Ultimately, if what you're trying to say is that there's a vast and untapped market of hardcore pvp gamers than I'm going to have to agree to disagree with you. I do believe that there definitely are gamers who want that, but I don't agree for an instant that there's enough of them for a company like SOE to try to target. Smaller company, smaller franchise maybe, but not SOE, and not EQ.
This pretty much hits the nail on the head. If you force players into PvP everywhere, it just won't sit well, because the players who want FFA PvP are not the majority by any stretch of the imagination. If they have specific areas for the open world conflict, that are optional to participate in, then yeah, it might work.
I think everyone is missing the point of the PVE vs PVP argument. The point is, SOE is a business and will do whatever it can to make maximum profit. This includes implementing changes that go against the mainstream paradigm even at the risk of alienating their existing fanbase. Because if they build something truly amazing, innovative and sustainable, new players will come in droves and they will stay.
Why take the risk? Smedley explained that the devs put tonnes of money into developing expansions that players burn through at an alarming rate. And when they're done with that content, they move on to the other 1000 clone games on the market, never quite finding the one that's "just right". They don't come back until SOE spends another chunk of their fortune developing more content. Clearly, there is a goldmine to be had in a game where the players keep playing and spending between expansions. That's Smedley's theory, and he mentions EVE as an example of a sandbox that gets players totally invested in creating their own content and conflict to keep things interesting. By the way: Smedley implies it's non-consensual, open-world PVP (i.e. Hulkageddon) that keeps EVE interesting.
Some people on the forum are saying SOE won't go this route because "EverQuest has never been about PVP" and they will lose a big chunk of the existing fanbase. SOE just doesn't care because there is a way bigger return on investment in making something different from the games they made in the past. And judging by the impressions of editors from MMORPG.COM and TenTonHammer, this game is likely a triple-A blockbuster that will retain fans for a long time.
One final point... although some people claim the fanbase is categorically against this change, I disagree. ice-vortex did a poll where about half of the 300+ respondents said they would still play even if this game is open-world, non-consensual PVP. Holy cow! People are ready for change.
So yeah. If SOE builds it, they will come. And they'll stay.
I find it amusing when I view a post that states if it is open world non consensual PvP they won't play the game....haha riiight!
Oh wait they want easy mode where you can go out and kill without recourse; senseless, mindless MOBs with highly predictible AI...been there, done that, done with that!
There are plenty of MMORPGs to choose from these days...SOE is a big company and they can afford to make this game however they like and not just to cater to carebears
Simply said im lookin for a real challenge, not a mindless timesink
Look for it all you want, EXPECTING it to be this title, in particular at this point and based off of a few tweets is just foolish. I'm not saying the game won't be this way, I'm simply saying odds aren't with it being so and there's no confirmation or anything saying otherwise. Temper your expectations.
Were you around during the so called dry periods between MMORPGs in the past where a MMORPG player would wait years for what was hyped as being the next big MMORPG everyone was waiting for?
I didn't hear about Everquest Next until recently as I was on hiatus (not playing any MMORPGs or any game or even waiting for any game for that matter) for a few years as it was rehash after rehash; as has been stated by good ol Smed himself
I for one am willing to wait (a little over a month) to see what all this hype is about as I played Everquest day one of launch and really enjoyed it at that time...since then everything has been an Everquest Clone with slight variations here and there, of sorts; however its time to really bring it and from what has been said they seem ready to bring it...
Im not expecting anything to be quite honest; especially in these times
I find it amusing when I view a post that states if it is open world non consensual PvP they won't play the game....haha riiight!
Oh wait they want easy mode where you can go out and kill without recourse; senseless, mindless MOBs with highly predictible AI...been there, done that, done with that!
There are plenty of MMORPGs to choose from these days...SOE is a big company and they can afford to make this game however they like and not just to cater to carebears
Simply said im lookin for a real challenge, not a mindless timesink
Ironically, the one solid bit of info that we have on EQNext is that it is going to use StoryBricks, which is new dynamic AI for NPCs.
I would think they'd have PVP, RP and PVE servers/shards at launch. Maybe itll be something like DCUO's PVP to PVE where players can port back and forth from PVP server to PVE server using an NPC or node.
If it was only down to having FFA PvP or no PvP; if it was only that simple
Personally I consider total free for all PvP to be non existent these days and I highly doubt its total FFA PvP as it simply doesn't make sense at this time...
Unless there was some risk, penalities, punishment; experienced by the player, firsthand
I`m excited about EQ Next as much as anyone but I couldn`t care less about PVP. The sandbox playstyle is what I am interested in. It`s what I liked about EQ1 so much. There was nothing pointing you to go to a certain area. I hope the game turns out to be great.
One final point... although some people claim the fanbase is categorically against this change, I disagree. ice-vortex did a poll where about half of the 300+ respondents said they would still play even if this game is open-world, non-consensual PVP. Holy cow! People are ready for change.
150 people on a forum known for idolising commercial failures like DFUW. Yeah seems like good statistics.
More like 'if you build it, it will fail'. Which is what it will do if you impose unwanted PvP on the masses.
ahhh, discrediting the sample pool. Well played Sir!
Most people are clueless as to why sandbox MMOs really haven't done well.
Just like themepark games fail because of their triviality, sandbox games fail because your accomplishments are mostly superficial and have little to no real impact on the world or other players.
Give me a game thats completely open world like Darkfall thats actually fun and challenging without PvP (like EQ), and it will be amazing with the addition of PvP. To this day, EQ pvp servers are, hands down, the most fun that I ever had in an MMO. Put that into a sandbox with a world thats more than a backdrop, and we'd finally have a game to play that wouldn't be boring after just a few weeks.
First, that poll is wrongly attributed to me as well, Grym created it and deserves the credit.
I will say that I mostly agree with the OP. that if they build the game, people will play it. There market is largely untapped. The PVP MMORPG games are filled with mostly low budget and poorly designed games and then there's EVE. I will be curious to see how Age of Wushu will do considering it is from an Asian company and is set in an Asian fantasy setting and that instantly places it in a very small niche market here in the west.
I really don't expect unadulterated FFA if the game is built with PVP as one of its pillars. It will probably have at minimum cities and starting areas that are relatively safe. I would kind of expect races and religion to play a role in some sort of faction system as that fits with the lore.
However, I don't really think a poll on an internet forum can really indicate how successful a game could be, but I think it can grab a general feeling from the specific community on this forum.
Originally posted by noncley
Stop scare-mongering the poor carebears.
SOE has NEVER made a MMORPG with a strong PVP element that did not have a system where PVE players could not opt out.
They've never made a sandbox either.
Originally posted by evilastro
Originally posted by Kuanshu
I find it amusing when I view a post that states if it is open world non consensual PvP they won't play the game....haha riiight!
Oh wait they want easy mode where you can go out and kill without recourse; senseless, mindless MOBs with highly predictible AI...been there, done that, done with that!
There are plenty of MMORPGs to choose from these days...SOE is a big company and they can afford to make this game however they like and not just to cater to carebears
Simply said im lookin for a real challenge, not a mindless timesink
Ironically, the one solid bit of info that we have on EQNext is that it is going to use StoryBricks, which is new dynamic AI for NPCs.
It's still just AI which will be predictable regardless how advanced it is for an MMO.
Originally posted by pdk25 I`m excited about EQ Next as much as anyone but I couldn`t care less about PVP. The sandbox playstyle is what I am interested in. It`s what I liked about EQ1 so much. There was nothing pointing you to go to a certain area. I hope the game turns out to be great.
EQ is not a sandbox, it was a themepark, even Smedley admits this. I am not sure why others can't.
To this day, EQ pvp servers are, hands down, the most fun that I ever had in an MMO. Put that into a sandbox with a world thats more than a backdrop, and we'd finally have a game to play that wouldn't be boring after just a few weeks.
They were/are also the, hands down, emptiest servers.
I'd like to think it has more to do with the fact that sandbox MMOs are usually developed on shoestring budgets. That said, there is one exception nobody can really argue with and that is EVE Online. It has outlived countless of themeparks and continues to stand tall as one of the most accomplished MMOs out there.
Me, I believe that these games should aim to be online worlds rather than co-op RPGs. Subsequently I want a lot of different ways to interact with other players. Positive and negative ways. I want to be able to carry a wounded comrade back home and get him or her patched up. I also want to be able to attack another player should it be in my best interest. When it comes down to it these games need to facilitate player choice and PvP is just another choice. I think some of you need to get over your irrational fears and step out of your comfort zones. Otherwise this genre will never grow up.
This is one of the reasons I have not played DF, I know proper punishment/reward systems are not in place. If they were there would be no need for safe zones.
Developers need to go further that just saying "FFA!"
Totally agree with you here again.
FFA = Free For All...right?
Well no sorry because so far I have not played a game with FFA PvP that lets me build a jail and shove some ganker in it for a few hours for compensation on the ours of wasted time they inflict on others.
If a player wants the freedom to spend 4 hours repeatedly killing another player preventing them from doing what they want to do then the other player should have the same freedom to lock up an enemy for the same period of time preventing them from doing what they want to do.
It is called balance and FFA games, to date, do not have it.
This is one of the reasons I have not played DF, I know proper punishment/reward systems are not in place. If they were there would be no need for safe zones.
Developers need to go further that just saying "FFA!"
Totally agree with you here again.
FFA = Free For All...right?
Well no sorry because so far I have not played a game with FFA PvP that lets me build a jail and shove some ganker in it for a few hours for compensation on the ours of wasted time they inflict on others.
If a player wants the freedom to spend 4 hours repeatedly killing another player preventing them from doing what they want to do then the other player should have the same freedom to lock up an enemy for the same period of time preventing them from doing what they want to do.
It is called balance and FFA games, to date, do not have it.
EVE does... in a rather sick twisted way, but it does .
"This is not going to be Grieferquest, and every system will be designed around not allowing that. It's one of those things where you have to make it so that griefers can't ruin the experience for everyone else."
Again, I will hold off judgement until August.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I think most people in favor of free PvP would love to see systems designed to punish poor gankers. Track them down, beat them half to death, drag them back to town and lock them in a pillory for some quality tomato throwing. The cool thing about free PvP is that it allows players to not only be villains but also actual heroes. Of course, there needs to be systems for this. You can't just flip on the PvP switch and expect things to turn out awesome. If a game is going to have this type of PvP it needs be developed with it in mind.
If the PvP is Non-consensual, no they will not stay.
Most MMO gamers dont like PvP that is on someone elses terms.
20 million Chinese gamers have stayed with Wushu.
Make a High Fantasy sandbox for the West in the same vain as Wushu, it will grow year after year. They will stay.
I find it interesting how there are so many Asian gamers, yet Asian companies are trying so very hard to get into Western markets. Would it be due to a greater amount of revenue from us despite all of those millions of Asian gamers? If that is so, then it would seem any company would then try for the greatest number of Western gamers since appealing to a niche market even though it is Western would defeat the purpose of higher profit margins.
You can find pvp in just about every MMO out there, with exception of EQ, Vanguard and Ryzom. I think we're due another game at this point.
Originally posted by Dihoru Originally posted by CalmOceansOriginally posted by DocBrodyBring up one major developer big budget sandbox like EQN with non consensual PvP, then we´ll talk again.I can already taste the sweet sweet tears of the PvE-only players, when the game hits 10 million players.
EQ had non consensual PVP actually. And the PVP servers died, there is only 1 left, while there are 16 PVE servers.Some people like non-consensual PVP, but you're delusional if you think it's anything more than a small niche market.Here son, show us on the doll where the bad pvpers touched you (I am seriously sick of your narrowminded, judgemental replies to any thread with this topic, either make a valid comment on its, PVP's, place in a future, not passed, EQ game with actual facts behind your arguments and I might not just start taking apart the jokes you call arguments).
It may be narrow minded, but it's based in reality. Call it what you will, FFA PvP, OWPvP, whatever, it pulls in fewer people than "flagging" PvP or battlegrounds style PvP.
In Rift, six out of twenty two servers are PvP servers.
Fifty five percent of WoW characters are rolled on PvE servers. The servers are actually pretty balanced, with there being four more PvE servers than PvP servers. There are more than double the number of RPPvE servers than RPPvP servers, but there aren't a ton of RP servers overall. No way to tell how many people participate in the PvP content on PvP servers though.
The majority of running EQ and EQ2 servers are PvE servers, not PvP servers.
Most of the people in Eve are playing in a game with non-consensual PvP, but they are playing in high security space. In other words, most players do not participate in PvP.
The statement that more people prefer PvE servers or consensual PvP to PvP servers or non-consensual PvP is easily supportable.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
EQ had non consensual PVP actually. And the PVP servers died, there is only 1 left, while there are 16 PVE servers.
Some people like non-consensual PVP, but you're delusional if you think it's anything more than a small niche market.
Here son, show us on the doll where the bad pvpers touched you (I am seriously sick of your narrowminded, judgemental replies to any thread with this topic, either make a valid comment on its, PVP's, place in a future, not passed, EQ game with actual facts behind your arguments and I might not just start taking apart the jokes you call arguments).
You know, half of the reason PVE players refuse to do any PVP at all has to do with the attitude problem PVP players have. There's this need to be confrontational with you players, something you don't find on PVE servers.
And the doll didn't touch me anywhere you crazy creep.
"This is not going to be Grieferquest, and every system will be designed around not allowing that. It's one of those things where you have to make it so that griefers can't ruin the experience for everyone else."
Again, I will hold off judgement until August.
No one is forced to play the game.
The word griefing does not equate to being pked. Smedley is a fan of Hulkageddon which every PVEer here would classify as griefing, but it's not really griefing.
SMH at all the people posting there that truly seem to act as if they are scared to death that EQ: Next might just have FFA PVP.
It's like "OMG! EQ: Next won't be World of Warcraft CLONE #3,789" ?!?!?
I for one, certainly wouldn't mind seeing a AAA budget PvP game made today as we really haven't had one since Ultima Online. (Even Asheron's Call and DAoC only had full PvP on single servers)
I just think if full PvP was done correctly, it might surprise the MMO community on much fun it can be if done correctly.
Non-consensual PVP is not going to happen on all servers. It's just realistic people the market is too small. If you want to invest millions into a new game, trash your best IP, and betray everyone of the players who stuck with EQ for 14 years make a open world forced PVP game you think people were pissed about the NGE.
There will obviously be PVP and PVP will be important to the game but expecting a darkfall EQ you're setting yourself up to be let down. I like to PVP, but I don't like to be forced into it every time I log in.
I am what the hardcore PVPers like to call a "carebear" - all the mmos I have played, I have gone with pve servers because I don't like getting ganked by 15 people roaming around killing newbs 'for teh Lulz'...but my opinion is changing.
I recently went back to SWTOR and rolled on a PVP server because my friends wanted to. The first time I played was on a PVE server. Being on a PVP server gave the game another dimension. Seeing someone on the horizon and chasing them down, being chased by others, those random battles when you turn a corner and someone is there really gives an adrenaline rush you just dont get from PVE.
I and many others are getting easily bored of the standard mmo fare and this may be because playing against npc's is just dull compared to playing against real people. I may be somewhat a convert to open world PvP but the whole idea of full loot is an instant turn off, it just ruins the fun. Fighting others is fun, but losing all your stuff just isn't. There also needs to be good mechanics in place to prevent ganking, such as a bandit/criminal/outlaw flagging system so people can kill newbs if they want, but there will be consequences like guards attacking them, not being able to enter cities, npcs won't trade with them etc. Add to this a bounty system so you can put a bounty on someone's head if you feel the need, and you have a winning system.
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
If the PvP is Non-consensual, no they will not stay.
Most MMO gamers dont like PvP that is on someone elses terms.
20 million Chinese gamers have stayed with Wushu.
Make a High Fantasy sandbox for the West in the same vain as Wushu, it will grow year after year. They will stay.
I find it interesting how there are so many Asian gamers, yet Asian companies are trying so very hard to get into Western markets. Would it be due to a greater amount of revenue from us despite all of those millions of Asian gamers? If that is so, then it would seem any company would then try for the greatest number of Western gamers since appealing to a niche market even though it is Western would defeat the purpose of higher profit margins.
You can find pvp in just about every MMO out there, with exception of EQ, Vanguard and Ryzom. I think we're due another game at this point.
We haven't had another western virtual world in the AAA range since EVE-Online, get your ass to the back of the line, there are others in front of you.
If the PvP is Non-consensual, no they will not stay.
Most MMO gamers dont like PvP that is on someone elses terms.
20 million Chinese gamers have stayed with Wushu.
Make a High Fantasy sandbox for the West in the same vain as Wushu, it will grow year after year. They will stay.
I find it interesting how there are so many Asian gamers, yet Asian companies are trying so very hard to get into Western markets. Would it be due to a greater amount of revenue from us despite all of those millions of Asian gamers? If that is so, then it would seem any company would then try for the greatest number of Western gamers since appealing to a niche market even though it is Western would defeat the purpose of higher profit margins.
You can find pvp in just about every MMO out there, with exception of EQ, Vanguard and Ryzom. I think we're due another game at this point.
We haven't had another western virtual world in the AAA range since EVE-Online, get your ass to the back of the line, there are others in front of you.
And did you ever stop to think there might be a reason for that?
Maybe you arent the majority you think you are.
But Im sure you know more than all the people in charge of putting together a multi million dollar project.
Comments
This pretty much hits the nail on the head. If you force players into PvP everywhere, it just won't sit well, because the players who want FFA PvP are not the majority by any stretch of the imagination. If they have specific areas for the open world conflict, that are optional to participate in, then yeah, it might work.
Were you around during the so called dry periods between MMORPGs in the past where a MMORPG player would wait years for what was hyped as being the next big MMORPG everyone was waiting for?
I didn't hear about Everquest Next until recently as I was on hiatus (not playing any MMORPGs or any game or even waiting for any game for that matter) for a few years as it was rehash after rehash; as has been stated by good ol Smed himself
I for one am willing to wait (a little over a month) to see what all this hype is about as I played Everquest day one of launch and really enjoyed it at that time...since then everything has been an Everquest Clone with slight variations here and there, of sorts; however its time to really bring it and from what has been said they seem ready to bring it...
Im not expecting anything to be quite honest; especially in these times
Ironically, the one solid bit of info that we have on EQNext is that it is going to use StoryBricks, which is new dynamic AI for NPCs.
EQ had non consensual PVP actually. And the PVP servers died, there is only 1 left, while there are 16 PVE servers.
Some people like non-consensual PVP, but you're delusional if you think it's anything more than a small niche market.
If it was only down to having FFA PvP or no PvP; if it was only that simple
Personally I consider total free for all PvP to be non existent these days and I highly doubt its total FFA PvP as it simply doesn't make sense at this time...
Unless there was some risk, penalities, punishment; experienced by the player, firsthand
ahhh, discrediting the sample pool. Well played Sir!
If nothing works, this always does!
/ slow clap
Most people are clueless as to why sandbox MMOs really haven't done well.
Just like themepark games fail because of their triviality, sandbox games fail because your accomplishments are mostly superficial and have little to no real impact on the world or other players.
Give me a game thats completely open world like Darkfall thats actually fun and challenging without PvP (like EQ), and it will be amazing with the addition of PvP. To this day, EQ pvp servers are, hands down, the most fun that I ever had in an MMO. Put that into a sandbox with a world thats more than a backdrop, and we'd finally have a game to play that wouldn't be boring after just a few weeks.
First, that poll is wrongly attributed to me as well, Grym created it and deserves the credit.
I will say that I mostly agree with the OP. that if they build the game, people will play it. There market is largely untapped. The PVP MMORPG games are filled with mostly low budget and poorly designed games and then there's EVE. I will be curious to see how Age of Wushu will do considering it is from an Asian company and is set in an Asian fantasy setting and that instantly places it in a very small niche market here in the west.
I really don't expect unadulterated FFA if the game is built with PVP as one of its pillars. It will probably have at minimum cities and starting areas that are relatively safe. I would kind of expect races and religion to play a role in some sort of faction system as that fits with the lore.
However, I don't really think a poll on an internet forum can really indicate how successful a game could be, but I think it can grab a general feeling from the specific community on this forum.
They've never made a sandbox either.
It's still just AI which will be predictable regardless how advanced it is for an MMO.
EQ is not a sandbox, it was a themepark, even Smedley admits this. I am not sure why others can't.
They were/are also the, hands down, emptiest servers.
Your opinion, however, is duly noted.
I'd like to think it has more to do with the fact that sandbox MMOs are usually developed on shoestring budgets. That said, there is one exception nobody can really argue with and that is EVE Online. It has outlived countless of themeparks and continues to stand tall as one of the most accomplished MMOs out there.
Me, I believe that these games should aim to be online worlds rather than co-op RPGs. Subsequently I want a lot of different ways to interact with other players. Positive and negative ways. I want to be able to carry a wounded comrade back home and get him or her patched up. I also want to be able to attack another player should it be in my best interest. When it comes down to it these games need to facilitate player choice and PvP is just another choice. I think some of you need to get over your irrational fears and step out of your comfort zones. Otherwise this genre will never grow up.
Totally agree with you here again.
FFA = Free For All...right?
Well no sorry because so far I have not played a game with FFA PvP that lets me build a jail and shove some ganker in it for a few hours for compensation on the ours of wasted time they inflict on others.
If a player wants the freedom to spend 4 hours repeatedly killing another player preventing them from doing what they want to do then the other player should have the same freedom to lock up an enemy for the same period of time preventing them from doing what they want to do.
It is called balance and FFA games, to date, do not have it.
EVE does... in a rather sick twisted way, but it does
.
and regardless they are not going to force people to pvp if they don't want to.
I'm not sure if evilastro posted this but here it is again:
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I find it interesting how there are so many Asian gamers, yet Asian companies are trying so very hard to get into Western markets. Would it be due to a greater amount of revenue from us despite all of those millions of Asian gamers? If that is so, then it would seem any company would then try for the greatest number of Western gamers since appealing to a niche market even though it is Western would defeat the purpose of higher profit margins.
You can find pvp in just about every MMO out there, with exception of EQ, Vanguard and Ryzom. I think we're due another game at this point.
Here son, show us on the doll where the bad pvpers touched you (I am seriously sick of your narrowminded, judgemental replies to any thread with this topic, either make a valid comment on its, PVP's, place in a future, not passed, EQ game with actual facts behind your arguments and I might not just start taking apart the jokes you call arguments).
It may be narrow minded, but it's based in reality. Call it what you will, FFA PvP, OWPvP, whatever, it pulls in fewer people than "flagging" PvP or battlegrounds style PvP.
In Rift, six out of twenty two servers are PvP servers.
Fifty five percent of WoW characters are rolled on PvE servers. The servers are actually pretty balanced, with there being four more PvE servers than PvP servers. There are more than double the number of RPPvE servers than RPPvP servers, but there aren't a ton of RP servers overall. No way to tell how many people participate in the PvP content on PvP servers though.
The majority of running EQ and EQ2 servers are PvE servers, not PvP servers.
Most of the people in Eve are playing in a game with non-consensual PvP, but they are playing in high security space. In other words, most players do not participate in PvP.
The statement that more people prefer PvE servers or consensual PvP to PvP servers or non-consensual PvP is easily supportable.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
You know, half of the reason PVE players refuse to do any PVP at all has to do with the attitude problem PVP players have. There's this need to be confrontational with you players, something you don't find on PVE servers.
And the doll didn't touch me anywhere you crazy creep.
No one is forced to play the game.
The word griefing does not equate to being pked. Smedley is a fan of Hulkageddon which every PVEer here would classify as griefing, but it's not really griefing.
SMH at all the people posting there that truly seem to act as if they are scared to death that EQ: Next might just have FFA PVP.
It's like "OMG! EQ: Next won't be World of Warcraft CLONE #3,789" ?!?!?
I for one, certainly wouldn't mind seeing a AAA budget PvP game made today as we really haven't had one since Ultima Online. (Even Asheron's Call and DAoC only had full PvP on single servers)
I just think if full PvP was done correctly, it might surprise the MMO community on much fun it can be if done correctly.
- Zaxx
Non-consensual PVP is not going to happen on all servers. It's just realistic people the market is too small. If you want to invest millions into a new game, trash your best IP, and betray everyone of the players who stuck with EQ for 14 years make a open world forced PVP game you think people were pissed about the NGE.
There will obviously be PVP and PVP will be important to the game but expecting a darkfall EQ you're setting yourself up to be let down. I like to PVP, but I don't like to be forced into it every time I log in.
I recently went back to SWTOR and rolled on a PVP server because my friends wanted to. The first time I played was on a PVE server. Being on a PVP server gave the game another dimension. Seeing someone on the horizon and chasing them down, being chased by others, those random battles when you turn a corner and someone is there really gives an adrenaline rush you just dont get from PVE.
I and many others are getting easily bored of the standard mmo fare and this may be because playing against npc's is just dull compared to playing against real people. I may be somewhat a convert to open world PvP but the whole idea of full loot is an instant turn off, it just ruins the fun. Fighting others is fun, but losing all your stuff just isn't. There also needs to be good mechanics in place to prevent ganking, such as a bandit/criminal/outlaw flagging system so people can kill newbs if they want, but there will be consequences like guards attacking them, not being able to enter cities, npcs won't trade with them etc. Add to this a bounty system so you can put a bounty on someone's head if you feel the need, and you have a winning system.
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
We haven't had another western virtual world in the AAA range since EVE-Online, get your ass to the back of the line, there are others in front of you.
And did you ever stop to think there might be a reason for that?
Maybe you arent the majority you think you are.
But Im sure you know more than all the people in charge of putting together a multi million dollar project.