Why not? There's no reason you can't have a Sandbox that is accessible to many people. Allow progression along non-combat paths and provide protected areas for the non-pvp crowd. You'll get a ton of farmers and crafters hanging around paying their monthly dues and supplying the economy with everything that the remaining 20% needs to run around killing monsters and each other.
A dynamic and healthy economy is one of the pillars of a good working sandbox MMORPG. To do that you need every items to be always in high demand. And the mass does not like the idea of having their gears permanently lost.. EVE's economy wouldn't be so wonderful if players ships don't get blown up by tens of thousands everyday.
Originally posted by Britas
Rubbish. The mass market loves sandbox elements, as proven with games like GTA and Oblivion.
There's a difference between sandbox and open world. And Oblivion is not as sandbox-ish as you think, at least when compared to it's predecessors.
And as far as MMORPGs with sandbox elements go, how do you know what the mass market likesor dosent like? When was the last time the mass market was offered a good quality well developed well launched MMORPG with strong sandbox elements?
What exactly is it that you actaully base your statement on?
I don't know....EVE Online? Oh yes EVE certainly now has millions of players and is competing with WoW for the top dog MMORPG title, isn't it?
its hard to know how serious you are being as your last statement contradicts itself.
you answer that eve was launched with good quality and well deceloped. thats not true. it has become that yes. but wasnt always that way.
you seem to insinuate that eve was a great sanbox on release yet the sarcasm dripping off the 2nd part of your statement seems to contradict that you think it is doing well now. or maybe youre saying that the best of the sandboxes is still nowhere near as popular as wow.
eve is the best of the sandboxes yes, but its a niche within the sandbox niche.there are alot of sandbox featheres in eve but they are delivered in such a way that it makes it dificult for the average user to get involved ir hell. to even understand how to do things.
and nobody compares its popularity to wow, obviously. you cant really compare any game to wow, as far as popularity goes.
I say this loving what it offers and being personally willing to stomach it in order to play- it needs to offer PvE servers as an option if it is going to be bigger then a niche title.
What I mean by 'PvE Server' is PvP only allowed on the 3rd island and in the BGs on them.
The truth is that open world PvP just dosent work for the mainstream Western player base- they obviously like their MMORPGs to be PvE with OPTIONAL PvP... even Aion had to nerf their open world PvP here in the West to stop the flood of sub cancellations. It's just a fact that open world PvP games have limited appeal here.
While I personally don't care about a bit of grind and can handle PKs, but this game is obviously already struggling against the grindfest/ gankfest stereotype, so not making it clear that it will cater for fully for the optional PvP crowd is going to limit it's market hugely I think.
And for those of you that say it isnt going to be an issue on the 2 controlled islands, well as things stand now remember other factions (inc the outlaws) are not punished for killing you on them, and it isnt sensible to think that all the PKs will flock to the 3rd land to look for challenging fair fights... we all know from experience they don'tplay like this in the main. Most will form gank squads and roll over enemy factions farms etc constantly- It's just what a lot of people do in these games.
The modern PvPer always looks for the easiest fight with smallest risk of loss (no matter how much of a bad ass PK they sound like in a forum), and if that means repeatedly raping you while you are tending your crops, thats what they will do, especially when you can probably be looted for spoils (though many will do it just to grief you). We have all seen this again and again.
They have plenty of time, there is no panic right now, nothing is set in stone, but imo they would be stupid not to offer alternative rulesets when it comes here. Other games do and it works in spreading the games appeal to a whole new crowd that won't play it otherwise.
It dosent take away the open world PvP crowd's game after all, dosent impact them at all in fact, and it will broaden AA's appeal into the mainstream of gamers (which has to be a great thing for its continuing development and longevity) that won't play otherwise. It will make the difference I think of it being played in the long term by something like 100,000 subs or maybe as high a couple of million.
This is NOT a carebear vs PK debate btw, both camps can be served happily I think for tiny additional investment.
(Also, I post this here after reading Ballista's post elsewhere on this siteand having a think on it all, and coming to the conclusion she is right. So apologies to her for not seeing it before)
If its either or....i'd say go with the open pvp as there are enough pve games on the market right now, its time for something different. The past few companies that tried to make pvp titles failed as they were small companies. That said, I'm always a fan of a pve server and a pvp serve so that no one will complain.
Incognito www.incognito-gaming.us "You're either with us or against us"
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
I agree with your thoughts but the vocal minority will scream the option down. Kind of ironic the people screaming about player choice and freedom only want their choice and freedom to count. Guess that is human nature though. Sigh another sandbox attempted filed into the niche market drawer.
I agree open pvp could very well kill it here but remeber over there they are big on pvp and competition .The world Cyber games were held for several years in Korea.
Archeage has been asked about publishing the game over here and the lead guy says that they are working on it.he was asked about having to change the game a bit to meet a publishers demands to publish it over here and he kind of didn't give any defintie answer.
IMO i don't have a problem with any games design,just don't go changing it up every week or two because peopel start crying.You design a game stick to your design that way if i join i know full well what i am getting into.
I think there is perhaps a 50/50 chance this game will be revamped a touch to meet a publishers demands over here,i don't think it will release the identical game as in over seas version.I don't care either way,i just want to see what these guys will do with this game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
the problem with making PVE servers is the people that play them would like the option of pvp.
That leads to instanced pvp for them or some sort of dumbass battleground. Once you go down that path open pvp dies. Like most people have stated there are a ton of games that have that type of system. GW2 and SWTOR will both cater to the pve players so why bother ruining this game?
I'll probably play the game no matter what servers are instituted, but would prefer the pvp on the 3rd continent only option. Although from what I am reading it seems the pk on your own continent will be pretty limited. Your own faction won't kill you much because of the jail system and all the NPC are hostile to the enemy faction. So there is some measure of protection.
As was stated numerous times, I do see an optional pvp server bringing in a lot more subs and impacting in no way a normal ffa pvp server.
I kind of think back to daoc. If the pvp was everwhere and not just in the frontiers, DF, and BGs, I probably wouldn't have played as long, nor had as much fun. The game also probably wouldn't have done as well as it did. Having that option when logging on to go out and take some keeps, find some pvp action or just roaming around safely doing whatever was huge. I was PvPing most of the time, but I had that choice to and liked that.
Would be nice to log on AA and just do some farming, crafting, exploring safely one night, and the next few some intense pvp action on the 3rd continent.
Open world PvP by itself does not scare us away. It is the idea of losing hours of playtime from getting killed by another player. Concepts like any kind of item loss when dying, or even rank loss, can scare anyone away pretty easily. The broad appeal goes out the window with painful death penalties in PvP. There has not really been a largely successful game that has this sort of concept in the West. There have been some mildly successful titles, but nothing that would be worth a developer's time to shoot for. The "suspense" that people look for in MMORPGs now a days is more just a way to look back at the more gritty death penalties in a nostalgic way. Chances are that half the people who cry for more severe penalties for dying in PvP and more hardcore elements in MMORPGs would not even play a game that had those elements.
server choosing should be question based,
how much time you have in hands to play during week?
casual vs " all the time in a world " players will always fight witht the core rules.
myself i have small child and wife i dont have all the time in a world look behind my shoulder if there is some virtually strong person to about pk me for some reason other than get the virtual boner! so im casual and i woudl like pvp to be optional.
i here call for wars like in old days in these games, war between factions in weekend 2 days those who are willing take a part winner got cookies looser loses nothing but no cookies. ofc some may say one side is always bugger better than other side but you can always adjust the war system for those who lose allthetime. let people train , quest play in peace during the week and at weekend is war in like map between the factions and quest line to do objects to destroy. and if you chose not to take a part of war you would be safe to train yourself to your on maps where ever they are.
I really dont see what the big fuss is about. Why would the pvp folks mind if they made a pve server. They dont have to play on it, afterall. And please, dont even try to give the arguement that it would take away people from the pvp side. PVP here in the states has never been huge, Especially full loot pvp. There is no real consequences for people that want to do nothing but gank folks. Even EvE's penalties for ganking in high sec space is virtually nothing when they will allow the game to pay the player their insurance for the ship even though they were breaking high sec space rules. You want a true pvp game, then make the rules for player ganking harsh enough that there are very real consequences for murdering another player in a game.
Chances are, if there was not a pve server option, those players would probably not even play the game in the first place. The OP is right on this one. The PVP games that are out there already, show that pvp is not a big market. If the developers want to make only a pvp game and not want to make a pve server, then it is their right and I would respect that, But I personally feel that they are going to limit themselves in their playerbase. Again, thats cool if that is what they want to do. I just dont see why all the hatred for people wanting a pve server. Surely you realize that if people dont like pvp, they simply wont buy the game anyways or if they do, will quit vey shortly after they spend a few hours being repeatedly ganked. So again, why are you so opposed to it?
I'm a few months late to this thread, but I only recently looked into the game.
Your argument isn't totally off, but it's missing in a few points as well.
One reason why PvPers wouldn't want PvE servers is because then the devs have to balance their time between the two systems. There is more mass market appeal (good for business) but there is the potential that the PvP may suffer (bad for the PvP player base)
It reduces player base on PvP servers. I know you don't think that those people would be playing on those servers anyway, and you're probably right to a degree. However, there will surely be a section of the market that wants to try this game out as something new or it just sounds interesting. Having only PvP servers forces these people into them, and hopefully some of them realize how much fun it is. Whereas having PvE servers might intice those people to just play it safe.
I could really see it going either way, in terms of mass appeal. PvE MMOs have been hugely popular in the West and has resulted in many games of this type coming out. However, this also means that the market is greatly saturated so it is very hard to distinguish yourself among the numerous others.
The "hardcore PvPer" appears to be a niche market so there is a question of how big the market is. However, a really good PvP game has the opportunity to really dominate that markett as there is a lack of solid games in that area, which may end up being more profitable than just being another clone of the many other PvE games out there. There is also a possibility that the market may be bigger than what we believe it to be because of the lack of solid games, especially since the expansion of MMO consumers in general over the last few years. It isn't unreasonable to think that some of the millions of new players to enter the MMO genre over the last few years may find a hardcore ruleset appealing and just have not yet had the opportunity to play a game with that feature.
Regarding the UO Felucca/Trammel debate - Considering the alternatives during that time as far as the commercial market, which was 1 themepark game and another sandbox. Both sides of the debate fail to take on how many numbers pre trammel stayed due to lack of better options. Fact was that when Trammel came out, the masses flocked trammel Britain bank, and Felucca was left fairly deserted.
As far as a the PVE/PVP discussion, the fact is, people don't want to spend hours grinding and building themselves up to be slapped with a penalty or item loss/decay, yet, they for some reason still want to grief each other in one form or another. Its human nature, competitive play. However, with that said, If I was going to pay for abuse, I believe my money would be better spent on a hottie in bondage gear if you catch my meaning.
There are those that dont mind paying for this type of play and perhaps XL Games is aiming for this very niche type of play, and if they are, great. Of all the Competitive style games I have played, I still feel PRE ToA DAOC Frontier system was by the far the funnest and that would be the type of game I currently am seeking, and if AA isn't going to be that type of game, then I will keep looking and wish AA to be as successful as can be.
Afterall, it just puts more options of play on the market for all of us gamers. People seriously need to realize that they ultimately destroy games and the market with their pety forum arguements between PVE vs PVP, FFA vs Controlled PVP, Open World Vs Battlegrounds, WoW Versus New Original Ideas (Or Ideas that already existed pre WoW, but WoWers want the credit for it) and Balance this and that spats.
I hope XL Games sticks to their guns and makes the game the way they want it and not cater to the masses for mass appeal, but truth be told, its the mass appeal that pays the bills, and at the end of the day, I expect them to ride that train, the money train.
The only reason I have interest in this game is that I thought it had faction vs faction conflict.....a la DAOC.If this turns out not to be the case...GW2 will be my only great option.Or I can do what i'm going now.....not playing any MMO.
UO..I left that game and NEVER came back when they let the rampant pking continue.And where did players driven off by UO management decisions go ...EVERQUEST.
Comments
This will be the better version of DF. Won't last long, though.
I agree.
Me, as well as all of my friends, like PvE servers, with optional controlled PvP areas.
I realy think, PvP free servers are for ppl that got ganked in RL when they were little and now, of course, it is time for payback.
I like to play not to stay at the "reclaim"
its hard to know how serious you are being as your last statement contradicts itself.
you answer that eve was launched with good quality and well deceloped. thats not true. it has become that yes. but wasnt always that way.
you seem to insinuate that eve was a great sanbox on release yet the sarcasm dripping off the 2nd part of your statement seems to contradict that you think it is doing well now. or maybe youre saying that the best of the sandboxes is still nowhere near as popular as wow.
eve is the best of the sandboxes yes, but its a niche within the sandbox niche.there are alot of sandbox featheres in eve but they are delivered in such a way that it makes it dificult for the average user to get involved ir hell. to even understand how to do things.
and nobody compares its popularity to wow, obviously. you cant really compare any game to wow, as far as popularity goes.
If its either or....i'd say go with the open pvp as there are enough pve games on the market right now, its time for something different. The past few companies that tried to make pvp titles failed as they were small companies. That said, I'm always a fan of a pve server and a pvp serve so that no one will complain.
Incognito
www.incognito-gaming.us
"You're either with us or against us"
Will AA have PvE only servers?
It is going to be so hard to play an Asian game, I have yet to find an Asian game I liked.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
I agree with your thoughts but the vocal minority will scream the option down. Kind of ironic the people screaming about player choice and freedom only want their choice and freedom to count. Guess that is human nature though. Sigh another sandbox attempted filed into the niche market drawer.
I agree open pvp could very well kill it here but remeber over there they are big on pvp and competition .The world Cyber games were held for several years in Korea.
Archeage has been asked about publishing the game over here and the lead guy says that they are working on it.he was asked about having to change the game a bit to meet a publishers demands to publish it over here and he kind of didn't give any defintie answer.
IMO i don't have a problem with any games design,just don't go changing it up every week or two because peopel start crying.You design a game stick to your design that way if i join i know full well what i am getting into.
I think there is perhaps a 50/50 chance this game will be revamped a touch to meet a publishers demands over here,i don't think it will release the identical game as in over seas version.I don't care either way,i just want to see what these guys will do with this game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
the problem with making PVE servers is the people that play them would like the option of pvp.
That leads to instanced pvp for them or some sort of dumbass battleground. Once you go down that path open pvp dies. Like most people have stated there are a ton of games that have that type of system. GW2 and SWTOR will both cater to the pve players so why bother ruining this game?
Go play one of the 1000 pve games with battle ground and pvp on certain places.
This is just not your type of mmorpg and i am looking forward to the game with its open world pvp.
I'll probably play the game no matter what servers are instituted, but would prefer the pvp on the 3rd continent only option. Although from what I am reading it seems the pk on your own continent will be pretty limited. Your own faction won't kill you much because of the jail system and all the NPC are hostile to the enemy faction. So there is some measure of protection.
As was stated numerous times, I do see an optional pvp server bringing in a lot more subs and impacting in no way a normal ffa pvp server.
I kind of think back to daoc. If the pvp was everwhere and not just in the frontiers, DF, and BGs, I probably wouldn't have played as long, nor had as much fun. The game also probably wouldn't have done as well as it did. Having that option when logging on to go out and take some keeps, find some pvp action or just roaming around safely doing whatever was huge. I was PvPing most of the time, but I had that choice to and liked that.
Would be nice to log on AA and just do some farming, crafting, exploring safely one night, and the next few some intense pvp action on the 3rd continent.
server choosing should be question based,
how much time you have in hands to play during week?
casual vs " all the time in a world " players will always fight witht the core rules.
myself i have small child and wife i dont have all the time in a world look behind my shoulder if there is some virtually strong person to about pk me for some reason other than get the virtual boner! so im casual and i woudl like pvp to be optional.
i here call for wars like in old days in these games, war between factions in weekend 2 days those who are willing take a part winner got cookies looser loses nothing but no cookies. ofc some may say one side is always bugger better than other side but you can always adjust the war system for those who lose allthetime. let people train , quest play in peace during the week and at weekend is war in like map between the factions and quest line to do objects to destroy. and if you chose not to take a part of war you would be safe to train yourself to your on maps where ever they are.
cheers
I'm a few months late to this thread, but I only recently looked into the game.
Your argument isn't totally off, but it's missing in a few points as well.
One reason why PvPers wouldn't want PvE servers is because then the devs have to balance their time between the two systems. There is more mass market appeal (good for business) but there is the potential that the PvP may suffer (bad for the PvP player base)
It reduces player base on PvP servers. I know you don't think that those people would be playing on those servers anyway, and you're probably right to a degree. However, there will surely be a section of the market that wants to try this game out as something new or it just sounds interesting. Having only PvP servers forces these people into them, and hopefully some of them realize how much fun it is. Whereas having PvE servers might intice those people to just play it safe.
I could really see it going either way, in terms of mass appeal. PvE MMOs have been hugely popular in the West and has resulted in many games of this type coming out. However, this also means that the market is greatly saturated so it is very hard to distinguish yourself among the numerous others.
The "hardcore PvPer" appears to be a niche market so there is a question of how big the market is. However, a really good PvP game has the opportunity to really dominate that markett as there is a lack of solid games in that area, which may end up being more profitable than just being another clone of the many other PvE games out there. There is also a possibility that the market may be bigger than what we believe it to be because of the lack of solid games, especially since the expansion of MMO consumers in general over the last few years. It isn't unreasonable to think that some of the millions of new players to enter the MMO genre over the last few years may find a hardcore ruleset appealing and just have not yet had the opportunity to play a game with that feature.
Regarding the UO Felucca/Trammel debate - Considering the alternatives during that time as far as the commercial market, which was 1 themepark game and another sandbox. Both sides of the debate fail to take on how many numbers pre trammel stayed due to lack of better options. Fact was that when Trammel came out, the masses flocked trammel Britain bank, and Felucca was left fairly deserted.
As far as a the PVE/PVP discussion, the fact is, people don't want to spend hours grinding and building themselves up to be slapped with a penalty or item loss/decay, yet, they for some reason still want to grief each other in one form or another. Its human nature, competitive play. However, with that said, If I was going to pay for abuse, I believe my money would be better spent on a hottie in bondage gear if you catch my meaning.
There are those that dont mind paying for this type of play and perhaps XL Games is aiming for this very niche type of play, and if they are, great. Of all the Competitive style games I have played, I still feel PRE ToA DAOC Frontier system was by the far the funnest and that would be the type of game I currently am seeking, and if AA isn't going to be that type of game, then I will keep looking and wish AA to be as successful as can be.
Afterall, it just puts more options of play on the market for all of us gamers. People seriously need to realize that they ultimately destroy games and the market with their pety forum arguements between PVE vs PVP, FFA vs Controlled PVP, Open World Vs Battlegrounds, WoW Versus New Original Ideas (Or Ideas that already existed pre WoW, but WoWers want the credit for it) and Balance this and that spats.
I hope XL Games sticks to their guns and makes the game the way they want it and not cater to the masses for mass appeal, but truth be told, its the mass appeal that pays the bills, and at the end of the day, I expect them to ride that train, the money train.
The only reason I have interest in this game is that I thought it had faction vs faction conflict.....a la DAOC.If this turns out not to be the case...GW2 will be my only great option.Or I can do what i'm going now.....not playing any MMO.
UO..I left that game and NEVER came back when they let the rampant pking continue.And where did players driven off by UO management decisions go ...EVERQUEST.