problems with games that are developed around a PvP premise via a realm vs. realm type of scenario is that, these games end up boiling down to some simple, real-life principles that will in all cases ruin the original intent of the game:
With The Repopulation it looks like the entirety of the game can occur on the PvE side of the map. There is Faction v Faction, but players can just hang out on the PvE side of the map. Their resources and the resources on the PvE side of the map are safe.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
so here's an interesting question;
why is it that PvPers can and do play on PvE servers / in PvE games and don't complain about rulesets but PvEers can't ever seem to let a game with a PvP ruleset go without criticism of both the developers and the players themselves? Why not accept the fact that not every game out there will fit your own very specific needs and learn to live with the differences? it's called compromise and the the ability to compromise is essential to living a healthy life in this very social world of ours. In short, you are why we can't have nice things. This game is being made for a specific audience and if you aren't part of the audience it would be nice if you could just move on and not inconvenience others with your opinions.
I would like to note that I will probably not be playing this game because it doesn't seem interesting to me. I tend to enjoy fantasy themed games more than sci-fi. There are people out there who enjoy sci-fi and they like/want an open world sandbox to play around in. Let's let them have what they want instead of being selfish assholes out to ruin other people's fun. Let's make this change as a community, please, for the love of god.
Lets reverse the question and ask the same thing
want 7 free days of playing? Try this
http://www.swtor.com/r/ZptVnY
It's true. The question gets asked from both sides of the fence. "Why can't we have open world PvP?" "Why can't we have a PvE server?"
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.