[quote]Originally posted by Greatness [b]Lineage 2 pvp=best. They are making it better too. The PvP is not just randomly fighting each other, there is guild wars, castle seiges, etc. Soon in chronicle 3 there will be more! Best mmorpg I have played has been Lineage 2(many people probably wouldn't agree though). www.lineage2.com - offical site. [url=http://www.lineagecenter.com/chronicle3/] - Everything coming in chronicle 3.[/b][/quote]
Lineage II's PVP system is quite good. The game itself is entirely too grind-centric... and that grind is HORRENDOUS... that's what killed it for me. If the grind weren't so insane I'd still be playing. Also couldn't stand the macro-freaks that camped all the lower level areas to hell and gone either.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Ya grind is crazy but PvP is still fun at lower lvls. Also, a lot of campers are actually gone now, I do not see any in Elf Fortress, just normal caual players like me.
Personally I would prefer to have Consensual PvP anywhere plus special PvP zones but only for individuals, and also separate PvP arenas for group vs. group. (it's a bit too much to ask for lol) Although there's no choice to select all three, so I guess I'll have to just settle for consensual pvp
First off, you can't bring AC2 into this since all there servers support PvP in one way or another. Standard servers had PvP areas, Then the Kindom ones like cold eve which is more like DAoC and WoW type of PvP, then ofcourse Darktide like on old AC it was FULL blown PVP. AC2's failure was due to being a dumbed down game that old AC gamers gave it a bad name which even scared off non AC players to even come to play.. Not to mention that the whole franchise never did get good plublication. I can go on all day with what happened there. I played AC for over 4 years and never player AC2 past the beta. If anything with regards to AC2 is that it proves that PvP is not a preferred method. Same thing goes with Shadowbane. That game is also struggling to stay around. Also look at Dragon Empires, it was suppose to be even way better than Shadowbane and it was cancelled. Infact there are already rumors that DnL might not even make it to open beta.
Just because CoH is adding CoV, you don't know how long it will last. It isn't around yet so you can't even say how well it is doing with PvP. So don't give credit to something that hasn't even shown success for being something it isn't yet.
This even gets better. As For WoW, first off you got to realize WoW got most of it's players from Battle.net and of course players from Warcraft series, Starcraft series and Diablo series. both RTS games being STRONGLY on PvP and with their only RPG being a Hash n Slash, of course most players from there are PK lovers. So, if you thinkn Wow sucked in all the MMORPG gamers, then that is in error. EQ2 still got a VERY large portion of it's players and new ows from other MMO's as well. Wow, basically moved a lot of people from FREE play over at Battle.net to P2P at WoW. Anyway, also you are completely wrong with the server numbers. First off you got to realize RP is also a server type that has the same set of rules for PvP as the normal servers.. so if you add all the PvP servers up you have 47. if you add up the normal/RP servers (since they go by the same rules of PvP) there are 49. Now this is really going to add another aspect to how PvP is failing even in WoW. Look now I am sure it won't change much around lunch time and being saturaday, which is consicered a peak time for gaming on WoW.
You will notice that the PvP servers have over 30+ servers that are at LOW. with the Normal servers having over 30+ at Medium. about 10 High for PvP and about 8 high for Normal. However, you also got to remember that Blizzard has been getting all the high end normal servers and doing a rebalance, moving charaters from high to low servers. I think if you really take a close look at the PvP servers and if they did the same thing, you will have all low servers. In the end the normal servers would be all MEDIUM and all the PvP all LOW. This already tells me that Blizzard will be moving some of their servers back to the Battle.net room aye?
PvP is not on the uprise as you may think. It will balance out of course. But it will not dominate the MMORPG genre. Now it may start getting bigger in the MMORTS and MMOFPS genre, but not the RPG. Infact true to MMORPG games are moving more towards stronger story and slowly incorporating what I call a PKlite, or some type of mild PK to hone out the combat twitcher and level grinders. So far WoW is the only true success that has incorporated PVP, well DAoC has as well, but you will notice they both are more as a RvR type scenerio, not a all out CHOAS battle of gankers that have an attention span of a person with ADD. That type of PvP will be left behind for all the FPS hackers that require an aimbot and wallhack to even play.
Oh one final note....Embers I think you need to realize, eventhough it is during the 3rd age it is still Middle Earth we are talking about. THAT is the focus. Not all based around the WAR of the Ring. It isn't LoTR Online it is Middle Earth Online. All you guys got to stop trying to base the world on one book. It is about Middle Earth...I think you guys got too excited from the movie.
I referred to AC2 becuase it was a dismal failure and my comment was in that context, it was also created by Turbine and even formed the basis for the client engine to be used in MEO, though they do say they have improved the engine. Despite that you seem to wish to talk about why AC2 failed, ok lets go with that, it did not fail because it had PvP. I really don't care how long you played it, all you have is an opinion same as mine. What can be verified by facts is that AC2 was targeted at the casual player, this taken from Turbines own pre launch marketing.
We can also verify a few facts about AC2, it suffered badly during beta with lag, it launched with major issues, the world had no npc's, no vendors. It was purely a combat engine with a few quest dungeons thrown in. It also suffered with a broken chat system for months, it also had a broken pvp system because on pvp kill points for ablities that meant that it was almost inpossible to get the higher pvp abilities as it was easier to lose pvp points that gain them.
It would be brave person that stated that AC2 failed because of pvp, your comment that all servers supported pvp seems to overlook the obvious fact that joining one of the factions was something you actually had to do on the PVE servers to enable PVP. You also ignore the other numerous faults, in addition to the above, the rushed implementation of group monsters with virtually no testing, a horrible end of beta event, the complete inability to enter buildings in the towns, the silly archer phase in beta when the majority of the players played archers. The constant nerfing and reblancing of classes, the determination to restrict solo play and force group play, the tact era with constant exploits and the failure of Turbine to ban players for exploiting the constant path errors with mobs unable to climb slopes. The z axis issues with players unable to actually inflict damage on mobs, the numerous broken and worthless skills in every character skill tree. The total lack of content at high level, the repetitive quests that you had to do for exp every week. the addition of a hero system to increase the already boring grind Etc etc
You also refer to a couple of games being cancelled as if the decision to implement pvp or not is in some way responsible and then go on to mention shadowbane. As MEO has proved it's entirely possible to make fundamental changes to a game before release. It's ironic that you mention Shadobane because Shadowbane was horribly horribly coded and despite that and with a full pvp system it still endures.
As for COH, it's interesting that COV is being added, COH has been real hit but it was based on pure PVE play, if you look at the comments from players of COH. It lacks an end game, COV is an attempt to add that end game, I didn't state it was good or bad but the very fact that PvP is being added shows that devs realise the advantages of attempting to tap into the pvp market.
As for WoW, you have no way of knowing where the playbase came from, even if you did how is that relevant? Do you really think anyone cares what game someone used to play? You have no proof of your statement and yet again are plucking figures out of thin air or somewhere else. You linked to the US stats for WoW, did you not examine your own link? 9 PVP servers currently show high population, 1 PVE server is currently showing high population. Check out the low population PVP servers, they are the new additional PVP servers they had to add because demand for PVP caught them unawares. But even accepting that in the US they have approx the same amount of PVE servers and ignoring the numbers of people who actually use them, if you examine the Europe and Asia stats the situation is even clearer, PVP is far more popular that PVE. Taking your example from AC2 above, PVE servers in WoW actually have more PVP than the PVE servers in AC2, how do that balance with your above reason for AC2's failure?
I think what you need to realise is that mmorpg's are released by companies, shareholders are not interested in what a particular subset of players want, the successful companies will target their product at the widest market possible. Removing PvP from MEO has been done for the same reason Turbine launched AC2 with no npc's and are attempting to launch MEO with only part of the world. It's easier and cheaper, it's that simple. However in an increasing populated mmorpg market, there's too much competition, this is not 1999 anymore, the majority of players will not accept a half finished mmorpg and no matter how big the license is, with no released details on an end game, I just don't see MEO being successful in the long term.
Hmmm Embers interesting theory but you're quite mistaken. MEO will do fine regardless of if it has PVP or not. Because it's MEO. Now, I'll jump right in there and state that it would do *better* with PVP but because of the fact that it's Middle Earth it's going to draw a huge playerbase and hold a decent population. They could use old-style DOOM graphics and still hold a sizeable playerbase using Middle Earth as their title.
But you are correct. Hell look at this poll. Of the folks responding less than 10% of the respondants prefer not to have PVP in the game. The overwhelming majority think PVP of some kind is important to have in an MMO.
This poll isn't really about MEO, however. The MEO debate just spurred my interest in how others felt about PVP.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Mmorpg's do well if they can retain subscribers, the box sales for MEO will be impressive no doubt. But mmorpg's live or die on word of mouth, what happens in beta and the early reviews will influence the box sales. The actual content will have a major effect on retaining subscribers, I said well long term, what I mean by that is 6+ months from release. If 300,000 people buy it on release day that's good, if 6 months later most have left that's bad. After all what are you going to do when you have leveled up? It's looking like EQ-lite at the moment and given the major server merges happening in EQ, how can they compete long term?
A major license is not a sure fire money maker. Especially if the license is so restrictive, it's going to be difficult to feel like a hero in MEO if you can't invade mordor, if you can't kill Sauron, those are not options. At the moment it looks like killing AI Mobs is the end game and only if they are not too famous..
Like someone wanted a type of PvP, Lineage 2 I think has it because you can PvP anywhere but if you do not want to lose anything you could go to arena(mostly PvP soloers are here), or the collieusm(cannot spell lol anyway, this is is group vs. group mostly).
I think the best PVP implementation out is SWG. You can choose to be PVP "overt" and PVP anywhere, anytime. Or you can be PVP "Covert" and only PVP if you assist an overt member of your faction. Or you can be PVP neutral and never participate in PVP. It's a very nice system. They've changed it a bit too to where you can be "War on" only to NPC's of the opposing faction (so stormtroopers or rebels will attack you but players can't) if you want as well.
In space you can do the same and if you want added fun you can go to a PVP sector of space where anyone there is fair game. (usually the best pilots are out there so be careful! )
Overall? SWG has the most well implemented PVP system I've experienced. If you don't want to be griefed just turn PVP off. When you're ready to PVP go re-declare.
Works great.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
...those who oppose PvE are generally suffering terrible flashbacks to pre trammel uo when they lost all their ingots.
AAAAAAAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHA!!!!!
That's awesome...I think I'm gonna add that to my sig. [edit] Stupid 500 character limit.[/edit]
----------------------------- Listen Asmodeeus, seven years ago, Ultima Online didn't even have those pathetic "quests" that you refer to or those "professions" of ninja, samurai, necromancer, and paladin. Nor did it have any of the neon crap, or bug mounts. It didn't even have any "combat moves." You turned on attack and jousted with simplistic swings. It was a better game then. if you can't guess why then just uninstall the thing and move along. - Crabby
Originally posted by MisfitZ Originally posted by Embers
...those who oppose PvE are generally suffering terrible flashbacks to pre trammel uo when they lost all their ingots.
AAAAAAAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHA!!!!!
That's awesome...I think I'm gonna add that to my sig. [edit] Stupid 500 character limit.[/edit]
LOL!!! Now that brings back memories. Back when I was a miner in UO I got so sick of PK'ers stealing my ingots that I mastered in Mage and Armsman just to protect myself. It was kinda funny to see them bolt when an EV would pop on their heads as soon as they'd show up (Before they nerfed EV's anyhow).
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online. Sig image Pending Still in: A couple Betas
Comments
[quote]Originally posted by Greatness
[b]Lineage 2 pvp=best. They are making it better too. The PvP is not just randomly fighting each other, there is guild wars, castle seiges, etc. Soon in chronicle 3 there will be more! Best mmorpg I have played has been Lineage 2(many people probably wouldn't agree though).
www.lineage2.com - offical site.
[url=http://www.lineagecenter.com/chronicle3/] - Everything coming in chronicle 3.[/b][/quote]
Lineage II's PVP system is quite good. The game itself is entirely too grind-centric... and that grind is HORRENDOUS... that's what killed it for me. If the grind weren't so insane I'd still be playing. Also couldn't stand the macro-freaks that camped all the lower level areas to hell and gone either.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
Ya grind is crazy but PvP is still fun at lower lvls. Also, a lot of campers are actually gone now, I do not see any in Elf Fortress, just normal caual players like me.
~Greatness~
Currently Playing:
Nothing
Personally I would prefer to have Consensual PvP anywhere plus special PvP zones but only for individuals, and also separate PvP arenas for group vs. group. (it's a bit too much to ask for lol) Although there's no choice to select all three, so I guess I'll have to just settle for consensual pvp
PvP Is a great aspect of any game, the only people who should be cut off from pvp are 1-10, and 50-60.
Lvls 1-10 should be consentual
Lvls 11-49 Should be Open PVP
Lvls 50-60 Should be Consentual
With complete PvP zones.
KillerTwinkie - That one guy who used to mod mmorpg.com's forums.
I referred to AC2 becuase it was a dismal failure and my comment was in that context, it was also created by Turbine and even formed the basis for the client engine to be used in MEO, though they do say they have improved the engine. Despite that you seem to wish to talk about why AC2 failed, ok lets go with that, it did not fail because it had PvP. I really don't care how long you played it, all you have is an opinion same as mine. What can be verified by facts is that AC2 was targeted at the casual player, this taken from Turbines own pre launch marketing.
We can also verify a few facts about AC2, it suffered badly during beta with lag, it launched with major issues, the world had no npc's, no vendors. It was purely a combat engine with a few quest dungeons thrown in. It also suffered with a broken chat system for months, it also had a broken pvp system because on pvp kill points for ablities that meant that it was almost inpossible to get the higher pvp abilities as it was easier to lose pvp points that gain them.
It would be brave person that stated that AC2 failed because of pvp, your comment that all servers supported pvp seems to overlook the obvious fact that joining one of the factions was something you actually had to do on the PVE servers to enable PVP. You also ignore the other numerous faults, in addition to the above, the rushed implementation of group monsters with virtually no testing, a horrible end of beta event, the complete inability to enter buildings in the towns, the silly archer phase in beta when the majority of the players played archers. The constant nerfing and reblancing of classes, the determination to restrict solo play and force group play, the tact era with constant exploits and the failure of Turbine to ban players for exploiting the constant path errors with mobs unable to climb slopes. The z axis issues with players unable to actually inflict damage on mobs, the numerous broken and worthless skills in every character skill tree. The total lack of content at high level, the repetitive quests that you had to do for exp every week. the addition of a hero system to increase the already boring grind Etc etc
You also refer to a couple of games being cancelled as if the decision to implement pvp or not is in some way responsible and then go on to mention shadowbane. As MEO has proved it's entirely possible to make fundamental changes to a game before release. It's ironic that you mention Shadobane because Shadowbane was horribly horribly coded and despite that and with a full pvp system it still endures.
As for COH, it's interesting that COV is being added, COH has been real hit but it was based on pure PVE play, if you look at the comments from players of COH. It lacks an end game, COV is an attempt to add that end game, I didn't state it was good or bad but the very fact that PvP is being added shows that devs realise the advantages of attempting to tap into the pvp market.
As for WoW, you have no way of knowing where the playbase came from, even if you did how is that relevant? Do you really think anyone cares what game someone used to play? You have no proof of your statement and yet again are plucking figures out of thin air or somewhere else. You linked to the US stats for WoW, did you not examine your own link? 9 PVP servers currently show high population, 1 PVE server is currently showing high population. Check out the low population PVP servers, they are the new additional PVP servers they had to add because demand for PVP caught them unawares. But even accepting that in the US they have approx the same amount of PVE servers and ignoring the numbers of people who actually use them, if you examine the Europe and Asia stats the situation is even clearer, PVP is far more popular that PVE. Taking your example from AC2 above, PVE servers in WoW actually have more PVP than the PVE servers in AC2, how do that balance with your above reason for AC2's failure?
I think what you need to realise is that mmorpg's are released by companies, shareholders are not interested in what a particular subset of players want, the successful companies will target their product at the widest market possible. Removing PvP from MEO has been done for the same reason Turbine launched AC2 with no npc's and are attempting to launch MEO with only part of the world. It's easier and cheaper, it's that simple. However in an increasing populated mmorpg market, there's too much competition, this is not 1999 anymore, the majority of players will not accept a half finished mmorpg and no matter how big the license is, with no released details on an end game, I just don't see MEO being successful in the long term.
Hmmm Embers interesting theory but you're quite mistaken. MEO will do fine regardless of if it has PVP or not. Because it's MEO. Now, I'll jump right in there and state that it would do *better* with PVP but because of the fact that it's Middle Earth it's going to draw a huge playerbase and hold a decent population. They could use old-style DOOM graphics and still hold a sizeable playerbase using Middle Earth as their title.
But you are correct. Hell look at this poll. Of the folks responding less than 10% of the respondants prefer not to have PVP in the game. The overwhelming majority think PVP of some kind is important to have in an MMO.
This poll isn't really about MEO, however. The MEO debate just spurred my interest in how others felt about PVP.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
Mmorpg's do well if they can retain subscribers, the box sales for MEO will be impressive no doubt. But mmorpg's live or die on word of mouth, what happens in beta and the early reviews will influence the box sales. The actual content will have a major effect on retaining subscribers, I said well long term, what I mean by that is 6+ months from release. If 300,000 people buy it on release day that's good, if 6 months later most have left that's bad. After all what are you going to do when you have leveled up? It's looking like EQ-lite at the moment and given the major server merges happening in EQ, how can they compete long term?
A major license is not a sure fire money maker. Especially if the license is so restrictive, it's going to be difficult to feel like a hero in MEO if you can't invade mordor, if you can't kill Sauron, those are not options. At the moment it looks like killing AI Mobs is the end game and only if they are not too famous..
~Greatness~
Currently Playing:
Nothing
I think the best PVP implementation out is SWG. You can choose to be PVP "overt" and PVP anywhere, anytime. Or you can be PVP "Covert" and only PVP if you assist an overt member of your faction. Or you can be PVP neutral and never participate in PVP. It's a very nice system. They've changed it a bit too to where you can be "War on" only to NPC's of the opposing faction (so stormtroopers or rebels will attack you but players can't) if you want as well.
In space you can do the same and if you want added fun you can go to a PVP sector of space where anyone there is fair game. (usually the best pilots are out there so be careful!
)
Overall? SWG has the most well implemented PVP system I've experienced. If you don't want to be griefed just turn PVP off. When you're ready to PVP go re-declare.
Works great.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
AAAAAAAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHA!!!!!
That's awesome...I think I'm gonna add that to my sig. [edit] Stupid 500 character limit.[/edit]
-----------------------------
Listen Asmodeeus, seven years ago, Ultima Online didn't even have those pathetic "quests" that you refer to or those "professions" of ninja, samurai, necromancer, and paladin. Nor did it have any of the neon crap, or bug mounts. It didn't even have any "combat moves." You turned on attack and jousted with simplistic swings. It was a better game then. if you can't guess why then just uninstall the thing and move along. - Crabby
LOL!!! Now that brings back memories. Back when I was a miner in UO I got so sick of PK'ers stealing my ingots that I mastered in Mage and Armsman just to protect myself. It was kinda funny to see them bolt when an EV would pop on their heads as soon as they'd show up
(Before they nerfed EV's anyhow).
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.
Sig image Pending
Still in: A couple Betas
i would like Full RvR with a small safe spot for n00bs
"It's the darkness that brings us power"