OWPVP is great as long as it doesn't give tools to cowards who aren't good at anything to grief people and mob with other pissants to do more of the same.
I always like when things are faction based because it provides a little structure to deter that sort of behavior. As long as there is a system in place to curb the behavior I'm for it whether it be factions or justice system with hard penalties.
A lot of people in this thread talk like the type to camp starter zones for shits and giggles, but run like roaches when notoriously strong players are around. That's not good for any game. It's selfish bitch ass behavior that is loved by people who don't care about the game or the community. They just like the rush of messing w/ people without the consequences.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
"Non Consensual PVP" must be the new MMORPG term of the month. I really do not think most of you have an original idea in your skull. All this hype for a game that has zero details about the system. All of this is just a bunch of wild speculation. Wasn't this guy Smed the devil just a few years ago? Whoo hoo let's all ride the hype train into the abyss! Lemmings....
Present: Current offerings are low quality or soloable
Past:AoC, DCUO, FFXI,FFXIV 1.0 and ARR,WoW,Fallen Earth, Tabula Rasa, TSW, SWTOR, Rift, Aion, WAR, Darkfall, STO, CoH/CoV, GW2, Diaspora, EQ2, DDO, and a bunch of forgettable ftp games
Originally posted by bigbudz "Non Consensual PVP" must be the new MMORPG term of the month. I really do not think most of you have an original idea in your skull. All this hype for a game that has zero details about the system. All of this is just a bunch of wild speculation. Wasn't this guy Smed the devil just a few years ago? Whoo hoo let's all ride the hype train into the abyss! Lemmings....
Explain the hype EQN is getting from websites like TenTonHammer and MMORPG.com?
In before "Smed clearly paid them each a $1000 to say good things about the game"
It legitimately sounds like we're getting a different experience than EQ1/EQ2/we're used to, and if you go in expecting EQ1/EQ2 you are going to be severely let down.
The greatest part? SOE can afford that, it's a free to play game. They are clearly open to letting anyone and everyone try their game. No one has to go out on a limb to try Everquest Next. All you have to do is download it opening day and try it for yourself.
Smedley is the best salesman ever. One smiley face on twitter and we have multiple threads, and probably hundreds, if not thousands of posts on the topic. The smiley-face-o-doom.
EVE took A LONG ASS TIME to get those numbers and is like the WoW of PvP centric games. So far only none has been able to pull off what EVE did. Not to mention EVE is a COMPLETELY different entity than ..... well ALL MMOs and is the most intricate, complex, massive, freedom MMO out there. Hell it takes one MONTHS to really learn just one aspect of EVE and there is so much out there it ain't even funny.
If non-consensual fantasy based PvP MMOs were such a highly popular game then why is it that Age of Washu, Darkfall, Mortal Online, and not sure if Warhammer Online fits the bill all received less that stellar recognition if not downright hate for some. Hell even Camelot Unchained only got about 15k backers. Then look at PvE focused crowd and it dwarfs the PvP centric game.
Also the OP needs to compare all non-consensual PvP MMOs to ALL PvE centric MMOs. This is what companies will see, a very much higher market by NOT making a non-consensual MMO, at least not forced but as an option.
Originally posted by niceguy3978 Smedley is the best salesman ever. One smiley face on twitter and we have multiple threads, and probably hundreds, if not thousands of posts on the topic. The smiley-face-o-doom.
Serious question: Why does PvP have to be Non-Consensual to be considered 'Good PvP'?
Because I see all this talk about it has to be, but never a reason as to 'why'.
Because some of us prefer a certain play style and forcing a particular play style on others detracts from the game. Honest answer!
Same as forced grouping, forced raiding or any other element in an MMO. Choices and options are what we want, not pigeon holing us into a game style we may or may not like. I love dungeon delving but I would never obtuse to believe that dungeon delving with a group should be required to play a game.
So forced non-consensual pvp is a-okay, but forced grouping, raiding, and anything else is not?
Maybe that's why so many people prefer BG's/Arena style pvp, because it's optional and not forced upon them.
You make no sense. You cant force something that is optional. And I said I don't believe in forced anything, whether it be grouping or raiding.
Your signature is wrong. What you say is a sandbox is just an "open world" or "free roaming" game.
An open world is a type of video game level design where a player can roam freely through a virtual world and is given considerable freedom in choosing how or when to approach objectives.[1] The term "free roam" is also used, as is "sandbox" and "free-roaming".[2][3] "Open world" and "free-roaming" suggest the absence of artificial barriers,[4] in contrast to the invisible walls and loading screens that are common in linear level designs. An "open world" game does not necessarily imply a sandbox. In a true "sandbox", the player has tools to modify the world themselves and create how they play.[5] Generally open world games still enforce some restrictions in the game environment, either due to absolute technical limitations or in-game limitations (such as locked areas) imposed by a game's linearity.
That bolded part is part of the overall definition not exclusive of it. Any or all of those elements are part of the sandbox definition. The problem is gamers have been trying to associate sandbox to certain elements for years now and that is a false premise.
One recurring theme across this genre is the open-ended "sandbox" style gameplay that is most often associated with the slightly more rigid Grand Theft Auto series (see book Chapter 9, "Grand Theft Auto III (2001): The Consolejacking Life") today; players are mostly free to choose their own way to accumulate capital and judge their own success at the game.
There is no one right way to play these games, and plots (if they exist at all) have little bearing. All of these games are highly detailed and complex, requiring comprehensive manuals and rigid study.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
EVE took A LONG ASS TIME to get those numbers and is like the WoW of PvP centric games. So far only none has been able to pull off what EVE did. Not to mention EVE is a COMPLETELY different entity than ..... well ALL MMOs and is the most intricate, complex, massive, freedom MMO out there. Hell it takes one MONTHS to really learn just one aspect of EVE and there is so much out there it ain't even funny.
If non-consensual fantasy based PvP MMOs were such a highly popular game then why is it that Age of Washu, Darkfall, Mortal Online, and not sure if Warhammer Online fits the bill all received less that stellar recognition if not downright hate for some. Hell even Camelot Unchained only got about 15k backers. Then look at PvE focused crowd and it dwarfs the PvP centric game.
Also the OP needs to compare all non-consensual PvP MMOs to ALL PvE centric MMOs. This is what companies will see, a very much higher market by NOT making a non-consensual MMO, at least not forced but as an option.
Just looking at numbers, it would tell us that WoW-clones are the most popular, so by your logic they should make a WoW-clone.
So by this theory when I log in to a FFA game I know what to expect, so it is consensual PvP too.
In fact EvE Darkfall and Mortal Online are consensual PvP too, everyone agrees to the rules of the game which makes it consensual
False.
To clear things up for the people unfamiliar with the topic (godforfuckingbid you should google it and know what you're talking about):
The term came from the multi-facet server feature introduced to Ultima Online during the Renaissance expansion in May 2000. Consensual PVP is where player-versus-player combat is relegated to only consensual agreement or warring guilds. A non-consensual PVP area is one with FFA PVP, where there is no explicit agreement between players/guilds to have combat that is restricted to the agreeing parties.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
GW2 has sold 3 million copies. That is 3,000,000 x $60 = $180,000,000
If GW2 comes out with an expansion at year 2 then they will have made
$90,000,000 per year
EVE Online has 500,000 SUBSCRIBERS that pay $15/month. That is:
500,000 x $15 = $7,500,000 x 12 months = .....
$90,000,000 per year
Does this mean that GW2 is "niche" or does it mean that EVE is "mainstream"
What does this bode for EQN, a "sandbox" game like EVE?
What does this say about the marketability of Non consensual PVP versus traditional PVE MMORPG games?
GW2 has nonconsensual PvP? Who knew? I played it for several months and never ran into a pvper... (note: exclusive zones for pvp does not make a game have nonconsensual PvP...that is called Consensual PvP)
As for Eve, a very large portion of the game's population does not even venture into low sec space, they play the game for the market and economy, not the pvp.
GW2 made $170M so far in the months it has been out. That is pretty close to the 180 Million for 3 million units sold. Of course there are cash shop sales.
EVE made, in 2011, while growing from 300-400K subscribers, $66M(366,666 subscriber as per $15/month). They have since had another year, 2012, growing from 400K - 500K. Assuming the same revenue, here we go assuming again!, that is the $90M in my OP.
The point is not the semantics of the GW2 to EVE comparison per se, it is recognizing that EVE is growing, is subscription based and meets the revenue of the box sales of GW2.
GW2 box sales = EVE subscription revenue.
GW2 is successful and EVE is successful.
The cash shop has nothing to do with it because we are taking this market performance and developing it for use with Everquest Next which will be planned to have significant cash shop revenue just like EQ and EQ2(and all of their other games.)
Everquest Next will have a cash shop. SOE is good at doing this, so good that they have eliminated the need for a subscription with Everquest and Everquest 2 and gone free to play.
You look at is as if you are SOE and say to yourself, "Self, EVE subscriptions are matching box sales of GW2. In EQN we could have a cash shop that makes up that subscription revenue, also we have box sales scheduled yearly in the form of expansions. So, even if we only have the 500K players EVE has, we will generate the box sales that GW2 has with cash shop sales. We will also have box sales a year in and every year after for even more revenue and heck we even offer subscriptions as well."
Take EVE, remove the barrier to play(initial box sales and subscription), add box sales after 1 year and every year and have a cash shop revenue stream that supplants the lost subscription revenue as well as offering subscriptions. You have every monitization method in use in an emerging MMO market. Not to mention the inundation of Sandbox we are getting from Asia. EQN can corner the Western sandbox MMO.
LOL stop now, you are embarrassing yourself. Wot is entirely PVP but it is consensual, your not going to queue for a match then complain you got ganked.... WOT has more in common with fps/tps games like COD & BF than any MMO's.
He's also comparing registered accounts to subs. If you look at the numbers of battles fought on those account ( my info is about a year old ) almost 70% of those accounts where under 100 battles. that means they played a week or so and then quit.
wow has 8 million subs going right now....how many people have played it, how many free trials signed up ? They never tell you that.
Also Eve has no competition. If you want a space sci-fi mmo you play eve. If you don't like EQN you can't swing a dead chipmunk without hitting a hundred other fantasy mmos you could play instead. That makes a pretty big difference when people are deciding what they' will and wont put up with.
EVE took A LONG ASS TIME to get those numbers and is like the WoW of PvP centric games. So far only none has been able to pull off what EVE did. Not to mention EVE is a COMPLETELY different entity than ..... well ALL MMOs and is the most intricate, complex, massive, freedom MMO out there. Hell it takes one MONTHS to really learn just one aspect of EVE and there is so much out there it ain't even funny.
If non-consensual fantasy based PvP MMOs were such a highly popular game then why is it that Age of Washu, Darkfall, Mortal Online, and not sure if Warhammer Online fits the bill all received less that stellar recognition if not downright hate for some. Hell even Camelot Unchained only got about 15k backers. Then look at PvE focused crowd and it dwarfs the PvP centric game.
Also the OP needs to compare all non-consensual PvP MMOs to ALL PvE centric MMOs. This is what companies will see, a very much higher market by NOT making a non-consensual MMO, at least not forced but as an option.
The problem is the PVP centric games don't balance very well. EVE has great PVP elements, but the PVE is just utterly fucking mind numbing. Same wiht Wushu and Warhammer (though not open world still PVP centric)
WoW was more of a PVE centric game until they introduced Arenas then most of the balancing and the loudest voices came from that community of players. But still PvPers are a minority compared to the amount of PVEers in that game.
So here's to hoping for open world PVP in EQNEXT with substantial PVE content that is WORTH DOING. Try to find that happy medium yeah?
LOL stop now, you are embarrassing yourself. Wot is entirely PVP but it is consensual, your not going to queue for a match then complain you got ganked.... WOT has more in common with fps/tps games like COD & BF than any MMO's.
uh-huh.
So by this theory when I log in to a FFA game I know what to expect, so it is consensual PvP too.
In fact EvE Darkfall and Mortal Online are consensual PvP too, everyone agrees to the rules of the game which makes it consensual
that is a logical fallacy. if someone takes your phone when you leave it unattended doesn't change the fact that it was an act of theft. likewise when you are attacked in a ffa. sure you set yourself up for it, but that doesn't change the nature of the action.
moreover, in an arena type game, fighting other players is the entire game. you log in to fight other players. you log into a ffa to experience the game, a portion of which (to a greater or lesser extent) is the pvp conflict.
furthermore "registered users" means nothing. that is the number of accounts made with them to date. because WoW has an unlimited trial, and all blizzard accounts are centralized in battle.net, blizzard could say the exact same thing about WoW accounts except they'd be including every account ever made on battle.net. which i'm guessing is more than 40 mil.
Equating stealing property vs killing someone in an online game where it is NOT against the rules and or law is it most ridiculous thing I've seen yet in a thread whining about FFA PVP.
LOL stop now, you are embarrassing yourself. Wot is entirely PVP but it is consensual, your not going to queue for a match then complain you got ganked.... WOT has more in common with fps/tps games like COD & BF than any MMO's.
uh-huh.
So by this theory when I log in to a FFA game I know what to expect, so it is consensual PvP too.
In fact EvE Darkfall and Mortal Online are consensual PvP too, everyone agrees to the rules of the game which makes it consensual
that is a logical fallacy. if someone takes your phone when you leave it unattended doesn't change the fact that it was an act of theft. likewise when you are attacked in a ffa. sure you set yourself up for it, but that doesn't change the nature of the action.
moreover, in an arena type game, fighting other players is the entire game. you log in to fight other players. you log into a ffa to experience the game, a portion of which is the pvp conflict.
It's not entirely a logical fallacy. Really whenever I log into to EVE I expect someone to try to attack me. High Sec, Lo Sec, Null Sec, makes no difference. Anyone can attack you anywhere and when you log in and undock if you don't expect it to happen then you really don't much about EVE. Age of Wushu makes people accept their "Open World PVP Challenge" every time you log in to the game which is basically consenting to being attacked by anyone anwhere.
EVE took A LONG ASS TIME to get those numbers and is like the WoW of PvP centric games. So far only none has been able to pull off what EVE did. Not to mention EVE is a COMPLETELY different entity than ..... well ALL MMOs and is the most intricate, complex, massive, freedom MMO out there. Hell it takes one MONTHS to really learn just one aspect of EVE and there is so much out there it ain't even funny.
If non-consensual fantasy based PvP MMOs were such a highly popular game then why is it that Age of Washu, Darkfall, Mortal Online, and not sure if Warhammer Online fits the bill all received less that stellar recognition if not downright hate for some. Hell even Camelot Unchained only got about 15k backers. Then look at PvE focused crowd and it dwarfs the PvP centric game.
Also the OP needs to compare all non-consensual PvP MMOs to ALL PvE centric MMOs. This is what companies will see, a very much higher market by NOT making a non-consensual MMO, at least not forced but as an option.
The problem is the PVP centric games don't balance very well. EVE has great PVP elements, but the PVE is just utterly fucking mind numbing. Same wiht Wushu and Warhammer (though not open world still PVP centric)
WoW was more of a PVE centric game until they introduced Arenas then most of the balancing and the loudest voices came from that community of players. But still PvPers are a minority compared to the amount of PVEers in that game.
So here's to hoping for open world PVP in EQNEXT with substantial PVE content that is WORTH DOING. Try to find that happy medium yeah?
Yea this is pretty prevalent, everyone has the same skills etc, same ships bla bla, in Darkfall everyone had the same skills it may as well have been the same classes like ona WoW scale. But yea Even WoW has to deal with it, everyone gravityates to what is most powerful so it becomes bland, WoW has resigned to that fact and I thiank they purposefully "balance" classes to rotate in FOTM classes just so PVP is less boring, under the guise of the ever on going balancing act, it may just be a result but in the end why not use it to your advantage, or at least to try and keep your players sane.
i expect EQN to have heavy PVE as well so it may lend itself to a wider bredth of player classes and builds being used for skirmishes where sub optimal builds are used simply because it is what is currently equipped and trained.
not tog et off track but It will be interesting to see how PVE and PVP gear are balanced as well. EVEs system is pretty exclusive having differnt shisp for different tasks, kinda hard to do that in a class based system unless gear restricts what spells you can use.
If developers would stop thinking about how to get the most money, then we wouldn't need to talk about stuff like this.
EvE Online is a very profitable game, because there's enough people who like it. However CCP never thought about subscriptions to begin with, but only about making a good game. In other words... they took a risk.
Most devs don't want to take risks anymore, and that's why we see one crappy game after another, were people play for a few month and then leave in droves to start playing the next MMO.
PvE-MMOs are by far the most popular, as they offer the possibility to play the game like a solo RPG (storyline, questing, leveling up) with multiplayer-mode (dungeons, raids, arenas and BGs).
In a game like EvE you can't do much on your own, besides the boring missions in high-sec, and that's the reason why these kind of games don't have as much players, yet they have the highest retention-rate as players heavily commit to these kind of games.
So yeah. Subsciption-numbers are really of no interest, as long as you have enough players to keep the game profitable. And if devs would start with this mindset, then we would actually see some better games being developed, as devs would start taking risks again.
Originally posted by OSF8759 There is no such thing as non-consensual PvP. If you're playing an open world PvP game, you've consented to PvP.
You are not consenting to being ganked there is a difference between ganking and pvp and most open world pvp games / sandbox with open world pvp are gear/level/skill based gankfests entirely. I have yet to see one have fair balanced real PVP cuz you sissies would wet your britches if it was a level playing field and you couldn't go around ganking people that you have a large edge over. If you want real PVP go do pvp in gw1 or 2 where gear doesn't matter or a game that isn't based around level, skill, or gear or stats. The latter doesn't exist though.
Originally posted by Scalpless I think he's trying to say EVE, a game with non-consentual PvP, is as profitable as GW2. He's ignoring lots of things, such as the fact that devs don't get 60$ per a box of GW2 (it's more like 40$) and that people spend 15$ per month in GW2's gem store on average according to some relatively credible source I forgot. Basically, the OP is full of holes.
he is just taking the base of all stuff and showing people that part, you can add in "what ifs" if you want to see the out come over all but he is correct in what his point is.
GW2 has sold 3 million copies. That is 3,000,000 x $60 = $180,000,000
If GW2 comes out with an expansion at year 2 then they will have made
$90,000,000 per year
EVE Online has 500,000 SUBSCRIBERS that pay $15/month. That is:
500,000 x $15 = $7,500,000 x 12 months = .....
$90,000,000 per year
Does this mean that GW2 is "niche" or does it mean that EVE is "mainstream"
What does this bode for EQN, a "sandbox" game like EVE?
What does this say about the marketability of Non consensual PVP versus traditional PVE MMORPG games?
The quoted figures are so wildly inaccurate that any further debate is meaningless as far as I can see.....
good job at pointing out nothing thanks for well...nothing? if you want call him out on stuff you might want to bring in some examples of what you believe this. As far as I can tell he did everything correct.
LOL stop now, you are embarrassing yourself. Wot is entirely PVP but it is consensual, your not going to queue for a match then complain you got ganked.... WOT has more in common with fps/tps games like COD & BF than any MMO's.
uh-huh.
So by this theory when I log in to a FFA game I know what to expect, so it is consensual PvP too.
In fact EvE Darkfall and Mortal Online are consensual PvP too, everyone agrees to the rules of the game which makes it consensual
that is a logical fallacy. if someone takes your phone when you leave it unattended doesn't change the fact that it was an act of theft. likewise when you are attacked in a ffa. sure you set yourself up for it, but that doesn't change the nature of the action.
moreover, in an arena type game, fighting other players is the entire game. you log in to fight other players. you log into a ffa to experience the game, a portion of which is the pvp conflict.
It's not entirely a logical fallacy. Really whenever I log into to EVE I expect someone to try to attack me. High Sec, Lo Sec, Null Sec, makes no difference. Anyone can attack you anywhere and when you log in and undock if you don't expect it to happen then you really don't much about EVE. Age of Wushu makes people accept their "Open World PVP Challenge" every time you log in to the game which is basically consenting to being attacked by anyone anwhere.
true enough. but the way i perceive the issue is that even in a ffa game, though you acknowledge the danger of being attacked, the attack itself is still not consented to. usually. that's what makes things fun and exciting: you never know what's going to happen. that said, just because it's fun doesn't mean you weren't attacked without consent.
so what's really going on is some people want the option to opt out of pvp, they want to consent to when and where they need to worry about the additional threat of other players. i can see it both ways personally, but there is no doubt that ffa pvp is a niche, and will remain so. probably forever.
Comments
OWPVP is great as long as it doesn't give tools to cowards who aren't good at anything to grief people and mob with other pissants to do more of the same.
I always like when things are faction based because it provides a little structure to deter that sort of behavior. As long as there is a system in place to curb the behavior I'm for it whether it be factions or justice system with hard penalties.
A lot of people in this thread talk like the type to camp starter zones for shits and giggles, but run like roaches when notoriously strong players are around. That's not good for any game. It's selfish bitch ass behavior that is loved by people who don't care about the game or the community. They just like the rush of messing w/ people without the consequences.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Current PC Build
http://pcpartpicker.com/b/p8RBD3
Present: Current offerings are low quality or soloable
Past:AoC, DCUO, FFXI,FFXIV 1.0 and ARR,WoW,Fallen Earth, Tabula Rasa, TSW, SWTOR, Rift, Aion, WAR, Darkfall, STO, CoH/CoV, GW2, Diaspora, EQ2, DDO, and a bunch of forgettable ftp games
Explain the hype EQN is getting from websites like TenTonHammer and MMORPG.com?
In before "Smed clearly paid them each a $1000 to say good things about the game"
It legitimately sounds like we're getting a different experience than EQ1/EQ2/we're used to, and if you go in expecting EQ1/EQ2 you are going to be severely let down.
The greatest part? SOE can afford that, it's a free to play game. They are clearly open to letting anyone and everyone try their game. No one has to go out on a limb to try Everquest Next. All you have to do is download it opening day and try it for yourself.
EVE took A LONG ASS TIME to get those numbers and is like the WoW of PvP centric games. So far only none has been able to pull off what EVE did. Not to mention EVE is a COMPLETELY different entity than ..... well ALL MMOs and is the most intricate, complex, massive, freedom MMO out there. Hell it takes one MONTHS to really learn just one aspect of EVE and there is so much out there it ain't even funny.
If non-consensual fantasy based PvP MMOs were such a highly popular game then why is it that Age of Washu, Darkfall, Mortal Online, and not sure if Warhammer Online fits the bill all received less that stellar recognition if not downright hate for some. Hell even Camelot Unchained only got about 15k backers. Then look at PvE focused crowd and it dwarfs the PvP centric game.
Also the OP needs to compare all non-consensual PvP MMOs to ALL PvE centric MMOs. This is what companies will see, a very much higher market by NOT making a non-consensual MMO, at least not forced but as an option.
Smedey FOR PRESIDENT!!!
That bolded part is part of the overall definition not exclusive of it. Any or all of those elements are part of the sandbox definition. The problem is gamers have been trying to associate sandbox to certain elements for years now and that is a false premise.
One recurring theme across this genre is the open-ended "sandbox" style gameplay that is most often associated with the slightly more rigid Grand Theft Auto series (see book Chapter 9, "Grand Theft Auto III (2001): The Consolejacking Life") today; players are mostly free to choose their own way to accumulate capital and judge their own success at the game.
There is no one right way to play these games, and plots (if they exist at all) have little bearing. All of these games are highly detailed and complex, requiring comprehensive manuals and rigid study.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Just looking at numbers, it would tell us that WoW-clones are the most popular, so by your logic they should make a WoW-clone.
False.
To clear things up for the people unfamiliar with the topic (godforfuckingbid you should google it and know what you're talking about):
The term came from the multi-facet server feature introduced to Ultima Online during the Renaissance expansion in May 2000. Consensual PVP is where player-versus-player combat is relegated to only consensual agreement or warring guilds. A non-consensual PVP area is one with FFA PVP, where there is no explicit agreement between players/guilds to have combat that is restricted to the agreeing parties.
Link: http://www.1up.com/features/ultima-online-turns-10?pager.offset=2
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
GW2 has nonconsensual PvP? Who knew? I played it for several months and never ran into a pvper... (note: exclusive zones for pvp does not make a game have nonconsensual PvP...that is called Consensual PvP)
As for Eve, a very large portion of the game's population does not even venture into low sec space, they play the game for the market and economy, not the pvp.
Thanks for corroborating my OP.
GW2 made $170M so far in the months it has been out. That is pretty close to the 180 Million for 3 million units sold. Of course there are cash shop sales.
EVE made, in 2011, while growing from 300-400K subscribers, $66M(366,666 subscriber as per $15/month). They have since had another year, 2012, growing from 400K - 500K. Assuming the same revenue, here we go assuming again!, that is the $90M in my OP.
The point is not the semantics of the GW2 to EVE comparison per se, it is recognizing that EVE is growing, is subscription based and meets the revenue of the box sales of GW2.
GW2 box sales = EVE subscription revenue.
GW2 is successful and EVE is successful.
The cash shop has nothing to do with it because we are taking this market performance and developing it for use with Everquest Next which will be planned to have significant cash shop revenue just like EQ and EQ2(and all of their other games.)
Everquest Next will have a cash shop. SOE is good at doing this, so good that they have eliminated the need for a subscription with Everquest and Everquest 2 and gone free to play.
You look at is as if you are SOE and say to yourself, "Self, EVE subscriptions are matching box sales of GW2. In EQN we could have a cash shop that makes up that subscription revenue, also we have box sales scheduled yearly in the form of expansions. So, even if we only have the 500K players EVE has, we will generate the box sales that GW2 has with cash shop sales. We will also have box sales a year in and every year after for even more revenue and heck we even offer subscriptions as well."
Take EVE, remove the barrier to play(initial box sales and subscription), add box sales after 1 year and every year and have a cash shop revenue stream that supplants the lost subscription revenue as well as offering subscriptions. You have every monitization method in use in an emerging MMO market. Not to mention the inundation of Sandbox we are getting from Asia. EQN can corner the Western sandbox MMO.He's also comparing registered accounts to subs. If you look at the numbers of battles fought on those account ( my info is about a year old ) almost 70% of those accounts where under 100 battles. that means they played a week or so and then quit.
wow has 8 million subs going right now....how many people have played it, how many free trials signed up ? They never tell you that.
Also Eve has no competition. If you want a space sci-fi mmo you play eve. If you don't like EQN you can't swing a dead chipmunk without hitting a hundred other fantasy mmos you could play instead. That makes a pretty big difference when people are deciding what they' will and wont put up with.
The problem is the PVP centric games don't balance very well. EVE has great PVP elements, but the PVE is just utterly fucking mind numbing. Same wiht Wushu and Warhammer (though not open world still PVP centric)
WoW was more of a PVE centric game until they introduced Arenas then most of the balancing and the loudest voices came from that community of players. But still PvPers are a minority compared to the amount of PVEers in that game.
So here's to hoping for open world PVP in EQNEXT with substantial PVE content that is WORTH DOING. Try to find that happy medium yeah?
that is a logical fallacy. if someone takes your phone when you leave it unattended doesn't change the fact that it was an act of theft. likewise when you are attacked in a ffa. sure you set yourself up for it, but that doesn't change the nature of the action.
moreover, in an arena type game, fighting other players is the entire game. you log in to fight other players. you log into a ffa to experience the game, a portion of which (to a greater or lesser extent) is the pvp conflict.
furthermore "registered users" means nothing. that is the number of accounts made with them to date. because WoW has an unlimited trial, and all blizzard accounts are centralized in battle.net, blizzard could say the exact same thing about WoW accounts except they'd be including every account ever made on battle.net. which i'm guessing is more than 40 mil.
One is against the law the other isn't.
It's not entirely a logical fallacy. Really whenever I log into to EVE I expect someone to try to attack me. High Sec, Lo Sec, Null Sec, makes no difference. Anyone can attack you anywhere and when you log in and undock if you don't expect it to happen then you really don't much about EVE. Age of Wushu makes people accept their "Open World PVP Challenge" every time you log in to the game which is basically consenting to being attacked by anyone anwhere.
Yea this is pretty prevalent, everyone has the same skills etc, same ships bla bla, in Darkfall everyone had the same skills it may as well have been the same classes like ona WoW scale. But yea Even WoW has to deal with it, everyone gravityates to what is most powerful so it becomes bland, WoW has resigned to that fact and I thiank they purposefully "balance" classes to rotate in FOTM classes just so PVP is less boring, under the guise of the ever on going balancing act, it may just be a result but in the end why not use it to your advantage, or at least to try and keep your players sane.
i expect EQN to have heavy PVE as well so it may lend itself to a wider bredth of player classes and builds being used for skirmishes where sub optimal builds are used simply because it is what is currently equipped and trained.
not tog et off track but It will be interesting to see how PVE and PVP gear are balanced as well. EVEs system is pretty exclusive having differnt shisp for different tasks, kinda hard to do that in a class based system unless gear restricts what spells you can use.
If developers would stop thinking about how to get the most money, then we wouldn't need to talk about stuff like this.
EvE Online is a very profitable game, because there's enough people who like it. However CCP never thought about subscriptions to begin with, but only about making a good game. In other words... they took a risk.
Most devs don't want to take risks anymore, and that's why we see one crappy game after another, were people play for a few month and then leave in droves to start playing the next MMO.
PvE-MMOs are by far the most popular, as they offer the possibility to play the game like a solo RPG (storyline, questing, leveling up) with multiplayer-mode (dungeons, raids, arenas and BGs).
In a game like EvE you can't do much on your own, besides the boring missions in high-sec, and that's the reason why these kind of games don't have as much players, yet they have the highest retention-rate as players heavily commit to these kind of games.
So yeah. Subsciption-numbers are really of no interest, as long as you have enough players to keep the game profitable. And if devs would start with this mindset, then we would actually see some better games being developed, as devs would start taking risks again.
You are not consenting to being ganked there is a difference between ganking and pvp and most open world pvp games / sandbox with open world pvp are gear/level/skill based gankfests entirely. I have yet to see one have fair balanced real PVP cuz you sissies would wet your britches if it was a level playing field and you couldn't go around ganking people that you have a large edge over. If you want real PVP go do pvp in gw1 or 2 where gear doesn't matter or a game that isn't based around level, skill, or gear or stats. The latter doesn't exist though.
he is just taking the base of all stuff and showing people that part, you can add in "what ifs" if you want to see the out come over all but he is correct in what his point is.
good job at pointing out nothing thanks for well...nothing? if you want call him out on stuff you might want to bring in some examples of what you believe this. As far as I can tell he did everything correct.
true enough. but the way i perceive the issue is that even in a ffa game, though you acknowledge the danger of being attacked, the attack itself is still not consented to. usually. that's what makes things fun and exciting: you never know what's going to happen. that said, just because it's fun doesn't mean you weren't attacked without consent.
so what's really going on is some people want the option to opt out of pvp, they want to consent to when and where they need to worry about the additional threat of other players. i can see it both ways personally, but there is no doubt that ffa pvp is a niche, and will remain so. probably forever.