Why do pvpers start these threads lol, seems they want PVE players to help make the pvp world feel alive because contrary to belief pve is more popular in mmo's than pvp.
Played your pvp games and the PVE players can play there pve games, what's the problem.
Contrary to your belief as mentioned above there are quite a few players interested in both PVE and PVP in their MMOs with those only willing to do one to the exclusion of the other likely the real outliers.
my question would be why not play two different games. why does the desire to play both have to be in the same game?
Because PVP games without a thriving virtual world that also includes PVE are boring and lifeless, unless its a strictly an action mmofps or something of the sort like planetside 2 etc, which is really not the same genre at all. Straight PVE only games lack the sense of danger, meaningful politics, and means to retaliate against people that find a way to be dicks despite the lack of pvp.
There is room for PVE only games for those that must have them, a very limited market for PVP only imo (besides instant gratification action mmofps etc), and plenty of market for a game that can combine both in a way that is not presented with too little or too much consequence for asshattery.
I'd argue that no MMO will ever be a truly virtual world without some form of "non-consentual" PVP. You can have your non pvp games, but the mixed pvp/pve variety will always be a more involving social experience for MANY people.
The problem is nobody has been able to do it right. No game pvp system will ever be perfect without real world accountability but it could come alot closer than most of the "PVP" games out there lately. Most either go too far or not far enough.
Also, I would not even call a pvp flagging (optional pvp) game a pvp game at all.
On the other hand, games that are primarily PvE should remain so and stop the incessant nerfing of class skills in a vain attempt to balance PvP in a PvE world. PvPers playing in a PvE game need to suck it up and stop complaining about the lack of PvP in the game. LOTRO is the perfect example of this. PvP is specifically prohibited in LOTRO by its license. Nonetheless, PvPers constantly complain about there being no OW PvP in LOTRO, apparently unaware of the game's history and purposeful design, demanding changes to classes to make them more fair in Monster Play, etc., etc.
LOTRO has Open World PvP... and it's fairly decent for a themepark. It's had it since shortly after release. Most of my time in the Ettenmoors (And LotRO as a whole) was before the first expansion hit.
Actually, no, LoTRO does not have open world PVP, it has Monsterplay / PvMP. It has never had open world PVP.
The difference between Open World PvP and Arena PvP is that Open World PvP takes place in, an... open world. Defining characteristics of Open World PvP is that the PvP zones are persistent zones where things other than PvP take place. In other words, any number of players from any side can step in and out of this zone at any time. Inside the zone you may find things such as resources, quests, etc. You also find the ability to freely PvP either anyone or players from opposing factions.
Arena PvP is tournament style. Set numbers, set sides, set objects, win conditions etc.
The Ettenmoors is a wide open zone with questing, resource gathering, and factional PvP that any number of players can enter or leave at any time. While there are mini objectives such as holding keeps overall the only thing driving it is constant war and there is opportunity for emergent conflict. So it is quite clearly Open World PvP.
Now if you are talking about them wanting the ENTIRE world to be PvP then that is a separate subject. That's not so much requesting Open World PvP as opening up the world for PvP. There was no significant push to do this when I played LotRO, and I would imagine the numbers of people pushing for it now are a very small minority you are hyping up quite a bit.
What I am about to say goes back to when I played WoW in 2004. But I liked that system where you could take out the other faction if you saw them leveling. I thought it was a fun system, I liked ganking people from time to time and I liked being ganked from time to time. I thought it worked well.
I do like open world PvP but I have to say I don't like the full loot aspect. Even though it made sense in EVE which I played, I don't like it in fantasy games because I think it is fun to get good gear and I don't want to lose it by getting ganked.
I am fine with open PvP in PvE games, it is actually fun, i just don't think you should lose everything. My 2 cents.
Cryomatrix
This is why I'm not sure why more games have not tried the partial/inventory only (not equipped gear) loot system. Full loot can work too but the gear needs to be easy to replace. That's a hard balance to find. Being too easy to replace makes it not feel special, and being too hard to replace means most people won't wear it except in the safest of conditions, and it almost might as well not be there.
In UO most gear was pretty easy to replace, with some pretty good stuff that was somewhat hard to replace, and then the one or two per server rediculously overpowered one hitter gear lol... A friend and I had alot of fun trying to go after a guy that was brave enough to actually go out solo with his pre-patch one-hitter. We came very close to getting it a couple times but never did.
We found that fun but in todays everybody gets a medal society too there are too many whiners...
Why do pvpers start these threads lol, seems they want PVE players to help make the pvp world feel alive because contrary to belief pve is more popular in mmo's than pvp.
Played your pvp games and the PVE players can play there pve games, what's the problem.
PVE players and PVP players are not mutually exclusive, that is all there is to say. PVE+PVP can work but pve only players need to stick to their pve only games or just not whine when they die.
Lootdrop vs. non-lootdrop games are two completely separate mentalities. In a non-lootdrop game the mentality is that your gear is a part of your character. When you consider lootdrop from the perspective of a non-lootdrop player lootdrop starts to sound like having your character deleveled which I think is a large part of the reason people have such extreme negative responses to it.
If you are a player who is adjusted to lootdrop games you view gear in those games differently. Gear is like food in a regular MMO. It's a consumable. You match the level of consumables you are willing to burn with how important success is (and how likely you are to actually lose it.) It's a game of weighing costs and making decisions based on what you determine to be "worth the costs."
In my opinion it's a far more engaging model because it takes a lot more thought and consideration then simply wearing your best gear to every occasion imaginable. It certainly takes an adjustment period in which you learn to view gear in a new way if you are coming from standard MMOs though.
Because PVP games without a thriving virtual world that also includes PVE are boring and lifeless, unless its a strictly an action mmofps or something of the sort like planetside 2 etc, which is really not the same genre at all. Straight PVE only games lack the sense of danger, meaningful politics, and means to retaliate against people that find a way to be dicks despite the lack of pvp.
There is room for PVE only games for those that must have them, a very limited market for PVP only imo (besides instant gratification action mmofps etc), and plenty of market for a game that can combine both in a way that is not presented with too little or too much consequence for asshattery.
I'd argue that no MMO will ever be a truly virtual world without some form of "non-consentual" PVP. You can have your non pvp games, but the mixed pvp/pve variety will always be a more involving social experience for MANY people.
The problem is nobody has been able to do it right. No game pvp system will ever be perfect without real world accountability but it could come alot closer than most of the "PVP" games out there lately. Most either go too far or not far enough.
Also, I would not even call a pvp flagging (optional pvp) game a pvp game at all.
You make a lot of points I agree with. I've always preferred open world PvP/PvE.
What I think is going on is very simple, not complicated. It has to do with adversity, or negative consequences. The more of this in an MMO the less popular it'll be. Just losing something is a source of adversity. Our brain is wired to feel "pain" when we lose. This also happens if we in any way feel rejected. Constant losing will lead you to believe you're rejected. Psychologically it's like being body slammed.
Why does it matter? Because we primarily play games or MMO's to get away from real life. Most of us seek entertainment. To be a hero or champion. THIS is why most MMO's are largely massive multiplayer online single player experiences. Because try as they might, MMO's can't make us feel epic without also making it subjective. For it not to be subjective, it has to be epic community-wide. And that won't happen unless it's actually hard to do and requires some effort and not everyone will attain it. Once that occurs, not everyone can be a hero anymore, instead they're met with frustration and failure. Only shared friendship and valuing the struggle itself can maintain enjoyment, but it can't guarantee it. So it's unpopular. You have to enjoy overcoming frustration and falling short of heroic status. You have to desire being a usually small part of the community. This inevitably makes it too much like RL and most gamers scoff at replicating RL in a game. It doesn't exploit the power of VR: To escape from RL.
Adversity comes from many sources. It can be many things, from boredom to griefing to chat spamming to getting lost to unanticipated deaths and losing a fight. Because open world PvP can be so uncontrolled, it's a big source of adversity. It can happen in open world PvE too. In most cases, open world PvP has more adversity, depending on how immediate and consequential it's. MMOFPS's are more focused on the PvP and teamwork, choosing to increase immediacy and decrease consequences. This is why their popularity is higher. Open world environments usually have more adversity because it's harder to control the player's experience, to ensure it's consistent and entertaining. Whne negative consequences are added on top of high adversity, it further reduces the popularity, exemplifying rejection in the player's mind. This increases the likelihood they'll judge it not entertaining and choose another game.
How much frustration or pain do you feel playing the game or MMO? That determines its popularity. The more you feel the less popular it'll be. It doesn't mean it's illegitimate. We can desire different things. We're not clones.
So generically speaking games are like drugs. We take them to feel good. To get away. To time out. And we're justified. RL is hard.
On the other hand, games that are primarily PvE should remain so and stop the incessant nerfing of class skills in a vain attempt to balance PvP in a PvE world. PvPers playing in a PvE game need to suck it up and stop complaining about the lack of PvP in the game. LOTRO is the perfect example of this. PvP is specifically prohibited in LOTRO by its license. Nonetheless, PvPers constantly complain about there being no OW PvP in LOTRO, apparently unaware of the game's history and purposeful design, demanding changes to classes to make them more fair in Monster Play, etc., etc.
LOTRO has Open World PvP... and it's fairly decent for a themepark. It's had it since shortly after release. Most of my time in the Ettenmoors (And LotRO as a whole) was before the first expansion hit.
Actually, no, LoTRO does not have open world PVP, it has Monsterplay / PvMP. It has never had open world PVP.
The difference between Open World PvP and Arena PvP is that Open World PvP takes place in, an... open world. Defining characteristics of Open World PvP is that the PvP zones are persistent zones where things other than PvP take place. In other words, any number of players from any side can step in and out of this zone at any time. Inside the zone you may find things such as resources, quests, etc. You also find the ability to freely PvP either anyone or players from opposing factions.
Arena PvP is tournament style. Set numbers, set sides, set objects, win conditions etc.
The Ettenmoors is a wide open zone with questing, resource gathering, and factional PvP that any number of players can enter or leave at any time. While there are mini objectives such as holding keeps overall the only thing driving it is constant war and there is opportunity for emergent conflict. So it is quite clearly Open World PvP.
Now if you are talking about them wanting the ENTIRE world to be PvP then that is a separate subject. That's not so much requesting Open World PvP as opening up the world for PvP. There was no significant push to do this when I played LotRO, and I would imagine the numbers of people pushing for it now are a very small minority you are hyping up quite a bit.
No, you are confusing realms vs realms, or WvW maps, with Open World PvP. When people say "Open Word PvP" they mean the Entire world is Open PvP, like EvE, Mortal, DayZ, H1Z1, etc.
From what you describe, The 'Ettenmoors' of LotR are like 'The Mists' maps of GW2, which is not "Open World PvP" as anyone describes it, as it stands you seem to want to play fudgy with definitions of what is Open World PvP, when you do that, it's impossible to have a discussion with you.
ZionBane said: When people say "Open Word PvP" they mean the Entire world is Open PvP, like EvE, Mortal, DayZ, H1Z1, etc.
So what if some parts of the world have no pvp or optional pvp while other parts are fully open pvp? Is it then called semi-open world pvp?
Depends on how the set up is. Say what you use.
There are all Kinds of PvP style play, For Example:
Realms vs Realms / World vs World / Server vs Server. Battle Grounds (Areas designated as Open PvP) Resources Capture (Specific locations that opposing sides can fight to capture a Resource) Guild vs Guild / Clan wars. Dueling. Arena Matches. Brawling Areas Etc...
There are many styles of PvP, and some games even use several styles, so say what you mean, when you talk about PvP.
When you say, >Open World PvP< that means that the Whole World is Open PvP.
Don't go trying to say that Realms vs Realms is Open World PvP.. it's NOT.
It's not hard to grasp. Anyone that has played MMOs or even likes PvP should know the various kinds and how they are intrinsically different from each other.
I just remember playing an mmorpg years ago where you could tick off PvP in-game in which case you couldn't be attacked by any player and you couldn't attack another player either. Once you turned PvP on you could attack other players and vice versa but there was a time limit before you could tick it off. You couldn't just Kill a player and then say "Well, I'm done fighting now, so I'm ticking PvP off so no one can kill me." You would have to deal with people being able to attack you for like an hour or so of in-game time.
What do you think of this? Do you think something like this would work out nicely?
I think it could work as a some kind of role-playing feature. Pick up a divine blessing that wears off after a certain period etc. In an open world pvp mmorpg it could have it's uses to create more fun for some players.
But just as a flagging system I don't find it that useful. Binary options don't create meaningful or creative, or fun, gameplay imo.
Talking about games where thousands of players exist simultaneously in a single instance and mechanics related to such games.
You should really stop going around spouting nonsense in an authoritative tone. Especially when it comes to Open World PvP. A subject you seem exceptionally ignorant about.
Ironic you would call me "fudgy" with definitions when you are the one who appears to have pulled your definition straight out of your fudge hole.
On the other hand, games that are primarily PvE should remain so and stop the incessant nerfing of class skills in a vain attempt to balance PvP in a PvE world. PvPers playing in a PvE game need to suck it up and stop complaining about the lack of PvP in the game. LOTRO is the perfect example of this. PvP is specifically prohibited in LOTRO by its license. Nonetheless, PvPers constantly complain about there being no OW PvP in LOTRO, apparently unaware of the game's history and purposeful design, demanding changes to classes to make them more fair in Monster Play, etc., etc.
LOTRO has Open World PvP... and it's fairly decent for a themepark. It's had it since shortly after release. Most of my time in the Ettenmoors (And LotRO as a whole) was before the first expansion hit.
Actually, no, LoTRO does not have open world PVP, it has Monsterplay / PvMP. It has never had open world PVP.
The difference between Open World PvP and Arena PvP is that Open World PvP takes place in, an... open world. Defining characteristics of Open World PvP is that the PvP zones are persistent zones where things other than PvP take place. In other words, any number of players from any side can step in and out of this zone at any time. Inside the zone you may find things such as resources, quests, etc. You also find the ability to freely PvP either anyone or players from opposing factions.
Arena PvP is tournament style. Set numbers, set sides, set objects, win conditions etc.
The Ettenmoors is a wide open zone with questing, resource gathering, and factional PvP that any number of players can enter or leave at any time. While there are mini objectives such as holding keeps overall the only thing driving it is constant war and there is opportunity for emergent conflict. So it is quite clearly Open World PvP.
Now if you are talking about them wanting the ENTIRE world to be PvP then that is a separate subject. That's not so much requesting Open World PvP as opening up the world for PvP. There was no significant push to do this when I played LotRO, and I would imagine the numbers of people pushing for it now are a very small minority you are hyping up quite a bit.
First, where is this "hyping" you claim I am doing? all I said was LoTRO does not have open world PVP.
And it does not.
What it has is one map/zone called the ettenmoors, and one map/zone called The Sundering of Osgiliath, where players can either play their freep, or log off their freep and log in on a monster player.
There is no open world PVP, as you cannot, for example, run around Bree attacking other player's, in fact, you cannot run around any normal LoTRO zone and attack other player's.
One zone where you can kind of PVP does not make it an open world PVP game by any stretch of the imigination.
Also, IF, and it is a big IF, what you are claiming is correct, and the definition of Open World PvP is what you claim it to be, and LoTRO PvMP is actually a perfect example of Open World PvP, there would be no need for this thread, at all.
There would be no need to ask if Open World PvP and PvE can coexist.
Post edited by Excession on
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
The difference between Open World PvP and Arena PvP is that Open World PvP takes place in, an... open world. Defining characteristics of Open World PvP is that the PvP zones are persistent zones where things other than PvP take place. In other words, any number of players from any side can step in and out of this zone at any time. Inside the zone you may find things such as resources, quests, etc. You also find the ability to freely PvP either anyone or players from opposing factions.
Arena PvP is tournament style. Set numbers, set sides, set objects, win conditions etc.
The Ettenmoors is a wide open zone with questing, resource gathering, and factional PvP that any number of players can enter or leave at any time. While there are mini objectives such as holding keeps overall the only thing driving it is constant war and there is opportunity for emergent conflict. So it is quite clearly Open World PvP.
Would not the DAoC battlegrounds fit your definition of "Open World"?
Defining characteristics of Open World PvP is that the PvP zones are persistent zones- CHECK these are persistent
where things other than PvP take place. - CHECK... you can enter the battlegrounds and engage in PvE including questing
In other words, any number of players from any side can step in and out of this zone at any time.- CHECK...
Inside the zone you may find things such as resources, quests, etc.-- CHECK- quests, PvE, Castle Sieging
You also find the ability to freely PvP either anyone or players from opposing factions. -- CHECK.. well you can't kill your own faction but the two enemy are fair play.
To me, the Ettenmoors is similar to the DAoC Battlegrounds. To me personally, that is not open world PvP but I guess as long as you have fun it doesn't really matter what name you put on it. For the record, I do enjoy the DAoC Battlegrounds but find it different than the true (to me) Open World of a Darkfall or similar.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
You should really stop going around spouting nonsense in an authoritative tone. Especially when it comes to Open World PvP. A subject you seem exceptionally ignorant about.
Ironic you would call me "fudgy" with definitions when you are the one who appears to have pulled your definition straight out of your fudge hole.
I'll repeat this post again of a source from "acedemia.edu" writing a researched (and probably peer reviewed) paper about Open World PvP in the Ettenmoors and the definition of Open World PvP that comes first in Google search results pretty closely matching mine.
There are people who say that Lord of the Rings Online has Open World PvP, and there are people who are wrong.
You guys can make crap up about the definition, but the most respectable sources you can find on the subject back me up.
You should really stop going around spouting nonsense in an authoritative tone. Especially when it comes to Open World PvP. A subject you seem exceptionally ignorant about.
Ironic you would call me "fudgy" with definitions when you are the one who appears to have pulled your definition straight out of your fudge hole.
I'll repeat this post again of a source from "acedemia.edu" writing a researched (and probably peer reviewed) paper about Open World PvP in the Ettenmoors and the definition of Open World PvP that comes first in Google search results pretty closely matching mine.
There are people who say that Lord of the Rings Online has Open World PvP, and there are people who are wrong.
You guys can make crap up about the definition, but the most respectable sources you can find on the subject back me up.
Why are you so hostile? Your reference is from some dude in Singapore...with a whopping 60 views. This post is going to be viewed hundreds of times, guess that makes it authoritative!
Pretty sure the average reader here knows just as much about the hobby we love as some guy in Singapore writing for the English department.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
You should really stop going around spouting nonsense in an authoritative tone. Especially when it comes to Open World PvP. A subject you seem exceptionally ignorant about.
Ironic you would call me "fudgy" with definitions when you are the one who appears to have pulled your definition straight out of your fudge hole.
I'll repeat this post again of a source from "acedemia.edu" writing a researched (and probably peer reviewed) paper about Open World PvP in the Ettenmoors and the definition of Open World PvP that comes first in Google search results pretty closely matching mine.
There are people who say that Lord of the Rings Online has Open World PvP, and there are people who are wrong.
You guys can make crap up about the definition, but the most respectable sources you can find on the subject back me up.
Respectable sources? really? by whose standards?
If you really think PvMP is Open World PvP, fair play to you, hope that thought bring's you much joy.
Though, if I am completely honest, you belong with the group of people who are wrong.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
You should really stop going around spouting nonsense in an authoritative tone. Especially when it comes to Open World PvP. A subject you seem exceptionally ignorant about.
Ironic you would call me "fudgy" with definitions when you are the one who appears to have pulled your definition straight out of your fudge hole.
By this Moronic term, that you want to cling to.. which is wrong, even EQ, counts as Open World PvP., GW2.. Yup that's open world PvP too, yah... as stupid as that sounds, you think GW2 is Open World PvP.
But, by all means, keep using terms in a way that make no sense, I never said you couldn't be wrong, I said it's impossible to have a discussion with you.
You should really stop going around spouting nonsense in an authoritative tone. Especially when it comes to Open World PvP. A subject you seem exceptionally ignorant about.
Ironic you would call me "fudgy" with definitions when you are the one who appears to have pulled your definition straight out of your fudge hole.
I'll repeat this post again of a source from "acedemia.edu" writing a researched (and probably peer reviewed) paper about Open World PvP in the Ettenmoors and the definition of Open World PvP that comes first in Google search results pretty closely matching mine.
There are people who say that Lord of the Rings Online has Open World PvP, and there are people who are wrong.
You guys can make crap up about the definition, but the most respectable sources you can find on the subject back me up.
LOL.. "researched" just means " I played the game"
Also, they don't bother to Define what they mean by Open World PvP, they are just claiming that LotR Ois Open world PvP. Come off it, anyone can see that was written as a Bullshit piece for a grade.
Darkfall, H1Z1, EvE, etc are Open World PvP. DaoC, LotRO, GW2, etc, are Realms vs Realms.
It's not hard to figure out what Open World PvP is..
You should really stop going around spouting nonsense in an authoritative tone. Especially when it comes to Open World PvP. A subject you seem exceptionally ignorant about.
Ironic you would call me "fudgy" with definitions when you are the one who appears to have pulled your definition straight out of your fudge hole.
I'll repeat this post again of a source from "acedemia.edu" writing a researched (and probably peer reviewed) paper about Open World PvP in the Ettenmoors and the definition of Open World PvP that comes first in Google search results pretty closely matching mine.
There are people who say that Lord of the Rings Online has Open World PvP, and there are people who are wrong.
You guys can make crap up about the definition, but the most respectable sources you can find on the subject back me up.
LOL.. "researched" just means " I played the game"
Also, they don't bother to Define what they mean by Open World PvP, they are just claiming that LotR Ois Open world PvP. Come off it, anyone can see that was written as a Bullshit piece for a grade.
Darkfall, H1Z1, EvE, etc are Open World PvP. DaoC, LotRO, GW2, etc, are Realms vs Realms.
It's not hard to figure out what Open World PvP is..
LOTRO is not Open world pvp , its as Open World pvp as putting your 2 year old in your yard to play , he thinks he is in an open world , everyone else knows he isnt ..
When I played LotRO popular sentiment in the community is that is Ettenmoors were PvP.
In SWTOR Ilum was commonly referred to as the Open World PvP Zone back when I played.
PvP Zones in all themeparks are referred to as open "Open World PvP Zones" despite the existence of uncontested zone where PvP is disabled.
This point is heavily driven home in ArcheAge which is considered to be an Open World PvP game despite massives sections of both continents being safezones for their respective factions.
Hell, even Darkfall Unholy Wars had 100% safe zones in the lower level areas.
I haven't PvPed in (or really even played to any real extent) GW2, EQ, or DAOC. However the way you describe them sounds like Open World PvP to me.
Open World PvP has always been a term that differentiates PvP that takes place in an open map from arena PvP in every game I've played in every context I've seen people use it outside these forums.
You can attack my sources because apparently people from Singapore are less credible (Openly racist much?) but you don't even have any, which makes them automatically better than yours.
When I played LotRO popular sentiment in the community is that is Ettenmoors were PvP.
In SWTOR Ilum was commonly referred to as the Open World PvP Zone back when I played.
PvP Zones in all themeparks are referred to as open "Open World PvP Zones" despite the existence of uncontested zone where PvP is disabled.
This point is heavily driven home in ArcheAge which is considered to be an Open World PvP game despite massives sections of both continents being safezones for their respective factions.
I haven't PvPed in (or really even played to any real extent) GW2, EQ, or DAOC. However the way you describe them sounds like Open World PvP to me.
Open World PvP has always been a term that differentiates PvP from arena PvP in every game I've played in every context I've seen people use it outside these forums.
You can attack my sources because apparently people from Singapore are less credible (Openly racist much?) but you don't even have any, which makes them automatically better than yours.
No you miss the point. There aren't many people in the entire WORLD that know more about MMORPGs than this community. I would put my credentials up against any English Professor in Singapore or anywhere else in the world. Citing some Dude with 60 views as your authoritative source is laughable. The fact that you have such limited experience yourself yet seem to want to argue with others with much deeper experience is also silly.
Your example is like quoting some English Professor in an argument with Lebron James about the triangle defense in basketball.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Both versions of Darkfall. EVE Wurm ArcheAge Ettenmoors Ilum (And all the other open world zones in SWTOR) Planetside Xsyon Pirates of The Burning Sea Runescape Wild
And more titles I probably can't remember over the past decade of Open World PvP in MMOs and a combined 15 year if you want to count Freelancer. The majority of that experience coming from Darkfall, EVE and ArcheAge.
Sorry if that's kind of experience is too "limited" for you.
Also, forum in general tend to have some of the biggest bozos in general. Generally a lot of people spewing crap out their butt and not even attempting to back up anything they are saying with anything but their own opinion. I don't think people using the MMORPG forums are any kind of experts whatsoever.
I've listed like what 5 different links of people talking about Open World PvP in games with safezones, which utterly flies in the face of anyone claiming that Open World PvP = PvP in all zones (Which again, I've never heard the term used that way outside these forums).
Words are defined by their usage, and it appears that there is a sizeable amount of gamers who don't use it the same way the "experts" here are claiming it's used.
Don't like the flag system? That's perfectly fine. DAoC offers your "zone" alternatives in a very friendly and purposed manner. It is also highly regarded by the PvE community as one of the best PvP games ever made. Why is that? Because the PvP zones have no effect on a person's ability to level up or craft gear.
I'd argue that is not true.. DAoC is successful because the PvP is integrated into the game from the start and not tacked on.
There are massive benefits that Realm success in PvP brings to PvE. The Power and Strength relics can make your PvE much easier. The best EXP can be found in the Frontiers. Control of Darkness Falls unlocks some of the best EXP and loot in the game (vanilla at least). That control is determined by the success of the overall war.
DAoC is my favorite game. I think it got more "right" than any other game so far.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Both versions of Darkfall. EVE Wurm ArcheAge Ettenmoors Ilum (And all the other open world zones in SWTOR) Planetside Xsyon Pirates of The Burning Sea Runescape Wild
And more titles I probably can't remember over the past decade of Open World PvP in MMOs and a combined 15 year if you want to count Freelancer. The majority of that experience coming from Darkfall, EVE and ArcheAge.
Sorry if that's kind of experience is too "limited" for you.
Also, forum in general tend to have some of the biggest bozos in general. Generally a lot of people spewing crap out their butt and not even attempting to back up anything they are saying with anything but their own opinion. I don't think people using the MMORPG forums are any kind of experts whatsoever.
I've listed like what 5 different links of people talking about Open World PvP in games with safezones, which utterly flies in the face of anyone claiming that Open World PvP = PvP in all zones (Which again, I've never heard the term used that way outside these forums).
Words are defined by their usage, and it appears that there is a sizeable amount of gamers who don't use it the same way the "experts" here are claiming it's used.
Ok, let me try this.
You claim LoTRO has Open World PvP because it has the Ettenmoor's (you do not mention The Sundering of Osgiliath), which is a map/zone where freep's can fight against creep's in PvMP.
The Ettenmoor's is roughly the same size as The Shire.
Look at that list of zone's in LoTRO, they make up the WORLD.
Still think PvMP in two zone's is Open World PvP?
If you do, think about this, as a Freep, you need to be at least level 20 before you can travel to one of the PvMP area's, and if you travel to one, you are SCALED/BOOSTED to level cap (which is 105 just now).
If you want to Creep, you need to be level 10 on a Freep before you can PvMP, and the Creep you make is automatically at the level cap (which is 105 just now)
Does this really sound like Open World PvP to you? or does it sound more like a Battleground?
How many Open World PvP MMORPG's automatically scale or boost character's to level cap so they can take part in the Open World PvP?
Think hard before replying.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Comments
There is room for PVE only games for those that must have them, a very limited market for PVP only imo (besides instant gratification action mmofps etc), and plenty of market for a game that can combine both in a way that is not presented with too little or too much consequence for asshattery.
I'd argue that no MMO will ever be a truly virtual world without some form of "non-consentual" PVP. You can have your non pvp games, but the mixed pvp/pve variety will always be a more involving social experience for MANY people. The problem is nobody has been able to do it right. No game pvp system will ever be perfect without real world accountability but it could come alot closer than most of the "PVP" games out there lately. Most either go too far or not far enough.
Also, I would not even call a pvp flagging (optional pvp) game a pvp game at all.
Arena PvP is tournament style. Set numbers, set sides, set objects, win conditions etc.
The Ettenmoors is a wide open zone with questing, resource gathering, and factional PvP that any number of players can enter or leave at any time. While there are mini objectives such as holding keeps overall the only thing driving it is constant war and there is opportunity for emergent conflict. So it is quite clearly Open World PvP.
Now if you are talking about them wanting the ENTIRE world to be PvP then that is a separate subject. That's not so much requesting Open World PvP as opening up the world for PvP. There was no significant push to do this when I played LotRO, and I would imagine the numbers of people pushing for it now are a very small minority you are hyping up quite a bit.
This is why I'm not sure why more games have not tried the partial/inventory only (not equipped gear) loot system. Full loot can work too but the gear needs to be easy to replace. That's a hard balance to find. Being too easy to replace makes it not feel special, and being too hard to replace means most people won't wear it except in the safest of conditions, and it almost might as well not be there.
In UO most gear was pretty easy to replace, with some pretty good stuff that was somewhat hard to replace, and then the one or two per server rediculously overpowered one hitter gear lol... A friend and I had alot of fun trying to go after a guy that was brave enough to actually go out solo with his pre-patch one-hitter. We came very close to getting it a couple times but never did.
We found that fun but in todays everybody gets a medal society too there are too many whiners...
If you are a player who is adjusted to lootdrop games you view gear in those games differently. Gear is like food in a regular MMO. It's a consumable. You match the level of consumables you are willing to burn with how important success is (and how likely you are to actually lose it.) It's a game of weighing costs and making decisions based on what you determine to be "worth the costs."
In my opinion it's a far more engaging model because it takes a lot more thought and consideration then simply wearing your best gear to every occasion imaginable. It certainly takes an adjustment period in which you learn to view gear in a new way if you are coming from standard MMOs though.
What I think is going on is very simple, not complicated. It has to do with adversity, or negative consequences. The more of this in an MMO the less popular it'll be. Just losing something is a source of adversity. Our brain is wired to feel "pain" when we lose. This also happens if we in any way feel rejected. Constant losing will lead you to believe you're rejected. Psychologically it's like being body slammed.
Why does it matter? Because we primarily play games or MMO's to get away from real life. Most of us seek entertainment. To be a hero or champion. THIS is why most MMO's are largely massive multiplayer online single player experiences. Because try as they might, MMO's can't make us feel epic without also making it subjective. For it not to be subjective, it has to be epic community-wide. And that won't happen unless it's actually hard to do and requires some effort and not everyone will attain it. Once that occurs, not everyone can be a hero anymore, instead they're met with frustration and failure. Only shared friendship and valuing the struggle itself can maintain enjoyment, but it can't guarantee it. So it's unpopular. You have to enjoy overcoming frustration and falling short of heroic status. You have to desire being a usually small part of the community. This inevitably makes it too much like RL and most gamers scoff at replicating RL in a game. It doesn't exploit the power of VR: To escape from RL.
Adversity comes from many sources. It can be many things, from boredom to griefing to chat spamming to getting lost to unanticipated deaths and losing a fight. Because open world PvP can be so uncontrolled, it's a big source of adversity. It can happen in open world PvE too. In most cases, open world PvP has more adversity, depending on how immediate and consequential it's. MMOFPS's are more focused on the PvP and teamwork, choosing to increase immediacy and decrease consequences. This is why their popularity is higher. Open world environments usually have more adversity because it's harder to control the player's experience, to ensure it's consistent and entertaining. Whne negative consequences are added on top of high adversity, it further reduces the popularity, exemplifying rejection in the player's mind. This increases the likelihood they'll judge it not entertaining and choose another game.
How much frustration or pain do you feel playing the game or MMO? That determines its popularity. The more you feel the less popular it'll be. It doesn't mean it's illegitimate. We can desire different things. We're not clones.
So generically speaking games are like drugs. We take them to feel good. To get away. To time out. And we're justified. RL is hard.
From what you describe, The 'Ettenmoors' of LotR are like 'The Mists' maps of GW2, which is not "Open World PvP" as anyone describes it, as it stands you seem to want to play fudgy with definitions of what is Open World PvP, when you do that, it's impossible to have a discussion with you.
There are all Kinds of PvP style play, For Example:
Realms vs Realms / World vs World / Server vs Server.
Battle Grounds (Areas designated as Open PvP)
Resources Capture (Specific locations that opposing sides can fight to capture a Resource)
Guild vs Guild / Clan wars.
Dueling.
Arena Matches.
Brawling Areas
Etc...
There are many styles of PvP, and some games even use several styles, so say what you mean, when you talk about PvP.
When you say, >Open World PvP< that means that the Whole World is Open PvP.
Don't go trying to say that Realms vs Realms is Open World PvP.. it's NOT.
It's not hard to grasp. Anyone that has played MMOs or even likes PvP should know the various kinds and how they are intrinsically different from each other.
But just as a flagging system I don't find it that useful. Binary options don't create meaningful or creative, or fun, gameplay imo.
Here is an entire academic paper written on "Open World PvP in the Ettenmoors"
Here's the first result I could find on a definition for Open World PvP. Seems pretty close to mine.
You should really stop going around spouting nonsense in an authoritative tone. Especially when it comes to Open World PvP. A subject you seem exceptionally ignorant about.
Ironic you would call me "fudgy" with definitions when you are the one who appears to have pulled your definition straight out of your fudge hole.
And it does not.
What it has is one map/zone called the ettenmoors, and one map/zone called The Sundering of Osgiliath, where players can either play their freep, or log off their freep and log in on a monster player.
There is no open world PVP, as you cannot, for example, run around Bree attacking other player's, in fact, you cannot run around any normal LoTRO zone and attack other player's.
One zone where you can kind of PVP does not make it an open world PVP game by any stretch of the imigination.
Also, IF, and it is a big IF, what you are claiming is correct, and the definition of Open World PvP is what you claim it to be, and LoTRO PvMP is actually a perfect example of Open World PvP, there would be no need for this thread, at all.
There would be no need to ask if Open World PvP and PvE can coexist.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
MAGA
To me, the Ettenmoors is similar to the DAoC Battlegrounds. To me personally, that is not open world PvP but I guess as long as you have fun it doesn't really matter what name you put on it. For the record, I do enjoy the DAoC Battlegrounds but find it different than the true (to me) Open World of a Darkfall or similar.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
There are people who say that Lord of the Rings Online has Open World PvP, and there are people who are wrong.
You guys can make crap up about the definition, but the most respectable sources you can find on the subject back me up.
Pretty sure the average reader here knows just as much about the hobby we love as some guy in Singapore writing for the English department.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
If you really think PvMP is Open World PvP, fair play to you, hope that thought bring's you much joy.
Though, if I am completely honest, you belong with the group of people who are wrong.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
But, by all means, keep using terms in a way that make no sense, I never said you couldn't be wrong, I said it's impossible to have a discussion with you.
Which it is.
Also, they don't bother to Define what they mean by Open World PvP, they are just claiming that LotR Ois Open world PvP. Come off it, anyone can see that was written as a Bullshit piece for a grade.
Darkfall, H1Z1, EvE, etc are Open World PvP.
DaoC, LotRO, GW2, etc, are Realms vs Realms.
It's not hard to figure out what Open World PvP is..
- When I played LotRO popular sentiment in the community is that is Ettenmoors were PvP.
- In SWTOR Ilum was commonly referred to as the Open World PvP Zone back when I played.
- PvP Zones in all themeparks are referred to as open "Open World PvP Zones" despite the existence of uncontested zone where PvP is disabled.
- This point is heavily driven home in ArcheAge which is considered to be an Open World PvP game despite massives sections of both continents being safezones for their respective factions.
- Hell, even Darkfall Unholy Wars had 100% safe zones in the lower level areas.
I haven't PvPed in (or really even played to any real extent) GW2, EQ, or DAOC. However the way you describe them sounds like Open World PvP to me.Open World PvP has always been a term that differentiates PvP that takes place in an open map from arena PvP in every game I've played in every context I've seen people use it outside these forums.
You can attack my sources because apparently people from Singapore are less credible (Openly racist much?) but you don't even have any, which makes them automatically better than yours.
Your example is like quoting some English Professor in an argument with Lebron James about the triangle defense in basketball.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Both versions of Darkfall.
EVE
Wurm
ArcheAge
Ettenmoors
Ilum (And all the other open world zones in SWTOR)
Planetside
Xsyon
Pirates of The Burning Sea
Runescape Wild
And more titles I probably can't remember over the past decade of Open World PvP in MMOs and a combined 15 year if you want to count Freelancer. The majority of that experience coming from Darkfall, EVE and ArcheAge.
Sorry if that's kind of experience is too "limited" for you.
Also, forum in general tend to have some of the biggest bozos in general. Generally a lot of people spewing crap out their butt and not even attempting to back up anything they are saying with anything but their own opinion. I don't think people using the MMORPG forums are any kind of experts whatsoever.
I've listed like what 5 different links of people talking about Open World PvP in games with safezones, which utterly flies in the face of anyone claiming that Open World PvP = PvP in all zones (Which again, I've never heard the term used that way outside these forums).
Words are defined by their usage, and it appears that there is a sizeable amount of gamers who don't use it the same way the "experts" here are claiming it's used.
There are massive benefits that Realm success in PvP brings to PvE. The Power and Strength relics can make your PvE much easier. The best EXP can be found in the Frontiers. Control of Darkness Falls unlocks some of the best EXP and loot in the game (vanilla at least). That control is determined by the success of the overall war.
DAoC is my favorite game. I think it got more "right" than any other game so far.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
You claim LoTRO has Open World PvP because it has the Ettenmoor's (you do not mention The Sundering of Osgiliath), which is a map/zone where freep's can fight against creep's in PvMP.
The Ettenmoor's is roughly the same size as The Shire.
https://lotro-wiki.com/index.php/Zones_by_level
Look at that list of zone's in LoTRO, they make up the WORLD.
Still think PvMP in two zone's is Open World PvP?
If you do, think about this, as a Freep, you need to be at least level 20 before you can travel to one of the PvMP area's, and if you travel to one, you are SCALED/BOOSTED to level cap (which is 105 just now).
If you want to Creep, you need to be level 10 on a Freep before you can PvMP, and the Creep you make is automatically at the level cap (which is 105 just now)
Does this really sound like Open World PvP to you? or does it sound more like a Battleground?
How many Open World PvP MMORPG's automatically scale or boost character's to level cap so they can take part in the Open World PvP?
Think hard before replying.
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.