I have no doubts that there will be some PvP on zones and not just useless zones. There will probably be some rare crafting materials to get in the zone or off mobs.
That's consensual and non-consensual. Want some sweet crafting materials? Go get it. Have fun. Don't want to fight for it? Better hope your friend gets you some sometime.
Anyone who goes into EQN expecting EQ1 or EQ2 should try to be willing to change. They've regurgitated this isnt going to be the same experience as before. You arent gonna have EQ1 grinding camps for hours and hours and hours etc.
People who honestly expect the moment you create a level 1 character you can get killed are silly. I doubt itll be every zone free for all. And technically even "loot on kill" vs players is pure speculation. Although what we do know is EQN is getting really hyped up by SOE/other websites including this one for being innovative and changing the MMO Genre. So it's going to be something we're not used to.
a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.
Smed says everything can be destroyed.
Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?
Absolutely. I would also like to have your character imprisoned for life if you attempt to murder another player. You said you wanted 'realism', well there it is. Muderers should be jailed permanently. Unless of course you are one of those open world PvP advocates that just want to abuse and grief players with no consequences. Which, by reading your posts, is exactly what you are. You and Doc are a pair of hypocritical, blind griefers who just want to harass others for your enjoyment. Want me to prove it? Sure..
First, you both are against PvE and PvP servers being separate. Only players that want to grief as many people as possible are against this.
Second, you keep saying you don't want restrictions, yet you don't want any penalties for murder/wanton destruction.
Third, you attack anyone who wants PvE in a beloved IP with insults and anger.
No matter how many posts you and Doc make...you both are wrong and part of an irrelevant, dying breed of griefers.
As a firm opponent of Forced PvP or FFA PvP or non-consensual PvP I will defend Bc here, not that I agree with him on many things pertaining to MMO philosophy but he is one of the few PvP guys here who has gave an alternate ruleset that "could potentially work". Plus he has been pretty vocal about his opposition to indiscriminate ganking and griefing.
FFA PvP will never work, unless the game is solely based around that, you need rules in certain areas, penalties etc... even EVE has its own rules and penalties which is why you can only really free pvp on nullsec.
More than agreeable, EQ Next should be 100% EvE in a fantasy setting. Take my money.
Which is the point that I have been trying to make all day and all night long. Consensual PvP is a must. Eve, not a game I freely admit to knowing anything about, nor care to, gives PvE'ers the choice whether to PvP or not.
As long as I have the option to PvE in safety and the systems are in place to penalize indiscriminate killing or ganking then that is one rule I could handle. Would still prefer optional rule set servers the most through, seeing as they worked really well on the games that provided them.
Glad we're all on the same page now.
Absolutely agree, never had a problem with territory security levels. But I bet the PvE-only lobbyists come out and state how unfair it is that they can´t go EVERYWHERE in safemode. Wait for it, it´s coming. Even if there is one half square foot small space with non-consensual PvP enabled, they will stomp with their feet until they can go there too in safemode.
Usually they bring up EvE Online as their personal evil, evil nemesis and the ultimate ganker paradise (which it is not), stating how it is the most evil unfair game ever existed, filled with sociapathic murderers.
It´s really hilarious how far paranoia and griefophobia can go. ;-)
Or how about we PvE'ers just want the option to have a server where we don't have to engage in it. I have no problem at all playing in PvP. Hell my main in WoW was on the PvP server for 6 years. I played Eve one week after launch and still do. Pvp can be fun, especially realm/faction pvp. But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience. Why can't you be ok with a seperate PvE server? Is it really so important that everyone plays exactly the way you do? Do you honestly believe that your way is the only way and no other game styles should be allowed?
But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience.
Haven't you heard the developers over and over? This isnt going to be what you liked about EQ1 and EQ2.. Infact, I am willing to bet that their first version of "Everquest Next" was just Everquest 3 with the best features of EQ1/EQ2, and they smartly realized that has no substance to it and gets forgotten about a month after release like all the other mediocre MMOs to come out this year alone
If you go in wanting EQ1 or EQ2, you are going to be sadly let down, so you better change that mindset real quick. You arent gonna have those red tinted glasses EQ1 feeling in how it played, that game is horribly outdated and flawed for people who can think objectively (And I too played and enjoyed Everquest)
a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.
Smed says everything can be destroyed.
Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?
Absolutely. I would also like to have your character imprisoned for life if you attempt to murder another player. You said you wanted 'realism', well there it is. Muderers should be jailed permanently. Unless of course you are one of those open world PvP advocates that just want to abuse and grief players with no consequences. Which, by reading your posts, is exactly what you are. You and Doc are a pair of hypocritical, blind griefers who just want to harass others for your enjoyment. Want me to prove it? Sure..
First, you both are against PvE and PvP servers being separate. Only players that want to grief as many people as possible are against this.
Second, you keep saying you don't want restrictions, yet you don't want any penalties for murder/wanton destruction.
Third, you attack anyone who wants PvE in a beloved IP with insults and anger.
No matter how many posts you and Doc make...you both are wrong and part of an irrelevant, dying breed of griefers.
As a firm opponent of Forced PvP or FFA PvP or non-consensual PvP I will defend Bc here, not that I agree with him on many things pertaining to MMO philosophy but he is one of the few PvP guys here who has gave an alternate ruleset that "could potentially work". Plus he has been pretty vocal about his opposition to indiscriminate ganking and griefing.
FFA PvP will never work, unless the game is solely based around that, you need rules in certain areas, penalties etc... even EVE has its own rules and penalties which is why you can only really free pvp on nullsec.
More than agreeable, EQ Next should be 100% EvE in a fantasy setting. Take my money.
Which is the point that I have been trying to make all day and all night long. Consensual PvP is a must. Eve, not a game I freely admit to knowing anything about, nor care to, gives PvE'ers the choice whether to PvP or not.
As long as I have the option to PvE in safety and the systems are in place to penalize indiscriminate killing or ganking then that is one rule I could handle. Would still prefer optional rule set servers the most through, seeing as they worked really well on the games that provided them.
Glad we're all on the same page now.
Absolutely agree, never had a problem with territory security levels. But I bet the PvE-only lobbyists come out and state how unfair it is that they can´t go EVERYWHERE in safemode. Wait for it, it´s coming. Even if there is one half square foot small space with non-consensual PvP enabled, they will stomp with their feet until they can go there too in safemode.
Usually they bring up EvE Online as their personal evil, evil nemesis and the ultimate ganker paradise (which it is not), stating how it is the most evil unfair game ever existed, filled with sociapathic murderers.
It´s really hilarious how far paranoia and griefophobia can go. ;-)
Or how about we PvE'ers just want the option to have a server where we don't have to engage in it. I have no problem at all playing in PvP. Hell my main in WoW was on the PvP server for 6 years. I played Eve one week after launch and still do. Pvp can be fun, especially realm/faction pvp. But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience. Why can't you be ok with a seperate PvE server? Is it really so important that everyone plays exactly the way you do? Do you honestly believe that your way is the only way and no other game styles should be allowed?
Waste of developer time. They want to create ONE sandbox world and focus on these rulesets, criminal punishments in place, possibly territory control, possible player-killer-killer systems, possible jails for murderers.. countless possibilites of smart, modern mechanics.
Splitting up playerbase like some old server type dead end MMOs did 10 years ago should NOT happen.
It´s over. Single Server is the future, single ruleset is the future, EvE gameplay is the future, not WoW gameplay.
Those who want WoW can still play Wow or one of the 654 clones until 2046.
Details we´ll know on August 2 but I think SOE knows very well what sandbox means.
Waste of developer time. They want to create ONE sandbox world and focus on these rulesets, criminal punishments in place, possibly territory control, possible player-killer-killer systems, possible jails for murderers.. countless possibilites of smart, modern mechanics.
Splitting up playerbase like some old server type dead end MMOs did 10 years ago should NOT happen.
It´s over. Single Server is the future, single ruleset is the future, EvE gameplay is the future, not WoW gameplay.
Those who want WoW can still play Wow or one of the 654 clones until 2046.
Details we´ll know on August 2 but I think SOE knows very well what sandbox means.
You obviously don't.
If EQN forces me to accept griefing, I will indeed continue waiting for a good sandbox.
A sandbox is a world you can influence. It's a world you can live in, not just visit every zone once while leveling.
Mandatory griefing is not a part of the definition of a sandbox.
a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.
Smed says everything can be destroyed.
Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?
Absolutely. I would also like to have your character imprisoned for life if you attempt to murder another player. You said you wanted 'realism', well there it is. Muderers should be jailed permanently. Unless of course you are one of those open world PvP advocates that just want to abuse and grief players with no consequences. Which, by reading your posts, is exactly what you are. You and Doc are a pair of hypocritical, blind griefers who just want to harass others for your enjoyment. Want me to prove it? Sure..
First, you both are against PvE and PvP servers being separate. Only players that want to grief as many people as possible are against this.
Second, you keep saying you don't want restrictions, yet you don't want any penalties for murder/wanton destruction.
Third, you attack anyone who wants PvE in a beloved IP with insults and anger.
No matter how many posts you and Doc make...you both are wrong and part of an irrelevant, dying breed of griefers.
As a firm opponent of Forced PvP or FFA PvP or non-consensual PvP I will defend Bc here, not that I agree with him on many things pertaining to MMO philosophy but he is one of the few PvP guys here who has gave an alternate ruleset that "could potentially work". Plus he has been pretty vocal about his opposition to indiscriminate ganking and griefing.
FFA PvP will never work, unless the game is solely based around that, you need rules in certain areas, penalties etc... even EVE has its own rules and penalties which is why you can only really free pvp on nullsec.
More than agreeable, EQ Next should be 100% EvE in a fantasy setting. Take my money.
Which is the point that I have been trying to make all day and all night long. Consensual PvP is a must. Eve, not a game I freely admit to knowing anything about, nor care to, gives PvE'ers the choice whether to PvP or not.
As long as I have the option to PvE in safety and the systems are in place to penalize indiscriminate killing or ganking then that is one rule I could handle. Would still prefer optional rule set servers the most through, seeing as they worked really well on the games that provided them.
Glad we're all on the same page now.
Absolutely agree, never had a problem with territory security levels. But I bet the PvE-only lobbyists come out and state how unfair it is that they can´t go EVERYWHERE in safemode. Wait for it, it´s coming. Even if there is one half square foot small space with non-consensual PvP enabled, they will stomp with their feet until they can go there too in safemode.
Usually they bring up EvE Online as their personal evil, evil nemesis and the ultimate ganker paradise (which it is not), stating how it is the most evil unfair game ever existed, filled with sociapathic murderers.
It´s really hilarious how far paranoia and griefophobia can go. ;-)
I think the majority of PVEers don't mind frontier like zones that they know have the danger of being attacked. Kind of like daoc. Not everyone went out to the frontiers, Some even went to just pve, for greater exp/treasures, hoping to avoid pvp, but knew it was a possibility.
Personally this is my favorite method of pvp. Some times I will want to pvp, some times I might want to do some risky pve, and other times, just relax in my own controlled environment.
Now there are some people that are like you say pure PvE that want to absolutely go everywhere with no risk whatsoever. They're probably the biggest minority of them all. But just have a pve coop type server which is different from the usual pve server, like daoc also had, heh. Thing is, they're totally happy with that compromise, unlike the ffa PvPers that want to force it on everyone.
Of course the real reason why they don't want others to have their own server is not because it is splitting the population (since ffa is such a minority, the main pop is not really diminished lol), but they derive their enjoyment out of causing others misery.
Sure, some people love the joy of pvp, and the competitiveness, but those people don't have a problem with a separate server. Some have even said here in this thread, they wouldn't want to fight people that don't really want to fight.
The ONLY ones complaining about separate servers and wanting to force pvp are the griefers and gankers.
And if by some wild chance the game was made into ffa pvp, but with some of the ideas of punishments and harsh consequences, the first people to leave will be the PvPers that are into griefing only. Can't cause misery if they're locked up all the time, what's the fun in that?
But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience.
Haven't you heard the developers over and over? This isnt going to be what you liked about EQ1 and EQ2.. Infact, I am willing to bet that their first version of "Everquest Next" was just Everquest 3 with the best features of EQ1/EQ2, and they smartly realized that has no substance to it and gets forgotten about a month after release like all the other mediocre MMOs to come out this year alone
If you go in wanting EQ1 or EQ2, you are going to be sadly let down, so you better change that mindset real quick. You arent gonna have those red tinted glasses EQ1 feeling in how it played, that game is horribly outdated and flawed for people who can think objectively (And I too played and enjoyed Everquest)
I guess I should have worded that better. I want the great PvE experience again, but new. I don't want a copy paste EQ/WoW game. But I also don't want the entire game to be nothing but a pointless gankfest that will die out in 6 months. I want to feel excited when I log into a game again. I miss that feeling. Everything out is focused on e-sport pvp mechanics. That's how I feel. And I believe that turning this game into nothing but a PvP centric game will go the way of GW2 and slowly bleed out. If they make PvE and PvP servers then they will have the best of both worlds and fans of different styles who love the IP can enjoy it.
In a crafting based item progression (Which is looking more and more likely, not to say Raids wont drop nice stuff) what is the point if all you're doing is crafting items to have better items when the Raids are like the second of importance? The carrot on the stick is always extra incentive to Raid in MMORPG's
Just curious how a crafting based item progression works with no PvP
EDIT to above poster: I'm sorry but if newer MMOs are hard on you mechanically.. I dont know what to say. What MMOS are focused towards "e-sports"? Even WoW isnt important in Arena anymore, I think they stopped doing those tournaments. Guild Wars 2 no one cares about. The mechanics of MMOs are easy to learn.
In fact I'd be willing to say no MMORPG that has come out has tried to focus on eSports -- Because truth be told I dont think there is room for MMORPG's in eSports because their gameplay is hard to understand unless youre a die hard fan -- In Starcraft 2 you go "Oh man explosions happened, I can get excited about that" and same goes for fighting games "Ohhh that combo I didnt need to know the inputs what I saw was sick!!!" League of Legends might be the only example of an "eSports" game that you really need to know the game to appreciate
a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.
Smed says everything can be destroyed.
Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?
Absolutely. I would also like to have your character imprisoned for life if you attempt to murder another player. You said you wanted 'realism', well there it is. Muderers should be jailed permanently. Unless of course you are one of those open world PvP advocates that just want to abuse and grief players with no consequences. Which, by reading your posts, is exactly what you are. You and Doc are a pair of hypocritical, blind griefers who just want to harass others for your enjoyment. Want me to prove it? Sure..
First, you both are against PvE and PvP servers being separate. Only players that want to grief as many people as possible are against this.
Second, you keep saying you don't want restrictions, yet you don't want any penalties for murder/wanton destruction.
Third, you attack anyone who wants PvE in a beloved IP with insults and anger.
No matter how many posts you and Doc make...you both are wrong and part of an irrelevant, dying breed of griefers.
As a firm opponent of Forced PvP or FFA PvP or non-consensual PvP I will defend Bc here, not that I agree with him on many things pertaining to MMO philosophy but he is one of the few PvP guys here who has gave an alternate ruleset that "could potentially work". Plus he has been pretty vocal about his opposition to indiscriminate ganking and griefing.
FFA PvP will never work, unless the game is solely based around that, you need rules in certain areas, penalties etc... even EVE has its own rules and penalties which is why you can only really free pvp on nullsec.
More than agreeable, EQ Next should be 100% EvE in a fantasy setting. Take my money.
Which is the point that I have been trying to make all day and all night long. Consensual PvP is a must. Eve, not a game I freely admit to knowing anything about, nor care to, gives PvE'ers the choice whether to PvP or not.
As long as I have the option to PvE in safety and the systems are in place to penalize indiscriminate killing or ganking then that is one rule I could handle. Would still prefer optional rule set servers the most through, seeing as they worked really well on the games that provided them.
Glad we're all on the same page now.
Absolutely agree, never had a problem with territory security levels. But I bet the PvE-only lobbyists come out and state how unfair it is that they can´t go EVERYWHERE in safemode. Wait for it, it´s coming. Even if there is one half square foot small space with non-consensual PvP enabled, they will stomp with their feet until they can go there too in safemode.
Usually they bring up EvE Online as their personal evil, evil nemesis and the ultimate ganker paradise (which it is not), stating how it is the most evil unfair game ever existed, filled with sociapathic murderers.
It´s really hilarious how far paranoia and griefophobia can go. ;-)
Or how about we PvE'ers just want the option to have a server where we don't have to engage in it. I have no problem at all playing in PvP. Hell my main in WoW was on the PvP server for 6 years. I played Eve one week after launch and still do. Pvp can be fun, especially realm/faction pvp. But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience. Why can't you be ok with a seperate PvE server? Is it really so important that everyone plays exactly the way you do? Do you honestly believe that your way is the only way and no other game styles should be allowed?
Waste of developer time. They want to create ONE sandbox world and focus on these rulesets, criminal punishments in place, possibly territory control, possible player-killer-killer systems, possible jails for murderers.. countless possibilites of smart, modern mechanics.
Splitting up playerbase like some old server type dead end MMOs did 10 years ago should NOT happen.
It´s over. Single Server is the future, single ruleset is the future, EvE gameplay is the future, not WoW gameplay.
Those who want WoW can still play Wow or one of the 654 clones until 2046.
Details we´ll know on August 2 but I think SOE knows very well what sandbox means.
I agree that sandboxes are the future of gaming. But you need to get it out of your head that sandbox = pvp. It does not. Single server, sounds great. Those are not what I'm worried about. What I am worried about is that you claim that it's a waste of developer time to have 2 servers yet you mention immediately after that 4+ different game mechanics that need to be in place. So coding an entire game with all these rulesets is easier than just turning 'off' pvp on one server? Nope. Again, you just want everyone playing the way you want it to be, and if they disagree you tell them to go back to WoW and say your way is the future. Your way is draconic and outdated. Open world pvp has been done to death. It's not unique. It's not progressive. It's the same old pvp crap that has killed many games. No matter how many times you justify it, you only come across as saying 'I want to be able to grief anyone at anytime'.
a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.
Smed says everything can be destroyed.
Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?
Absolutely. I would also like to have your character imprisoned for life if you attempt to murder another player. You said you wanted 'realism', well there it is. Muderers should be jailed permanently. Unless of course you are one of those open world PvP advocates that just want to abuse and grief players with no consequences. Which, by reading your posts, is exactly what you are. You and Doc are a pair of hypocritical, blind griefers who just want to harass others for your enjoyment. Want me to prove it? Sure..
First, you both are against PvE and PvP servers being separate. Only players that want to grief as many people as possible are against this.
Second, you keep saying you don't want restrictions, yet you don't want any penalties for murder/wanton destruction.
Third, you attack anyone who wants PvE in a beloved IP with insults and anger.
No matter how many posts you and Doc make...you both are wrong and part of an irrelevant, dying breed of griefers.
As a firm opponent of Forced PvP or FFA PvP or non-consensual PvP I will defend Bc here, not that I agree with him on many things pertaining to MMO philosophy but he is one of the few PvP guys here who has gave an alternate ruleset that "could potentially work". Plus he has been pretty vocal about his opposition to indiscriminate ganking and griefing.
FFA PvP will never work, unless the game is solely based around that, you need rules in certain areas, penalties etc... even EVE has its own rules and penalties which is why you can only really free pvp on nullsec.
More than agreeable, EQ Next should be 100% EvE in a fantasy setting. Take my money.
Which is the point that I have been trying to make all day and all night long. Consensual PvP is a must. Eve, not a game I freely admit to knowing anything about, nor care to, gives PvE'ers the choice whether to PvP or not.
As long as I have the option to PvE in safety and the systems are in place to penalize indiscriminate killing or ganking then that is one rule I could handle. Would still prefer optional rule set servers the most through, seeing as they worked really well on the games that provided them.
Glad we're all on the same page now.
Absolutely agree, never had a problem with territory security levels. But I bet the PvE-only lobbyists come out and state how unfair it is that they can´t go EVERYWHERE in safemode. Wait for it, it´s coming. Even if there is one half square foot small space with non-consensual PvP enabled, they will stomp with their feet until they can go there too in safemode.
Usually they bring up EvE Online as their personal evil, evil nemesis and the ultimate ganker paradise (which it is not), stating how it is the most evil unfair game ever existed, filled with sociapathic murderers.
It´s really hilarious how far paranoia and griefophobia can go. ;-)
Or how about we PvE'ers just want the option to have a server where we don't have to engage in it. I have no problem at all playing in PvP. Hell my main in WoW was on the PvP server for 6 years. I played Eve one week after launch and still do. Pvp can be fun, especially realm/faction pvp. But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience. Why can't you be ok with a seperate PvE server? Is it really so important that everyone plays exactly the way you do? Do you honestly believe that your way is the only way and no other game styles should be allowed?
Waste of developer time. They want to create ONE sandbox world and focus on these rulesets, criminal punishments in place, possibly territory control, possible player-killer-killer systems, possible jails for murderers.. countless possibilites of smart, modern mechanics.
Splitting up playerbase like some old server type dead end MMOs did 10 years ago should NOT happen.
It´s over. Single Server is the future, single ruleset is the future, EvE gameplay is the future, not WoW gameplay.
Those who want WoW can still play Wow or one of the 654 clones until 2046.
Details we´ll know on August 2 but I think SOE knows very well what sandbox means.
I agree that sandboxes are the future of gaming. But you need to get it out of your head that sandbox = pvp. It does not. Single server, sounds great. Those are not what I'm worried about. What I am worried about is that you claim that it's a waste of developer time to have 2 servers yet you mention immediately after that 4+ different game mechanics that need to be in place. So coding an entire game with all these rulesets is easier than just turning 'off' pvp on one server? Nope. Again, you just want everyone playing the way you want it to be, and if they disagree you tell them to go back to WoW and say your way is the future. Your way is draconic and outdated. Open world pvp has been done to death. It's not unique. It's not progressive. It's the same old pvp crap that has killed many games. No matter how many times you justify it, you only come across as saying 'I want to be able to grief anyone at anytime'.
How does a Sandbox without PvP work when Sandboxes typically the end-game is crafting for better items? Raids will be there but they arent going to be the end-all be all to item progression. In fact I'd be willing to bet the best items of the game will come from crafting only.
Dont people eventually get bored of not fighting each other at all and lollygagging in their roleplaying houses? Just curious
There isn't peace without war, and there isn't war without peace..
a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.
Smed says everything can be destroyed.
Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?
Absolutely. I would also like to have your character imprisoned for life if you attempt to murder another player. You said you wanted 'realism', well there it is. Muderers should be jailed permanently. Unless of course you are one of those open world PvP advocates that just want to abuse and grief players with no consequences. Which, by reading your posts, is exactly what you are. You and Doc are a pair of hypocritical, blind griefers who just want to harass others for your enjoyment. Want me to prove it? Sure..
First, you both are against PvE and PvP servers being separate. Only players that want to grief as many people as possible are against this.
Second, you keep saying you don't want restrictions, yet you don't want any penalties for murder/wanton destruction.
Third, you attack anyone who wants PvE in a beloved IP with insults and anger.
No matter how many posts you and Doc make...you both are wrong and part of an irrelevant, dying breed of griefers.
As a firm opponent of Forced PvP or FFA PvP or non-consensual PvP I will defend Bc here, not that I agree with him on many things pertaining to MMO philosophy but he is one of the few PvP guys here who has gave an alternate ruleset that "could potentially work". Plus he has been pretty vocal about his opposition to indiscriminate ganking and griefing.
FFA PvP will never work, unless the game is solely based around that, you need rules in certain areas, penalties etc... even EVE has its own rules and penalties which is why you can only really free pvp on nullsec.
More than agreeable, EQ Next should be 100% EvE in a fantasy setting. Take my money.
Which is the point that I have been trying to make all day and all night long. Consensual PvP is a must. Eve, not a game I freely admit to knowing anything about, nor care to, gives PvE'ers the choice whether to PvP or not.
As long as I have the option to PvE in safety and the systems are in place to penalize indiscriminate killing or ganking then that is one rule I could handle. Would still prefer optional rule set servers the most through, seeing as they worked really well on the games that provided them.
Glad we're all on the same page now.
Absolutely agree, never had a problem with territory security levels. But I bet the PvE-only lobbyists come out and state how unfair it is that they can´t go EVERYWHERE in safemode. Wait for it, it´s coming. Even if there is one half square foot small space with non-consensual PvP enabled, they will stomp with their feet until they can go there too in safemode.
Usually they bring up EvE Online as their personal evil, evil nemesis and the ultimate ganker paradise (which it is not), stating how it is the most evil unfair game ever existed, filled with sociapathic murderers.
It´s really hilarious how far paranoia and griefophobia can go. ;-)
I think the majority of PVEers don't mind frontier like zones that they know have the danger of being attacked. Kind of like daoc. Not everyone went out to the frontiers, Some even went to just pve, for greater exp/treasures, hoping to avoid pvp, but knew it was a possibility.
Personally this is my favorite method of pvp. Some times I will want to pvp, some times I might want to do some risky pve, and other times, just relax in my own controlled environment.
Now there are some people that are like you say pure PvE that want to absolutely go everywhere with no risk whatsoever. They're probably the biggest minority of them all. But just have a pve coop type server which is different from the usual pve server, like daoc also had, heh. Thing is, they're totally happy with that compromise, unlike the ffa PvPers that want to force it on everyone.
Of course the real reason why they don't want others to have their own server is not because it is splitting the population (since ffa is such a minority, the main pop is not really diminished lol), but they derive their enjoyment out of causing others misery.
Sure, some people love the joy of pvp, and the competitiveness, but those people don't have a problem with a separate server. Some have even said here in this thread, they wouldn't want to fight people that don't really want to fight.
The ONLY ones complaining about separate servers and wanting to force pvp are the griefers and gankers.
And if by some wild chance the game was made into ffa pvp, but with some of the ideas of punishments and harsh consequences, the first people to leave will be the PvPers that are into griefing only. Can't cause misery if they're locked up all the time, what's the fun in that?
Finally, someone with reason and intellect. That's exactly my point. The only ones complaining about separate servers are griefers. The whole point I've been trying to make.
In a crafting based item progression (Which is looking more and more likely, not to say Raids wont drop nice stuff) what is the point if all you're doing is crafting items to have better items when the Raids are like the second of importance? The carrot on the stick is always extra incentive to Raid in MMORPG's
Just curious how a crafting based item progression works with no PvP
I guess you make it really hard to craft the best gear. IMO it should be obtainable through any playstyle, but much easier if you interact with other people through trade or grouping.
Making gear and weapons situational is also a good idea. Who said that heavy battle-axe is the best possible weapon against all foes in every situation?
There could be endless complications in crafting, you could play for years and years and still have a lot to learn and craft if crafting is done right. You need to build your house, and all sorts of crafting skills will be usefull then.
I don't see why PvP or no PvP will even enter into it.
In a crafting based item progression (Which is looking more and more likely, not to say Raids wont drop nice stuff) what is the point if all you're doing is crafting items to have better items when the Raids are like the second of importance? The carrot on the stick is always extra incentive to Raid in MMORPG's
Just curious how a crafting based item progression works with no PvP
I guess you make it really hard to craft the best gear. IMO it should be obtainable through any playstyle, but much easier if you interact with other people through trade or grouping.
Making gear and weapons situational is also a good idea. Who said that heavy battle-axe is the best possible weapon against all foes in every situation?
There could be endless complications in crafting, you could play for years and years and still have a lot to learn and craft if crafting is done right. You need to build your house, and all sorts of crafting skills will be usefull then.
I don't see why PvP or no PvP will even enter into it.
Because with PvP, it gets harder to max out if you can lose loot. It re-saturates the market because there isnt an overflow of 40000000 people using [Thunderfury, Blessed Blade Of The Windseeker] if everyone has the best gear in the game, that's not a good system, IMO.
Artificially or not, it makes the game last longer because there is more to do than mindlessly grind mobs or raids or craft stuff. Also to some, the idea of PvP is fun.
a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.
Smed says everything can be destroyed.
Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?
Absolutely. I would also like to have your character imprisoned for life if you attempt to murder another player. You said you wanted 'realism', well there it is. Muderers should be jailed permanently. Unless of course you are one of those open world PvP advocates that just want to abuse and grief players with no consequences. Which, by reading your posts, is exactly what you are. You and Doc are a pair of hypocritical, blind griefers who just want to harass others for your enjoyment. Want me to prove it? Sure..
First, you both are against PvE and PvP servers being separate. Only players that want to grief as many people as possible are against this.
Second, you keep saying you don't want restrictions, yet you don't want any penalties for murder/wanton destruction.
Third, you attack anyone who wants PvE in a beloved IP with insults and anger.
No matter how many posts you and Doc make...you both are wrong and part of an irrelevant, dying breed of griefers.
As a firm opponent of Forced PvP or FFA PvP or non-consensual PvP I will defend Bc here, not that I agree with him on many things pertaining to MMO philosophy but he is one of the few PvP guys here who has gave an alternate ruleset that "could potentially work". Plus he has been pretty vocal about his opposition to indiscriminate ganking and griefing.
FFA PvP will never work, unless the game is solely based around that, you need rules in certain areas, penalties etc... even EVE has its own rules and penalties which is why you can only really free pvp on nullsec.
More than agreeable, EQ Next should be 100% EvE in a fantasy setting. Take my money.
Which is the point that I have been trying to make all day and all night long. Consensual PvP is a must. Eve, not a game I freely admit to knowing anything about, nor care to, gives PvE'ers the choice whether to PvP or not.
As long as I have the option to PvE in safety and the systems are in place to penalize indiscriminate killing or ganking then that is one rule I could handle. Would still prefer optional rule set servers the most through, seeing as they worked really well on the games that provided them.
Glad we're all on the same page now.
Absolutely agree, never had a problem with territory security levels. But I bet the PvE-only lobbyists come out and state how unfair it is that they can´t go EVERYWHERE in safemode. Wait for it, it´s coming. Even if there is one half square foot small space with non-consensual PvP enabled, they will stomp with their feet until they can go there too in safemode.
Usually they bring up EvE Online as their personal evil, evil nemesis and the ultimate ganker paradise (which it is not), stating how it is the most evil unfair game ever existed, filled with sociapathic murderers.
It´s really hilarious how far paranoia and griefophobia can go. ;-)
Or how about we PvE'ers just want the option to have a server where we don't have to engage in it. I have no problem at all playing in PvP. Hell my main in WoW was on the PvP server for 6 years. I played Eve one week after launch and still do. Pvp can be fun, especially realm/faction pvp. But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience. Why can't you be ok with a seperate PvE server? Is it really so important that everyone plays exactly the way you do? Do you honestly believe that your way is the only way and no other game styles should be allowed?
Waste of developer time. They want to create ONE sandbox world and focus on these rulesets, criminal punishments in place, possibly territory control, possible player-killer-killer systems, possible jails for murderers.. countless possibilites of smart, modern mechanics.
Splitting up playerbase like some old server type dead end MMOs did 10 years ago should NOT happen.
It´s over. Single Server is the future, single ruleset is the future, EvE gameplay is the future, not WoW gameplay.
Those who want WoW can still play Wow or one of the 654 clones until 2046.
Details we´ll know on August 2 but I think SOE knows very well what sandbox means.
I agree that sandboxes are the future of gaming. But you need to get it out of your head that sandbox = pvp. It does not. Single server, sounds great. Those are not what I'm worried about. What I am worried about is that you claim that it's a waste of developer time to have 2 servers yet you mention immediately after that 4+ different game mechanics that need to be in place. So coding an entire game with all these rulesets is easier than just turning 'off' pvp on one server? Nope. Again, you just want everyone playing the way you want it to be, and if they disagree you tell them to go back to WoW and say your way is the future. Your way is draconic and outdated. Open world pvp has been done to death. It's not unique. It's not progressive. It's the same old pvp crap that has killed many games. No matter how many times you justify it, you only come across as saying 'I want to be able to grief anyone at anytime'.
How does a Sandbox without PvP work when Sandboxes typically the end-game is crafting for better items? Raids will be there but they arent going to be the end-all be all to item progression. In fact I'd be willing to bet the best items of the game will come from crafting only.
Dont people eventually get bored of not fighting each other at all and lollygagging in their roleplaying houses? Just curious
There isn't peace without war, and there isn't war without peace..
How is it a sandbox WITH PvP? You can do everything in a sandbox with PvP that you can do without. Building, crafting, exploring, progression does not need PvP at all. And no, some people actually like to play a game that isn't centered around just murdering every player for fun. There are other things to do than just 'lollygag' in a house. Believe it or not but PvP is very boring for a lot of people.
And that saying is absolute garbage. There can be peace without war. It's just that sociopaths choose to be violent and murder instead of enjoying that peace. That was only quoted as a means of justification. To make it seem fine that people are dying for 'peace'.
In a crafting based item progression (Which is looking more and more likely, not to say Raids wont drop nice stuff) what is the point if all you're doing is crafting items to have better items when the Raids are like the second of importance? The carrot on the stick is always extra incentive to Raid in MMORPG's
Just curious how a crafting based item progression works with no PvP
I guess you make it really hard to craft the best gear. IMO it should be obtainable through any playstyle, but much easier if you interact with other people through trade or grouping.
Making gear and weapons situational is also a good idea. Who said that heavy battle-axe is the best possible weapon against all foes in every situation?
There could be endless complications in crafting, you could play for years and years and still have a lot to learn and craft if crafting is done right. You need to build your house, and all sorts of crafting skills will be usefull then.
I don't see why PvP or no PvP will even enter into it.
Because with PvP, it gets harder to max out if you can lose loot. It re-saturates the market because there isnt an overflow of 40000000 people using [Thunderfury, Blessed Blade Of The Windseeker] if everyone has the best gear in the game, that's not a good system, IMO.
Artificially or not, it makes the game last longer because there is more to do than mindlessly grind mobs or raids or craft stuff. Also to some, the idea of PvP is fun.
I'm against the idea of not having PvP servers for that exact reason. Of course you should be able to play on a PvP server.
Those two polls (PVP and PVE) that are currently up--the people who identify themselves as (and therefor support) "PVP" come from several different schools of thought.
But because they take the pro-PVP stance, they're identified by what PVE players see as "general PVP properties", by watching their behavior in various games.
And the same happens in reverse, everyone who identifies as PVE takes on "opponent", to the other team.
Do all Republicans support every part of the party platform?
Nope, but when you think of the label, you subconsciously assign a lot of properties to every individual who claims the tag.
a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.
Smed says everything can be destroyed.
Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?
Absolutely. I would also like to have your character imprisoned for life if you attempt to murder another player. You said you wanted 'realism', well there it is. Muderers should be jailed permanently. Unless of course you are one of those open world PvP advocates that just want to abuse and grief players with no consequences. Which, by reading your posts, is exactly what you are. You and Doc are a pair of hypocritical, blind griefers who just want to harass others for your enjoyment. Want me to prove it? Sure..
First, you both are against PvE and PvP servers being separate. Only players that want to grief as many people as possible are against this.
Second, you keep saying you don't want restrictions, yet you don't want any penalties for murder/wanton destruction.
Third, you attack anyone who wants PvE in a beloved IP with insults and anger.
No matter how many posts you and Doc make...you both are wrong and part of an irrelevant, dying breed of griefers.
As a firm opponent of Forced PvP or FFA PvP or non-consensual PvP I will defend Bc here, not that I agree with him on many things pertaining to MMO philosophy but he is one of the few PvP guys here who has gave an alternate ruleset that "could potentially work". Plus he has been pretty vocal about his opposition to indiscriminate ganking and griefing.
FFA PvP will never work, unless the game is solely based around that, you need rules in certain areas, penalties etc... even EVE has its own rules and penalties which is why you can only really free pvp on nullsec.
More than agreeable, EQ Next should be 100% EvE in a fantasy setting. Take my money.
Which is the point that I have been trying to make all day and all night long. Consensual PvP is a must. Eve, not a game I freely admit to knowing anything about, nor care to, gives PvE'ers the choice whether to PvP or not.
As long as I have the option to PvE in safety and the systems are in place to penalize indiscriminate killing or ganking then that is one rule I could handle. Would still prefer optional rule set servers the most through, seeing as they worked really well on the games that provided them.
Glad we're all on the same page now.
Absolutely agree, never had a problem with territory security levels. But I bet the PvE-only lobbyists come out and state how unfair it is that they can´t go EVERYWHERE in safemode. Wait for it, it´s coming. Even if there is one half square foot small space with non-consensual PvP enabled, they will stomp with their feet until they can go there too in safemode.
Usually they bring up EvE Online as their personal evil, evil nemesis and the ultimate ganker paradise (which it is not), stating how it is the most evil unfair game ever existed, filled with sociapathic murderers.
It´s really hilarious how far paranoia and griefophobia can go. ;-)
Or how about we PvE'ers just want the option to have a server where we don't have to engage in it. I have no problem at all playing in PvP. Hell my main in WoW was on the PvP server for 6 years. I played Eve one week after launch and still do. Pvp can be fun, especially realm/faction pvp. But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience. Why can't you be ok with a seperate PvE server? Is it really so important that everyone plays exactly the way you do? Do you honestly believe that your way is the only way and no other game styles should be allowed?
Waste of developer time. They want to create ONE sandbox world and focus on these rulesets, criminal punishments in place, possibly territory control, possible player-killer-killer systems, possible jails for murderers.. countless possibilites of smart, modern mechanics.
Splitting up playerbase like some old server type dead end MMOs did 10 years ago should NOT happen.
It´s over. Single Server is the future, single ruleset is the future, EvE gameplay is the future, not WoW gameplay.
Those who want WoW can still play Wow or one of the 654 clones until 2046.
Details we´ll know on August 2 but I think SOE knows very well what sandbox means.
I agree that sandboxes are the future of gaming. But you need to get it out of your head that sandbox = pvp. It does not. Single server, sounds great. Those are not what I'm worried about. What I am worried about is that you claim that it's a waste of developer time to have 2 servers yet you mention immediately after that 4+ different game mechanics that need to be in place. So coding an entire game with all these rulesets is easier than just turning 'off' pvp on one server? Nope. Again, you just want everyone playing the way you want it to be, and if they disagree you tell them to go back to WoW and say your way is the future. Your way is draconic and outdated. Open world pvp has been done to death. It's not unique. It's not progressive. It's the same old pvp crap that has killed many games. No matter how many times you justify it, you only come across as saying 'I want to be able to grief anyone at anytime'.
How does a Sandbox without PvP work when Sandboxes typically the end-game is crafting for better items? Raids will be there but they arent going to be the end-all be all to item progression. In fact I'd be willing to bet the best items of the game will come from crafting only.
Dont people eventually get bored of not fighting each other at all and lollygagging in their roleplaying houses? Just curious
There isn't peace without war, and there isn't war without peace..
How is it a sandbox WITH PvP? You can do everything in a sandbox with PvP that you can do without. Building, crafting, exploring, progression does not need PvP at all. And no, some people actually like to play a game that isn't centered around just murdering every player for fun. There are other things to do than just 'lollygag' in a house. Believe it or not but PvP is very boring for a lot of people.
And that saying is absolute garbage. There can be peace without war. It's just that sociopaths choose to be violent and murder instead of enjoying that peace. That was only quoted as a means of justification. To make it seem fine that people are dying for 'peace'.
Game doesnt focus on end-game raiding
Game doesn't focus on the endless grind of monsters anymore for loot
Game likely focues on crafting as the item progression you will see in the game
Game likely wont have an AH to avoid crafters feeling unimportant when any joe-schmoe can go to the AH
I just dont see how that works without PvP at all. Whats the point of gearing up when Raids arent the focus?
With PvP and the ability to lose items, that means you arent maxing out as fast. A lot of the most popular games are games where players are interacting in a competitive manner against each other. Because no AI is ever going to match up to a human in video games unless you're just not a very skilled gamer (Losing to a level 9 CPU in Smash Bros doesnt mean the AI is good, it means you're not skilled)
"Cool.. so everyone has Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the WindSeeker and the devs dont want raiding to be the focus of the game.. You guys wanna chill in Monica's new mansion she made next to Qeynos and have some beers?"
In a crafting based item progression (Which is looking more and more likely, not to say Raids wont drop nice stuff) what is the point if all you're doing is crafting items to have better items when the Raids are like the second of importance? The carrot on the stick is always extra incentive to Raid in MMORPG's
Just curious how a crafting based item progression works with no PvP
I guess you make it really hard to craft the best gear. IMO it should be obtainable through any playstyle, but much easier if you interact with other people through trade or grouping.
Making gear and weapons situational is also a good idea. Who said that heavy battle-axe is the best possible weapon against all foes in every situation?
There could be endless complications in crafting, you could play for years and years and still have a lot to learn and craft if crafting is done right. You need to build your house, and all sorts of crafting skills will be usefull then.
I don't see why PvP or no PvP will even enter into it.
Because with PvP, it gets harder to max out if you can lose loot. It re-saturates the market because there isnt an overflow of 40000000 people using [Thunderfury, Blessed Blade Of The Windseeker] if everyone has the best gear in the game, that's not a good system, IMO.
Artificially or not, it makes the game last longer because there is more to do than mindlessly grind mobs or raids or craft stuff. Also to some, the idea of PvP is fun.
I'm against the idea of not having PvP servers for that exact reason. Of course you should be able to play on a PvP server.
I really can't see Smed and co forcing PVPers and PVE's being forced to play together, it's not going to happen.
In a crafting based item progression (Which is looking more and more likely, not to say Raids wont drop nice stuff) what is the point if all you're doing is crafting items to have better items when the Raids are like the second of importance? The carrot on the stick is always extra incentive to Raid in MMORPG's
Just curious how a crafting based item progression works with no PvP
I guess you make it really hard to craft the best gear. IMO it should be obtainable through any playstyle, but much easier if you interact with other people through trade or grouping.
Making gear and weapons situational is also a good idea. Who said that heavy battle-axe is the best possible weapon against all foes in every situation?
There could be endless complications in crafting, you could play for years and years and still have a lot to learn and craft if crafting is done right. You need to build your house, and all sorts of crafting skills will be usefull then.
I don't see why PvP or no PvP will even enter into it.
Because with PvP, it gets harder to max out if you can lose loot. It re-saturates the market because there isnt an overflow of 40000000 people using [Thunderfury, Blessed Blade Of The Windseeker] if everyone has the best gear in the game, that's not a good system, IMO.
Artificially or not, it makes the game last longer because there is more to do than mindlessly grind mobs or raids or craft stuff. Also to some, the idea of PvP is fun.
I'm against the idea of not having PvP servers for that exact reason. Of course you should be able to play on a PvP server.
I really can't see Smed and co forcing PVPers and PVE's being forced to play together, it's not going to happen.
It´s not a discussion about PVPers vs. PVEers. Those groups are better defined as
1. PvAll players who want a unified global ruleset
2.PvE-only segregators who want to split the player base into hard mode / easy mode
No one requested a PvP-Only MMO. Therefore "the PvPers" don´t exist in this context.
In a crafting based item progression (Which is looking more and more likely, not to say Raids wont drop nice stuff) what is the point if all you're doing is crafting items to have better items when the Raids are like the second of importance? The carrot on the stick is always extra incentive to Raid in MMORPG's
Just curious how a crafting based item progression works with no PvP
I guess you make it really hard to craft the best gear. IMO it should be obtainable through any playstyle, but much easier if you interact with other people through trade or grouping.
Making gear and weapons situational is also a good idea. Who said that heavy battle-axe is the best possible weapon against all foes in every situation?
There could be endless complications in crafting, you could play for years and years and still have a lot to learn and craft if crafting is done right. You need to build your house, and all sorts of crafting skills will be usefull then.
I don't see why PvP or no PvP will even enter into it.
Because with PvP, it gets harder to max out if you can lose loot. It re-saturates the market because there isnt an overflow of 40000000 people using [Thunderfury, Blessed Blade Of The Windseeker] if everyone has the best gear in the game, that's not a good system, IMO.
Artificially or not, it makes the game last longer because there is more to do than mindlessly grind mobs or raids or craft stuff. Also to some, the idea of PvP is fun.
I'm against the idea of not having PvP servers for that exact reason. Of course you should be able to play on a PvP server.
I really can't see Smed and co forcing PVPers and PVE's being forced to play together, it's not going to happen.
It´s not a discussion about PVPers vs. PVEers. Those groups are better defined as
1. PvAll players who want a unified global ruleset
2.PvE-only segregators who want to split the player base into hard mode / easy mode
No one requested a PvP-Only MMO. Therefore "the PvPers" don´t exist in this context.
It's more like
1. Players who like to PvP, but feel inferior when PvE servers get the activity, and the population on PvP servers always keep falling while PvE servers are doing great. Therefore they want to ban PvE servers.
2. Players who likes the option to PvP, but are sick and tired of the constant griefing, and has moved from PvP servers to PvE servers in most games they have played.
a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.
Smed says everything can be destroyed.
Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?
Absolutely. I would also like to have your character imprisoned for life if you attempt to murder another player. You said you wanted 'realism', well there it is. Muderers should be jailed permanently. Unless of course you are one of those open world PvP advocates that just want to abuse and grief players with no consequences. Which, by reading your posts, is exactly what you are. You and Doc are a pair of hypocritical, blind griefers who just want to harass others for your enjoyment. Want me to prove it? Sure..
First, you both are against PvE and PvP servers being separate. Only players that want to grief as many people as possible are against this.
Second, you keep saying you don't want restrictions, yet you don't want any penalties for murder/wanton destruction.
Third, you attack anyone who wants PvE in a beloved IP with insults and anger.
No matter how many posts you and Doc make...you both are wrong and part of an irrelevant, dying breed of griefers.
As a firm opponent of Forced PvP or FFA PvP or non-consensual PvP I will defend Bc here, not that I agree with him on many things pertaining to MMO philosophy but he is one of the few PvP guys here who has gave an alternate ruleset that "could potentially work". Plus he has been pretty vocal about his opposition to indiscriminate ganking and griefing.
FFA PvP will never work, unless the game is solely based around that, you need rules in certain areas, penalties etc... even EVE has its own rules and penalties which is why you can only really free pvp on nullsec.
More than agreeable, EQ Next should be 100% EvE in a fantasy setting. Take my money.
Which is the point that I have been trying to make all day and all night long. Consensual PvP is a must. Eve, not a game I freely admit to knowing anything about, nor care to, gives PvE'ers the choice whether to PvP or not.
As long as I have the option to PvE in safety and the systems are in place to penalize indiscriminate killing or ganking then that is one rule I could handle. Would still prefer optional rule set servers the most through, seeing as they worked really well on the games that provided them.
Glad we're all on the same page now.
Absolutely agree, never had a problem with territory security levels. But I bet the PvE-only lobbyists come out and state how unfair it is that they can´t go EVERYWHERE in safemode. Wait for it, it´s coming. Even if there is one half square foot small space with non-consensual PvP enabled, they will stomp with their feet until they can go there too in safemode.
Usually they bring up EvE Online as their personal evil, evil nemesis and the ultimate ganker paradise (which it is not), stating how it is the most evil unfair game ever existed, filled with sociapathic murderers.
It´s really hilarious how far paranoia and griefophobia can go. ;-)
Or how about we PvE'ers just want the option to have a server where we don't have to engage in it. I have no problem at all playing in PvP. Hell my main in WoW was on the PvP server for 6 years. I played Eve one week after launch and still do. Pvp can be fun, especially realm/faction pvp. But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience. Why can't you be ok with a seperate PvE server? Is it really so important that everyone plays exactly the way you do? Do you honestly believe that your way is the only way and no other game styles should be allowed?
Waste of developer time. They want to create ONE sandbox world and focus on these rulesets, criminal punishments in place, possibly territory control, possible player-killer-killer systems, possible jails for murderers.. countless possibilites of smart, modern mechanics.
Splitting up playerbase like some old server type dead end MMOs did 10 years ago should NOT happen.
It´s over. Single Server is the future, single ruleset is the future, EvE gameplay is the future, not WoW gameplay.
Those who want WoW can still play Wow or one of the 654 clones until 2046.
Details we´ll know on August 2 but I think SOE knows very well what sandbox means.
I agree that sandboxes are the future of gaming. But you need to get it out of your head that sandbox = pvp. It does not. Single server, sounds great. Those are not what I'm worried about. What I am worried about is that you claim that it's a waste of developer time to have 2 servers yet you mention immediately after that 4+ different game mechanics that need to be in place. So coding an entire game with all these rulesets is easier than just turning 'off' pvp on one server? Nope. Again, you just want everyone playing the way you want it to be, and if they disagree you tell them to go back to WoW and say your way is the future. Your way is draconic and outdated. Open world pvp has been done to death. It's not unique. It's not progressive. It's the same old pvp crap that has killed many games. No matter how many times you justify it, you only come across as saying 'I want to be able to grief anyone at anytime'.
How does a Sandbox without PvP work when Sandboxes typically the end-game is crafting for better items? Raids will be there but they arent going to be the end-all be all to item progression. In fact I'd be willing to bet the best items of the game will come from crafting only.
Dont people eventually get bored of not fighting each other at all and lollygagging in their roleplaying houses? Just curious
There isn't peace without war, and there isn't war without peace..
How is it a sandbox WITH PvP? You can do everything in a sandbox with PvP that you can do without. Building, crafting, exploring, progression does not need PvP at all. And no, some people actually like to play a game that isn't centered around just murdering every player for fun. There are other things to do than just 'lollygag' in a house. Believe it or not but PvP is very boring for a lot of people.
And that saying is absolute garbage. There can be peace without war. It's just that sociopaths choose to be violent and murder instead of enjoying that peace. That was only quoted as a means of justification. To make it seem fine that people are dying for 'peace'.
Game doesnt focus on end-game raiding
Game doesn't focus on the endless grind of monsters anymore for loot
Game likely focues on crafting as the item progression you will see in the game
Game likely wont have an AH to avoid crafters feeling unimportant when any joe-schmoe can go to the AH
I just dont see how that works without PvP at all. Whats the point of gearing up when Raids arent the focus?
With PvP and the ability to lose items, that means you arent maxing out as fast. A lot of the most popular games are games where players are interacting in a competitive manner against each other. Because no AI is ever going to match up to a human in video games unless you're just not a very skilled gamer (Losing to a level 9 CPU in Smash Bros doesnt mean the AI is good, it means you're not skilled)
"Cool.. so everyone has Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the WindSeeker and the devs dont want raiding to be the focus of the game.. You guys wanna chill in Monica's new mansion she made next to Qeynos and have some beers?"
I doubt the quote is how the game will go..
What's the point of the game when the focus is just PvP? I've played both for longer than I'd like to admit and I enjoy PvE far more. In PvE I get so many things that let me enjoy the game. In PvP I get one. The constant killing and being killed by the same players over and over and over and over....it's utterly boring. Nothing ever changes. The same 4-8 classes/skill combos, the same faces, the same environs...
There is no growth in PvP. It's static. So you die to someone in a pvp fight and lose all your gear. Ok, now what? Go get some more gear...Ok, find/contact a crafter. Get gear, cool. Go out and pvp some more. Die. Lose gear......*sigh* find/contact crafter...You get the point. There is nothing new to that kind of gaming. It's been done.
What's the point of the game when the focus is just PvP? I've played both for longer than I'd like to admit and I enjoy PvE far more. In PvE I get so many things that let me enjoy the game. In PvP I get one. The constant killing and being killed by the same players over and over and over and over....it's utterly boring. Nothing ever changes. The same 4-8 classes/skill combos, the same faces, the same environs...
There is no growth in PvP. It's static. So you die to someone in a pvp fight and lose all your gear. Ok, now what? Go get some more gear...Ok, find/contact a crafter. Get gear, cool. Go out and pvp some more. Die. Lose gear......*sigh* find/contact crafter...You get the point. There is nothing new to that kind of gaming. It's been done.
The focus wouldnt be just PvP -- When did I claim to say that?
Also, I figure I'd drop this off here, from PAX East.
PAX East
"But is it a risk to make an MMO that's so different from what players are familiar with? Georgeson acknowledges that it's a risk, but he's very confident that his team is on the right track. He said that the unfamiliar is going to be OK because the ideas are so cool that players will want to stick around to find out about them. At the same time, SOE is trying to make the game more intuitive. The longer a game's out, the harder it is for new players to jump into the game easily. With EQ Next, SOE is making sure to take care of accessibility now, not later.
When we spoke about the franchise as a whole, Georgeson reminded me that both EQ and EQII have been around for 14 and nine years respectively, and as far as he's concerned, there's no reason to ever turn the games off. He's not worried about EQ Next cannibalizing the two titles because it's such a different game from its siblings and because the fans are so loyal to their respective games. Both communities have developed deep, familial relationships with SOE over the years, and he expects that to continue for many years to come."
I don't think anything should be 100% safe but it needs to take effort and resources/equipment that is required to be brought to the site and thus at a risk of loss, not something 20 guys can just mindlessly bash down within 10minutes with their normal swords or whatever.
What's the point of the game when the focus is just PvP? I've played both for longer than I'd like to admit and I enjoy PvE far more. In PvE I get so many things that let me enjoy the game. In PvP I get one. The constant killing and being killed by the same players over and over and over and over....it's utterly boring. Nothing ever changes. The same 4-8 classes/skill combos, the same faces, the same environs...
There is no growth in PvP. It's static. So you die to someone in a pvp fight and lose all your gear. Ok, now what? Go get some more gear...Ok, find/contact a crafter. Get gear, cool. Go out and pvp some more. Die. Lose gear......*sigh* find/contact crafter...You get the point. There is nothing new to that kind of gaming. It's been done.
The focus wouldnt be just PvP -- When did I claim to say that?
Also, I figure I'd drop this off here, from PAX East.
PAX East
"But is it a risk to make an MMO that's so different from what players are familiar with? Georgeson acknowledges that it's a risk, but he's very confident that his team is on the right track. He said that the unfamiliar is going to be OK because the ideas are so cool that players will want to stick around to find out about them. At the same time, SOE is trying to make the game more intuitive. The longer a game's out, the harder it is for new players to jump into the game easily. With EQ Next, SOE is making sure to take care of accessibility now, not later.
When we spoke about the franchise as a whole, Georgeson reminded me that both EQ and EQII have been around for 14 and nine years respectively, and as far as he's concerned, there's no reason to ever turn the games off. He's not worried about EQ Next cannibalizing the two titles because it's such a different game from its siblings and because the fans are so loyal to their respective games. Both communities have developed deep, familial relationships with SOE over the years, and he expects that to continue for many years to come."
I'm hoping it's going to be game changing. I can't wait to give it a go. But to say it will be full pvp, full loot means it's outdated and nothing new. And to say it will be WoW/EQ/GW2 with a few 'new' tricks means it's outdated and nothing new. If they can pull this off and actually make a game that genuinely has something new.....
I don't particularly agree with BC's take on pvp however this is a very interesting post he has brought up. To that end I dislike pvp with a passion. It's not the pvp in and of itself...more so what usually happens when players are given the pvp option. Tera for example and a poor one at that would have people stand right over the bridge and kill lower level people as they crossed over. I have issues with this system for a couple of reasons.
1. The player usually doing this is x levels higher than the people around them...so even with a multiple group set-up going after this guy he gets tickled while he can bat his hand and you're at 20% health. This is the problem with pvp....its based entirely on the level of the person.
I would alter pvp in a way that perhaps if you are griefed like that you become the same level as the other person...I dislike griefers with a passion. BC brought up Age of Wushu in that you can go to jail, and I think that is a very good idea. However pvp should have the same reprecussions as in real life. Since that's what people want to do...non agreed upon pvp taken to the extreme should be met with heavy fines and penalties..jail being one but not something you can log out and come back later for.
It's like some people want the option but not the responsibility of the option. I agree with having pvp if it furthers the agenda of the world but not just some tacked on kill x player picking roses set-up. Perhaps have a class of players that can enlist and become officers for their city that go after criminals in game...they would have better gear (temporary). There has to be a balance on both sides.
Another post stated that pvp and pve should be mixed together or they will focus solely on pve...I wonder why that is. PVP is a smaller market and I think it will always be so until they mix pvp in the game without it being so...limited in the minds of the devs and players. In real world tactics you can view pvp in many ways, politics, killing, stealing, spying, torture, kidnapping...because pvp is really only killing another player. That dynamic should be further fleshed out both in scope of how you pvp and the punishments for pvping. You have a punishment system for pve in terms of dungeons, raids, etc...pvp what do you have on the rare change two warring guilds and more often than not, battle grounds, warfronts, arenas and of course people getting in a group with the soul purpose of going out and messing with other people...problem with that is there is nothing keeping them from doing as such.
Age of Wushu I remember a pvper was angry because he was ganking people got caught and actually had to spend real time in the game jail. I found that hilarious because he felt there should be no penalties for this...
Comments
I have no doubts that there will be some PvP on zones and not just useless zones. There will probably be some rare crafting materials to get in the zone or off mobs.
That's consensual and non-consensual. Want some sweet crafting materials? Go get it. Have fun. Don't want to fight for it? Better hope your friend gets you some sometime.
Anyone who goes into EQN expecting EQ1 or EQ2 should try to be willing to change. They've regurgitated this isnt going to be the same experience as before. You arent gonna have EQ1 grinding camps for hours and hours and hours etc.
People who honestly expect the moment you create a level 1 character you can get killed are silly. I doubt itll be every zone free for all. And technically even "loot on kill" vs players is pure speculation. Although what we do know is EQN is getting really hyped up by SOE/other websites including this one for being innovative and changing the MMO Genre. So it's going to be something we're not used to.
Or how about we PvE'ers just want the option to have a server where we don't have to engage in it. I have no problem at all playing in PvP. Hell my main in WoW was on the PvP server for 6 years. I played Eve one week after launch and still do. Pvp can be fun, especially realm/faction pvp. But I want to play EQ for the same reasons I played it back then. To have a great PvE experience. Why can't you be ok with a seperate PvE server? Is it really so important that everyone plays exactly the way you do? Do you honestly believe that your way is the only way and no other game styles should be allowed?
Haven't you heard the developers over and over? This isnt going to be what you liked about EQ1 and EQ2.. Infact, I am willing to bet that their first version of "Everquest Next" was just Everquest 3 with the best features of EQ1/EQ2, and they smartly realized that has no substance to it and gets forgotten about a month after release like all the other mediocre MMOs to come out this year alone
If you go in wanting EQ1 or EQ2, you are going to be sadly let down, so you better change that mindset real quick. You arent gonna have those red tinted glasses EQ1 feeling in how it played, that game is horribly outdated and flawed for people who can think objectively (And I too played and enjoyed Everquest)
Waste of developer time. They want to create ONE sandbox world and focus on these rulesets, criminal punishments in place, possibly territory control, possible player-killer-killer systems, possible jails for murderers.. countless possibilites of smart, modern mechanics.
Splitting up playerbase like some old server type dead end MMOs did 10 years ago should NOT happen.
It´s over. Single Server is the future, single ruleset is the future, EvE gameplay is the future, not WoW gameplay.
Those who want WoW can still play Wow or one of the 654 clones until 2046.
Details we´ll know on August 2 but I think SOE knows very well what sandbox means.
You obviously don't.
If EQN forces me to accept griefing, I will indeed continue waiting for a good sandbox.
A sandbox is a world you can influence. It's a world you can live in, not just visit every zone once while leveling.
Mandatory griefing is not a part of the definition of a sandbox.
I think the majority of PVEers don't mind frontier like zones that they know have the danger of being attacked. Kind of like daoc. Not everyone went out to the frontiers, Some even went to just pve, for greater exp/treasures, hoping to avoid pvp, but knew it was a possibility.
Personally this is my favorite method of pvp. Some times I will want to pvp, some times I might want to do some risky pve, and other times, just relax in my own controlled environment.
Now there are some people that are like you say pure PvE that want to absolutely go everywhere with no risk whatsoever. They're probably the biggest minority of them all. But just have a pve coop type server which is different from the usual pve server, like daoc also had, heh. Thing is, they're totally happy with that compromise, unlike the ffa PvPers that want to force it on everyone.
Of course the real reason why they don't want others to have their own server is not because it is splitting the population (since ffa is such a minority, the main pop is not really diminished lol), but they derive their enjoyment out of causing others misery.
Sure, some people love the joy of pvp, and the competitiveness, but those people don't have a problem with a separate server. Some have even said here in this thread, they wouldn't want to fight people that don't really want to fight.
The ONLY ones complaining about separate servers and wanting to force pvp are the griefers and gankers.
And if by some wild chance the game was made into ffa pvp, but with some of the ideas of punishments and harsh consequences, the first people to leave will be the PvPers that are into griefing only. Can't cause misery if they're locked up all the time, what's the fun in that?
I guess I should have worded that better. I want the great PvE experience again, but new. I don't want a copy paste EQ/WoW game. But I also don't want the entire game to be nothing but a pointless gankfest that will die out in 6 months. I want to feel excited when I log into a game again. I miss that feeling. Everything out is focused on e-sport pvp mechanics. That's how I feel. And I believe that turning this game into nothing but a PvP centric game will go the way of GW2 and slowly bleed out. If they make PvE and PvP servers then they will have the best of both worlds and fans of different styles who love the IP can enjoy it.
In a crafting based item progression (Which is looking more and more likely, not to say Raids wont drop nice stuff) what is the point if all you're doing is crafting items to have better items when the Raids are like the second of importance? The carrot on the stick is always extra incentive to Raid in MMORPG's
Just curious how a crafting based item progression works with no PvP
EDIT to above poster: I'm sorry but if newer MMOs are hard on you mechanically.. I dont know what to say. What MMOS are focused towards "e-sports"? Even WoW isnt important in Arena anymore, I think they stopped doing those tournaments. Guild Wars 2 no one cares about. The mechanics of MMOs are easy to learn.
In fact I'd be willing to say no MMORPG that has come out has tried to focus on eSports -- Because truth be told I dont think there is room for MMORPG's in eSports because their gameplay is hard to understand unless youre a die hard fan -- In Starcraft 2 you go "Oh man explosions happened, I can get excited about that" and same goes for fighting games "Ohhh that combo I didnt need to know the inputs what I saw was sick!!!" League of Legends might be the only example of an "eSports" game that you really need to know the game to appreciate
I agree that sandboxes are the future of gaming. But you need to get it out of your head that sandbox = pvp. It does not. Single server, sounds great. Those are not what I'm worried about. What I am worried about is that you claim that it's a waste of developer time to have 2 servers yet you mention immediately after that 4+ different game mechanics that need to be in place. So coding an entire game with all these rulesets is easier than just turning 'off' pvp on one server? Nope. Again, you just want everyone playing the way you want it to be, and if they disagree you tell them to go back to WoW and say your way is the future. Your way is draconic and outdated. Open world pvp has been done to death. It's not unique. It's not progressive. It's the same old pvp crap that has killed many games. No matter how many times you justify it, you only come across as saying 'I want to be able to grief anyone at anytime'.
How does a Sandbox without PvP work when Sandboxes typically the end-game is crafting for better items? Raids will be there but they arent going to be the end-all be all to item progression. In fact I'd be willing to bet the best items of the game will come from crafting only.
Dont people eventually get bored of not fighting each other at all and lollygagging in their roleplaying houses? Just curious
There isn't peace without war, and there isn't war without peace..
Finally, someone with reason and intellect. That's exactly my point. The only ones complaining about separate servers are griefers. The whole point I've been trying to make.
I guess you make it really hard to craft the best gear. IMO it should be obtainable through any playstyle, but much easier if you interact with other people through trade or grouping.
Making gear and weapons situational is also a good idea. Who said that heavy battle-axe is the best possible weapon against all foes in every situation?
There could be endless complications in crafting, you could play for years and years and still have a lot to learn and craft if crafting is done right. You need to build your house, and all sorts of crafting skills will be usefull then.
I don't see why PvP or no PvP will even enter into it.
Because with PvP, it gets harder to max out if you can lose loot. It re-saturates the market because there isnt an overflow of 40000000 people using [Thunderfury, Blessed Blade Of The Windseeker] if everyone has the best gear in the game, that's not a good system, IMO.
Artificially or not, it makes the game last longer because there is more to do than mindlessly grind mobs or raids or craft stuff. Also to some, the idea of PvP is fun.
How is it a sandbox WITH PvP? You can do everything in a sandbox with PvP that you can do without. Building, crafting, exploring, progression does not need PvP at all. And no, some people actually like to play a game that isn't centered around just murdering every player for fun. There are other things to do than just 'lollygag' in a house. Believe it or not but PvP is very boring for a lot of people.
And that saying is absolute garbage. There can be peace without war. It's just that sociopaths choose to be violent and murder instead of enjoying that peace. That was only quoted as a means of justification. To make it seem fine that people are dying for 'peace'.
I'm against the idea of not having PvP servers for that exact reason. Of course you should be able to play on a PvP server.
Those two polls (PVP and PVE) that are currently up--the people who identify themselves as (and therefor support) "PVP" come from several different schools of thought.
But because they take the pro-PVP stance, they're identified by what PVE players see as "general PVP properties", by watching their behavior in various games.
And the same happens in reverse, everyone who identifies as PVE takes on "opponent", to the other team.
Do all Republicans support every part of the party platform?
Nope, but when you think of the label, you subconsciously assign a lot of properties to every individual who claims the tag.
Game doesnt focus on end-game raiding
Game doesn't focus on the endless grind of monsters anymore for loot
Game likely focues on crafting as the item progression you will see in the game
Game likely wont have an AH to avoid crafters feeling unimportant when any joe-schmoe can go to the AH
I just dont see how that works without PvP at all. Whats the point of gearing up when Raids arent the focus?
With PvP and the ability to lose items, that means you arent maxing out as fast. A lot of the most popular games are games where players are interacting in a competitive manner against each other. Because no AI is ever going to match up to a human in video games unless you're just not a very skilled gamer (Losing to a level 9 CPU in Smash Bros doesnt mean the AI is good, it means you're not skilled)
"Cool.. so everyone has Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the WindSeeker and the devs dont want raiding to be the focus of the game.. You guys wanna chill in Monica's new mansion she made next to Qeynos and have some beers?"
I doubt the quote is how the game will go..
I really can't see Smed and co forcing PVPers and PVE's being forced to play together, it's not going to happen.
It´s not a discussion about PVPers vs. PVEers. Those groups are better defined as
1. PvAll players who want a unified global ruleset
2.PvE-only segregators who want to split the player base into hard mode / easy mode
No one requested a PvP-Only MMO. Therefore "the PvPers" don´t exist in this context.
It's more like
1. Players who like to PvP, but feel inferior when PvE servers get the activity, and the population on PvP servers always keep falling while PvE servers are doing great. Therefore they want to ban PvE servers.
2. Players who likes the option to PvP, but are sick and tired of the constant griefing, and has moved from PvP servers to PvE servers in most games they have played.
What's the point of the game when the focus is just PvP? I've played both for longer than I'd like to admit and I enjoy PvE far more. In PvE I get so many things that let me enjoy the game. In PvP I get one. The constant killing and being killed by the same players over and over and over and over....it's utterly boring. Nothing ever changes. The same 4-8 classes/skill combos, the same faces, the same environs...
There is no growth in PvP. It's static. So you die to someone in a pvp fight and lose all your gear. Ok, now what? Go get some more gear...Ok, find/contact a crafter. Get gear, cool. Go out and pvp some more. Die. Lose gear......*sigh* find/contact crafter...You get the point. There is nothing new to that kind of gaming. It's been done.
The focus wouldnt be just PvP -- When did I claim to say that?
Also, I figure I'd drop this off here, from PAX East.
PAX East
"But is it a risk to make an MMO that's so different from what players are familiar with? Georgeson acknowledges that it's a risk, but he's very confident that his team is on the right track. He said that the unfamiliar is going to be OK because the ideas are so cool that players will want to stick around to find out about them. At the same time, SOE is trying to make the game more intuitive. The longer a game's out, the harder it is for new players to jump into the game easily. With EQ Next, SOE is making sure to take care of accessibility now, not later.
When we spoke about the franchise as a whole, Georgeson reminded me that both EQ and EQII have been around for 14 and nine years respectively, and as far as he's concerned, there's no reason to ever turn the games off. He's not worried about EQ Next cannibalizing the two titles because it's such a different game from its siblings and because the fans are so loyal to their respective games. Both communities have developed deep, familial relationships with SOE over the years, and he expects that to continue for many years to come."
I'm hoping it's going to be game changing. I can't wait to give it a go. But to say it will be full pvp, full loot means it's outdated and nothing new. And to say it will be WoW/EQ/GW2 with a few 'new' tricks means it's outdated and nothing new. If they can pull this off and actually make a game that genuinely has something new.....
Hears hoping.
Good Morning everyone.
I don't particularly agree with BC's take on pvp however this is a very interesting post he has brought up. To that end I dislike pvp with a passion. It's not the pvp in and of itself...more so what usually happens when players are given the pvp option. Tera for example and a poor one at that would have people stand right over the bridge and kill lower level people as they crossed over. I have issues with this system for a couple of reasons.
1. The player usually doing this is x levels higher than the people around them...so even with a multiple group set-up going after this guy he gets tickled while he can bat his hand and you're at 20% health. This is the problem with pvp....its based entirely on the level of the person.
I would alter pvp in a way that perhaps if you are griefed like that you become the same level as the other person...I dislike griefers with a passion. BC brought up Age of Wushu in that you can go to jail, and I think that is a very good idea. However pvp should have the same reprecussions as in real life. Since that's what people want to do...non agreed upon pvp taken to the extreme should be met with heavy fines and penalties..jail being one but not something you can log out and come back later for.
It's like some people want the option but not the responsibility of the option. I agree with having pvp if it furthers the agenda of the world but not just some tacked on kill x player picking roses set-up. Perhaps have a class of players that can enlist and become officers for their city that go after criminals in game...they would have better gear (temporary). There has to be a balance on both sides.
Another post stated that pvp and pve should be mixed together or they will focus solely on pve...I wonder why that is. PVP is a smaller market and I think it will always be so until they mix pvp in the game without it being so...limited in the minds of the devs and players. In real world tactics you can view pvp in many ways, politics, killing, stealing, spying, torture, kidnapping...because pvp is really only killing another player. That dynamic should be further fleshed out both in scope of how you pvp and the punishments for pvping. You have a punishment system for pve in terms of dungeons, raids, etc...pvp what do you have on the rare change two warring guilds and more often than not, battle grounds, warfronts, arenas and of course people getting in a group with the soul purpose of going out and messing with other people...problem with that is there is nothing keeping them from doing as such.
Age of Wushu I remember a pvper was angry because he was ganking people got caught and actually had to spend real time in the game jail. I found that hilarious because he felt there should be no penalties for this...