Normal server & 100% hardcore server. Do it

Realbigdeal

Gloria needs a normal server with the following rules:
No player looting, no friendly fire and more friendly stuff.

Hardcore with the following rules:
100% full loot, friendly fire on and more hardcore stuff.


That way, everyone is happy. Some players don't like player partial loot and others don't like the fact that it's not full loot. So let's make 2 server to please both fan-base.

Nicco77

The 100% hardcore server will end empty because most players that want be able to kill everyone and full loot usually enjoy to do this in order to ruin the game of non consensual people that in most cases are unable to defend thenselves.
So a server where everyone is hardcore player and can defend himself or at least is well prepared and focused on pvp will likelyhave population issues with no economy and crafting.

Realbigdeal

Nicco77 said:

The 100% hardcore server will end empty because most players that want be able to kill everyone and full loot usually enjoy to do this in order to ruin the game of non consensual people that in most cases are unable to defend thenselves.
So a server where everyone is hardcore player and can defend himself or at least is well prepared and focused on pvp will likelyhave population issues with no economy and crafting.

Mortal online is a bad game and it has 1000 players so you're wrong sir.

And darkscape got a lot of players already so once more, you're wrong.

ste2000

Nicco77 said:

The 100% hardcore server will end empty because most players that want be able to kill everyone and full loot usually enjoy to do this in order to ruin the game of non consensual people that in most cases are unable to defend thenselves.
So a server where everyone is hardcore player and can defend himself or at least is well prepared and focused on pvp will likelyhave population issues with no economy and crafting.

Isn't this ironic?
But that's actually the truth.

That's why Full Loot PVP will never succeed

Horusra

Realbigdeal said:

Nicco77 said:

The 100% hardcore server will end empty because most players that want be able to kill everyone and full loot usually enjoy to do this in order to ruin the game of non consensual people that in most cases are unable to defend thenselves.
So a server where everyone is hardcore player and can defend himself or at least is well prepared and focused on pvp will likelyhave population issues with no economy and crafting.

Mortal online is a bad game and it has 1000 players so you're wrong sir.

And darkscape got a lot of players already so once more, you're wrong.

1000.  A whole 1000?  Not 999 right?  For an MMO that is a horrible number to be profitable.

Realbigdeal

ste2000 said:

Nicco77 said:

The 100% hardcore server will end empty because most players that want be able to kill everyone and full loot usually enjoy to do this in order to ruin the game of non consensual people that in most cases are unable to defend thenselves.
So a server where everyone is hardcore player and can defend himself or at least is well prepared and focused on pvp will likelyhave population issues with no economy and crafting.

Isn't this ironic?
But that's actually the truth.

That's why Full Loot PVP will never succeed

It's not the truth. Most full loot games are bad. That's why they're total failure, but in 1 hand, you got good games with full loot who are successful like Darkscape and ultima online.

If every sandbox games that are currently not successful had no full loot, they would still be bad. That's the fact.

If what you say is so true, then tell me, why survival games like H1Z1 are successful on steam? They're incomplete games, yet succesful. I wanna hear your reasons. 
We got H1Z1, Dayz, Rust, Ark: Survival evolve.

Even in minecraft, you lose your stuff when you die.

Everything you guys say is based on your opinion, not on facts. I actually got facts and MO, even if it's not a good game currently has 1000 players.
We just need a 3ple A developer like blizzard who can make a full loot game and that will prove once and for all that when a full loot game is also a good game, it can easily be successful .

Myrdynn

why do you use Mortal and its whole 1000 people in your defense, I am not taking either side, I just think 1000 people is down right awful, and GV would shut down if it only had 1000 people after 7 years

Realbigdeal

Myrdynn said:

why do you use Mortal and its whole 1000 people in your defense, I am not taking either side, I just think 1000 people is down right awful, and GV would shut down if it only had 1000 people after 7 years

So i ask you, how many players do you think MO would have if it wasn't a full loot game? think about it. MO is a bad game and it has 1000 players. Removing full loot won't make their situation better since those who already don't like full loot are currently playing wow. 

Realbigdeal

DMKano said:

Realbigdeal said:

We just need a 3ple A developer like blizzard who can make a full loot game and that will prove once and for all that when a full loot game is also a good game, it can easily be successful .

No AAA developer is so misinformed to piss funds away on a full loot game, especially Blizzard. 

In case you didn't notice the trend over the last 15 years - AAA devs are  targeting massive casual players segment which has zero interest in full loot games.

So we can't even prove if full loot games can be as successful as a 3ple A mmo if they never tried to take any risk.

That's exactly what i'm saying bro.

Only indie devs take risk and now, look at the next wave of survival games with full loot on steam, they're all succesful.

Rust is the 8th most popular survival with full loot game on steam next to call of duty black ops 3. 

I bring actual facts while you don't.

Ho wait, rust is above world of warcraft on twitch.tv

Myrdynn

Realbigdeal said:

Myrdynn said:

why do you use Mortal and its whole 1000 people in your defense, I am not taking either side, I just think 1000 people is down right awful, and GV would shut down if it only had 1000 people after 7 years

So i ask you, how many players do you think MO would have if it wasn't a full loot game? think about it. MO is a bad game and it has 1000 players. Removing full loot won't make their situation better since those who already don't like full loot are currently playing wow. 

MO wouldnt exist, if it wasnt for full loot, the point is there is only like 2 full loot games out there, and the number of full loot enthusiasts is EXTREMELY low, probably under 1 % of the entire population prefer full loot.  Most people, myself included, and I do nothing but pvp in any game I play, prefer no loot or minimal loot (my preference where you lose 1-2 items)

building a game strictly full loot is going to hurt their numbers plain and simple, and they would have a bigger draw if they had a server that had partial loot 

Octagon7711

Eve is the poster boy of hardcore yet even they struggle.  There is a reason it's low on the list of popular MMO's.  

Realbigdeal

Octagon7711 said:

Eve is the poster boy of hardcore yet even they struggle.  There is a reason it's low on the list of popular MMO's.  

I personally will never try Eve online. I don't want anything to do with space. 

BigRambo

Full loot worlds, there's a reason why EVE-Online lost about 2/3's of it's active player base in under 3 years. Used to have 65K strong active at a time, now down to barely 22K on a Saturday evening / night.  For every 1 person that will join a hardcore server about 5000 will go in the normal server.   People can make fun of carebears all they want, but at the end of the day, it's the carebears that got the power on if the game will do any good or not.  So remember to always respect the carebears, even if you don't feel like respecting them, they own you in every possible way.   

Horusra

Realbigdeal said:

DMKano said:

Realbigdeal said:

We just need a 3ple A developer like blizzard who can make a full loot game and that will prove once and for all that when a full loot game is also a good game, it can easily be successful .

No AAA developer is so misinformed to piss funds away on a full loot game, especially Blizzard. 

In case you didn't notice the trend over the last 15 years - AAA devs are  targeting massive casual players segment which has zero interest in full loot games.

So we can't even prove if full loot games can be as successful as a 3ple A mmo if they never tried to take any risk.

That's exactly what i'm saying bro.

Only indie devs take risk and now, look at the next wave of survival games with full loot on steam, they're all succesful.

Rust is the 8th most popular survival with full loot game on steam next to call of duty black ops 3. 

I bring actual facts while you don't.

Ho wait, rust is above world of warcraft on twitch.tv

8th most popular survival games.  All successful?  Define successful?  8th most popular "survival games" could be 200,008th when compaired to all games. 


There is nothing in your facts 'bro' that say you could get a profit return for spending 100 million to make your game.  PvP servers are always smaller in population than PvE.  Games show the majority like controlled PvP settings.

Dullahan

I think different server rulesets could be the thing of the future. Permitted a game supports it, you could have all kinds of different servers. For Pantheon for instance, we've suggested both normal and hardcore servers with more severe death penalties, FFA PvP servers, Race wars PvP, Immersion servers with only first person, and quite a few more.

That won't work with every game depending on how much the economy and other gameplay revolves around PvE or PvP, but if developers would consider different rulesets, they may find an easy way to bring in more players without having to abandon their core audience.

Kyleran

BigRambo said:

Full loot worlds, there's a reason why EVE-Online lost about 2/3's of it's active player base in under 3 years. Used to have 65K strong active at a time, now down to barely 22K on a Saturday evening / night.  For every 1 person that will join a hardcore server about 5000 will go in the normal server.   People can make fun of carebears all they want, but at the end of the day, it's the carebears that got the power on if the game will do any good or not.  So remember to always respect the carebears, even if you don't feel like respecting them, they own you in every possible way.   

There's probably several reasons for EVEs drop in subs, but full loot isn't one of them.

Nicco77

Realbigdeal said:

Nicco77 said:

The 100% hardcore server will end empty because most players that want be able to kill everyone and full loot usually enjoy to do this in order to ruin the game of non consensual people that in most cases are unable to defend thenselves.
So a server where everyone is hardcore player and can defend himself or at least is well prepared and focused on pvp will likelyhave population issues with no economy and crafting.

1000 players 

WOW! 1000 players!!!

ste2000

Realbigdeal said:

ste2000 said:

Isn't this ironic?
But that's actually the truth.

That's why Full Loot PVP will never succeed

It's not the truth. Most full loot games are bad. That's why they're total failure, but in 1 hand, you got good games with full loot who are successful like Darkscape and ultima online.

Well actually it is the truth, and I explain to you why I am so certain.

Darkfall (the original) in my honest opinion was the best PvP MMO ever, its PvP had purpose, 1 to 1 was somewhat balanced, and the Guild war system with its geopolitical implication was awesome.
It wasn't perfect of course, it had its issues.
But the reason why the game eventually failed was because the game wasn't PvE friendly, and that indirectly affected PvP gameplay.
People like me who don't dislike PvP but generally spend more time doing PvE errands after a while quit in frustration, the reward just wasn't there for us, we were just walking loot bags for PvPers
Once the easy prey (PvE peeps) were gone only hardcore PvPers remained, and that's where the reality of Full PvP sets in.

When you have to prey on easy targets, PvPers have lots of fun, but when they have to fight each others they have quite less fun.
Because this wasn't a Moba you actually lose shit and I remember towards the end of the game lots of self appointed hardcore PvPers crying on the Forums because they lost their Dragon Armor and rage quitting.
But that wasn't the end of it.
The nail on the coffin was the many Guilds simply disbanding because they lost their castle/hamlet to the best guilds on the server which by then were just a couple.
So in the end only the best PvPers and guilds survived but their number wasn't enough to keep the game alive.

Let's face it, no one like to lose consistently, and a full pvp environment is very punishing, only the very best win.........the rest quit.
Only EvE got the right balance between PvE and PvP, the other devs just don't know how to make those kind of games, though I just read Big Rambo post about EvE losing players, and that just confirm my theory.
That's the painful truth.

Nicco77

Robokapp said:

this casual mentality is what's killing the genre.

These are videogames you know...most of us just play sometimes to kill time and have some fun,I don't really get why people want games that are like jobs or alternative lives.

Horusra

Nicco77 said:

Robokapp said:

this casual mentality is what's killing the genre.

These are videogames you know...most of us just play sometimes to kill time and have some fun,I don't really get why people want games that are like jobs or alternative lives.

Maybe they do not have real lives outside of the game?

Horusra

DMKano said:

Realbigdeal said:

DMKano said:

Realbigdeal said:

We just need a 3ple A developer like blizzard who can make a full loot game and that will prove once and for all that when a full loot game is also a good game, it can easily be successful .

No AAA developer is so misinformed to piss funds away on a full loot game, especially Blizzard. 

In case you didn't notice the trend over the last 15 years - AAA devs are  targeting massive casual players segment which has zero interest in full loot games.

So we can't even prove if full loot games can be as successful as a 3ple A mmo if they never tried to take any risk.

That's exactly what i'm saying bro.

Only indie devs take risk and now, look at the next wave of survival games with full loot on steam, they're all succesful.

Rust is the 8th most popular survival with full loot game on steam next to call of duty black ops 3. 

I bring actual facts while you don't.

Ho wait, rust is above world of warcraft on twitch.tv

The proof is that no AAA company is dumb enough to make a high budget MMO that has no chance of being profitable. 

Same reason why nobody is working on a space program for goats - don't have to blow billions on making a goat spaceship to know it's a complete waste of money. 

goboygo

  ste2000 said:

Darkfall (the original) in my honest opinion was the best PvP MMO ever, its PvP had purpose, 1 to 1 was somewhat balanced, and the Guild war system with its geopolitical implication was awesome.
It wasn't perfect of course, it had its issues.
But the reason why the game eventually failed was because the game wasn't PvE friendly, and that indirectly affected PvP gameplay.
People like me who don't dislike PvP but generally spend more time doing PvE errands after a while quit in frustration, the reward just wasn't there for us, we were just walking loot bags for PvPers
Once the easy prey (PvE peeps) were gone only hardcore PvPers remained, and that's where the reality of Full PvP sets in.

I agree Darkfalls game world is arguably one of if not the best MMO's ever made as far as world size, exploration, skill depth and meaningful gameplay, however what killed it is what has killed every game like it.  Full loot.  Sorry but its true, games like this launch , peak then slowly start the spiraling death that is full loot PvP. 

Its not a growth based gameplay model. Looting players is cool for everyone at first, but quickly grows old when you realize that its generally the same players doing the looting, the ones that aren't slowly quit, the games skill levels readjust, the new losers slowly quit, repeat until game dies or stabilizes in a non profitable state with a very small base.

Realbigdeal

goboygo said:

  ste2000 said:

Darkfall (the original) in my honest opinion was the best PvP MMO ever, its PvP had purpose, 1 to 1 was somewhat balanced, and the Guild war system with its geopolitical implication was awesome.
It wasn't perfect of course, it had its issues.
But the reason why the game eventually failed was because the game wasn't PvE friendly, and that indirectly affected PvP gameplay.
People like me who don't dislike PvP but generally spend more time doing PvE errands after a while quit in frustration, the reward just wasn't there for us, we were just walking loot bags for PvPers
Once the easy prey (PvE peeps) were gone only hardcore PvPers remained, and that's where the reality of Full PvP sets in.

I agree Darkfalls game world is arguably one of if not the best MMO's ever made as far as world size, exploration, skill depth and meaningful gameplay, however what killed it is what has killed every game like it.  Full loot.  Sorry but its true, games like this launch , peak then slowly start the spiraling death that is full loot PvP. 

Its not a growth based gameplay model. Looting players is cool for everyone at first, but quickly grows old when you realize that its generally the same players doing the looting, the ones that aren't slowly quit, the games skill levels readjust, the new losers slowly quit, repeat until game dies or stabilizes in a non profitable state with a very small base.

Yeah right. Ignore the fact that Darkfall had a terrible grind, macroers, swimming on a wall and everything.

But hey, since full loot is in there, it might be why it failed.

Again, ignore the fact there was no skill cap. Ignore the fact that it was not possible to place houses and things like that anywhere. Ignore the fact that the game never got patched cosistently. IGnore the fact that only mages were viable.

Ignore all of that. Nitpick on the fact that full loot is there and that's it.

Fact is, we have yet to see a 3ple A title making a full loot mmo. Every full loot games we got are either incomplete or they're simply not good games.

Realbigdeal

Horusra said:

Realbigdeal said:

DMKano said:

Realbigdeal said:

We just need a 3ple A developer like blizzard who can make a full loot game and that will prove once and for all that when a full loot game is also a good game, it can easily be successful .

No AAA developer is so misinformed to piss funds away on a full loot game, especially Blizzard. 

In case you didn't notice the trend over the last 15 years - AAA devs are  targeting massive casual players segment which has zero interest in full loot games.

So we can't even prove if full loot games can be as successful as a 3ple A mmo if they never tried to take any risk.

That's exactly what i'm saying bro.

Only indie devs take risk and now, look at the next wave of survival games with full loot on steam, they're all succesful.

Rust is the 8th most popular survival with full loot game on steam next to call of duty black ops 3. 

I bring actual facts while you don't.

Ho wait, rust is above world of warcraft on twitch.tv

8th most popular survival games.  All successful?  Define successful?  8th most popular "survival games" could be 200,008th when compaired to all games. 


There is nothing in your facts 'bro' that say you could get a profit return for spending 100 million to make your game.  PvP servers are always smaller in population than PvE.  Games show the majority like controlled PvP settings.

My mistake. That's not what i meant to say.

Rust is the 8th most popular game on the sub genre survival on Twitch.TV. Then i posted the link.

Rust was next to call of duty black ops 3 the day i made that post.

ber_lin

Nicco77 said:

Robokapp said:

this casual mentality is what's killing the genre.

These are videogames you know...most of us just play sometimes to kill time and have some fun,I don't really get why people want games that are like jobs or alternative lives.

It's cuz that's kind of what mmos are/were and there is a market for them. All games are not meant for all people, there are target audiences. Different server rules is a totally acceptable way of doing things, if the game has the population to support it and that population wants it.

An alternate life is what a "rpg" kind of is. Single player games are more for people thar want to get in a goof around for a bit. Mmos are designed with people playing together and over long periods of time (days/months/years), with those kind of tenants being strived for in design, mmos generally appeal to those  kind of players.

waynejr2

Realbigdeal said:

goboygo said:

  ste2000 said:

Darkfall (the original) in my honest opinion was the best PvP MMO ever, its PvP had purpose, 1 to 1 was somewhat balanced, and the Guild war system with its geopolitical implication was awesome.
It wasn't perfect of course, it had its issues.
But the reason why the game eventually failed was because the game wasn't PvE friendly, and that indirectly affected PvP gameplay.
People like me who don't dislike PvP but generally spend more time doing PvE errands after a while quit in frustration, the reward just wasn't there for us, we were just walking loot bags for PvPers
Once the easy prey (PvE peeps) were gone only hardcore PvPers remained, and that's where the reality of Full PvP sets in.

I agree Darkfalls game world is arguably one of if not the best MMO's ever made as far as world size, exploration, skill depth and meaningful gameplay, however what killed it is what has killed every game like it.  Full loot.  Sorry but its true, games like this launch , peak then slowly start the spiraling death that is full loot PvP. 

Its not a growth based gameplay model. Looting players is cool for everyone at first, but quickly grows old when you realize that its generally the same players doing the looting, the ones that aren't slowly quit, the games skill levels readjust, the new losers slowly quit, repeat until game dies or stabilizes in a non profitable state with a very small base.

Yeah right. Ignore the fact that Darkfall had a terrible grind, macroers, swimming on a wall and everything.

But hey, since full loot is in there, it might be why it failed.

Again, ignore the fact there was no skill cap. Ignore the fact that it was not possible to place houses and things like that anywhere. Ignore the fact that the game never got patched cosistently. IGnore the fact that only mages were viable.

Ignore all of that. Nitpick on the fact that full loot is there and that's it.

Fact is, we have yet to see a 3ple A title making a full loot mmo. Every full loot games we got are either incomplete or they're simply not good games.

Suppose there is a great game with full loot that fails.  You can still claim it is a bad game.  Stop taking that as a point.  

How about this.  Invest your time and money into making such a game.  IF (BIG IF) you are correct (PROVE US WRONG) you stand to make a ton of money AND you will be able to show everyone here how much smarter you are than us.