Originally posted by DamonVile If a pve player can be killed by a pvp player it's a pvp game. It doesn't matter what mechanic you use.
In a sandbox game there are no PvE, nor PvP players. I don't think I've played many sandbox games, if any, that didn't allow PvP combat mechanics to take place. Even in "safe" places.
Come to think of it, I also can not think of a single sandbox game without pvp either.
And for some reason people try to argue with me when I say that pvp is inherently a sandbox feature.
Because most sandboxes up until now have featured full PvP that means it has to be a feature? No, not just a feature but the main feature? This is were lines get crossed because no one is saying no PvP at all. Yet, when someone mentions (as highlighted above) that PvP wasn't on everywhere all the time it's suddenly taken as not there at all. I know, I know, it's all or nothing.
Even if your statement has been the case up until now, that sandoxes have been all PvP, what does that say? The ones that are out minus EvE are not that great. That's because the right one hasn't been produced by a AAA team right? Well the same could be said for a mixed PvP/PvE sandbox, could it not? It just hasn't been made yet. This is a matter of opinion but just because you can build things in a sandbox doesn't automatically mean it should be designed for someone else to kick down.
The desire for sandbox gameplay has finally come to the spotlight. Although it may not mean full on PvP it may just be great enough for PvPers to get on board with as well as bored themepark players. I think a lot of different playstyles can be helped by a well, and carefully made, sandbox. I hope EQN is just that. SoE is in the driver's seat and I hope they know what they are doing. Six more days!
Originally posted by DamonVile If a pve player can be killed by a pvp player it's a pvp game. It doesn't matter what mechanic you use.
In a sandbox game there are no PvE, nor PvP players. I don't think I've played many sandbox games, if any, that didn't allow PvP combat mechanics to take place. Even in "safe" places.
Come to think of it, I also can not think of a single sandbox game without pvp either.
And for some reason people try to argue with me when I say that pvp is inherently a sandbox feature.
Because most sandboxes up until now have featured full PvP that means it has to be a feature? No, not just a feature but the main feature? This is were lines get crossed because no one is saying no PvP at all. Yet, when someone mentions (as highlighted above) that PvP wasn't on everywhere all the time it's suddenly taken as not there at all. I know, I know, it's all or nothing.
No, I didn't say that, did I? I didn't say it has to be the main feature, and I didn't say that BECAUSE most sandbox games have pvp that means it's a sandbox feature. In fact I'm saying it's a sandbox feature and that's why most sandbox games have it. If you PvE crowd want us to not snap at you so much, try not to twist our words around so much and waste our time explaining things several times.
PvP zones, separate servers, flagging systems effectively emasculates the type of game we're asking for. For some infinitely frustrating reason you guys will not let go of the idea that we don't just want to fight people. It's not that we're the "pvp only" crowd. We want there to be consequences to playing greedy/sloppy, and we want our successes to be more satisfying. OW PvP achieves that more interestingly and organically than anything I've played. So yes, if you segregate pvp too much, or make it so people can choose when and where they fight and with whom, then that's not the game we want.
Even if your statement has been the case up until now, that sandoxes have been all PvP, what does that say? The ones that are out minus EvE are not that great. That's because the right one hasn't been produced by a AAA team right? Well the same could be said for a mixed PvP/PvE sandbox, could it not? It just hasn't been made yet. This is a matter of opinion but just because you can build things in a sandbox doesn't automatically mean it should be designed for someone else to kick down.
I'm not sure if you meant it sarcastically but yes, there hasn't been a really big budget ow pvp sandbox game.
I don't know what you mean by a "pvp/pve sandbox" but I assume you mean one where pvp is optional in some way? Either separated into specific zones, flagging systems, separate servers, etc? I'd venture a guess and say it's because typically people who want depth to their game, and a challenge to things like crafting or questing probably are ok with OW PvP, in general. There's no doubt in my mind that an OW PvP game, done well, is a more satisfying game than one without... it's just a matter of how much you can stomach. If you can take the losses and become intrigued by the game, there's a good chance you're gonna be a fan of the genre for life.
Why do you think such tiny games like DF, UO (big at the time but relatively small compared to AAA games), Shadowbane have such strong hardcore followings? Because they're better games that are harder to get into, but once you get into them, they're incredibly rewarding.
Sandbox games are about FREEDOM. Less restrictions. That's why I say OW PvP is an inherently sandbox feature. And when examining a game by its features, one of the biggest questions you can ask is how does it do pvp, so for a sandbox game to have such a big chunk of the game (pvp) be un-sandbox is a little bit weird.
You talk about pvp sandboxes being tried over and over (which isn't true), yet you advocate separate pvp/pve servers. This silly idea has already been debunked more than a few times in this very thread.
I don't know how you can debunk something that generally works OK. It may not be great for PvPers but they shouldn't be playing MMORPG's anyway.
What's been debunked over and over is that a pvp and nonpvp server setup is an acceptable "compromise." It's been explained time and time again how a game that can separate out pvp and still be a functioning game isn't a game that had pvp built into it naturally. If you can just turn it off, then it's clearly not that important to the game as a whole.
You say it's been working pretty well so far.... YEAH FOR YOU.
Also, what exactly do you mean pvpers shouldn't be playing mmorpgs??
Ya, and I think PvE players should go play single player games if they want low risk and all the rewards. So what then?
Don't try to reason with them. they don't even try to understand for half a second.
It's water and oil, they don't mix and they wont no matter how much you shake it up. Aspects like "themapark", "sandbox", "WoW", "EvE", etc. are all being used to label things when it's all just smoke and mirrors. If an MMO doesn't have PvP as a focus it makes it WoW-like? wha?
Not just that, but also an emphasis on quest hubs, "end-game content" such as raids and monotonous grinding (particularly gear grinding) are what make games Wow-Clones.
Exactly. The inclusion or exclusion of full PvP does not make, or not make, a themepark. You yourself said that and I just can't agree as freedom in a gameworld goes much farther than who you can attack.
Some people do not want to be killed by other people in a fantasy MMO. No matter what you or any other person tries to add to that it wont change. Trying to do so by calling names or stereotyping just makes said person look foolish.
The PvE crowd is CONSTANTLY insulting and slandering the PvP crowd. In fact rarely does the pvp crowd get heated over people simply saying they don't want to play a game with ow pvp. We get heated when you guys arrogantly claim something about us, while at the same time totally misunderstanding our intentions. For instance, the way people act like separate pvp and non-pvp servers is the answer... even though it's been debunked in detail several times. Or the way they say pvp advocates just want to gank people and bind camp them, etc. This has happened to me personally at least half a dozen times in this very thread.
I agree that no one should be insulting others over features in a video game. Using the word "carebear" is an example of this making those that don't like PvP seem weak. You have to admit that some PvP advocates carry a type of brovado because they PvP. It looks bad on both sides. An argument for seperate servers does not need to be "corrected" and should not be taken as an insult. It's not a PvE problem that PvP has to be all on or all off. It's unfortunate that it needs to be that way and will be a major hurdle for developers. The ganking issue is per player for both sides. You may not do it but you only speak for yourself. I myself played through constant ganking in Aion. It does happen and if you aren't one of them why would you be insulted when someone brings it up?
I think it's wrong to assume that just because it's an opinion opposite yours that it's wrong. Many people on this site, including myself, have been playing MMOs 10+ years. While this by no means makes anyone an expert most have played through quite a few titles.
Bottom line: the pvp crowd is far more reasonable and level-headed than the pve crowd. The pve crowd is constantly chiming in with tired ideas and arrogantly presenting them like THEY HAVE THE MAGICAL SOLUTION.... meanwhile their posts make it clear they're incredibly inexperienced in ow pvp games. The majority of the pvp crowd's posts are correcting people in their incorrect assumptions, or defending their character after being called a baby killer or whatever.
No, I don't think so. The PvP standpoint in this thread is so rigid it would break in a breeze. I think that good points have been made for why it needs to be that way (thank Ramanadjinn) but it is far from reasonable. The "corrections" have come in the form of talking down every attempt at a compromise, which this thread was about in the first place. I agree again that slander is uncalled for no matter who it's said to.
I'm not specifically talking to you DavisFlight about the above comments but am aiming it more towards the fact there is no misunderstanding here. We understand completely. To be a good PvP game it must be the most important aspect that all other game system form around. Well PvE isn't like that, it's not as rigid and is more appealing to developers because as strong as the want is from PvPers to have a "pure" PvP game I bet they will still play if the PvP is good and meaningful.
It doesn't have to be the most important aspect. It just has to be built into the game rather than be an afterthought or a mini-game. And the other systems of the game don't have to "form around" it. They should work interdependently. We don't want a "pure" pvp game... we just don't want a game that puts restrictions on us because of the whims of the most vocal players.
You had me all the way until the end. Not having those restrictions makes the whole argument ground out. It's very simple, let PvP be consentual and you'll have many, many people on board. Again, it's all or nothing I guess, which is fine I guess. I think part of the reason people have preconcieved notions about PvP is that it tries to dictate what can be done to others. When someone plays a game with thier free time they don't want it decided by someone else. It's an MMO of course and that will happen regardless to a point but even bad group members are still intending to work towards the same goal.
I applaud you for hoisting the PvP flag like you are but some of the comments you make are far too reaching and are assuming. Between the WoW if no PvP comment to people who want depth and challange being okay with OWPvP. Those who can stomach it? You are far in friend and I see your view but can't get on board. I think this deserves to be in The Pub by now. I'll read your replies because you seem very good at relaying your point.
I can't say I hope EQN is to your liking but I can say I hope you'll play it and enjoy it as I plan to do the same.
You talk about pvp sandboxes being tried over and over (which isn't true), yet you advocate separate pvp/pve servers. This silly idea has already been debunked more than a few times in this very thread.
I don't know how you can debunk something that generally works OK. It may not be great for PvPers but they shouldn't be playing MMORPG's anyway.
What's been debunked over and over is that a pvp and nonpvp server setup is an acceptable "compromise." It's been explained time and time again how a game that can separate out pvp and still be a functioning game isn't a game that had pvp built into it naturally. If you can just turn it off, then it's clearly not that important to the game as a whole.
You say it's been working pretty well so far.... YEAH FOR YOU.
Also, what exactly do you mean pvpers shouldn't be playing mmorpgs??
Ya, and I think PvE players should go play single player games if they want low risk and all the rewards. So what then?
Don't try to reason with them. they don't even try to understand for half a second.
It's water and oil, they don't mix and they wont no matter how much you shake it up. Aspects like "themapark", "sandbox", "WoW", "EvE", etc. are all being used to label things when it's all just smoke and mirrors. If an MMO doesn't have PvP as a focus it makes it WoW-like? wha?
Not just that, but also an emphasis on quest hubs, "end-game content" such as raids and monotonous grinding (particularly gear grinding) are what make games Wow-Clones.
Exactly. The inclusion or exclusion of full PvP does not make, or not make, a themepark. You yourself said that and I just can't agree as freedom in a gameworld goes much farther than who you can attack.
Themepark to Sandbox is a sliding scale, it's not all one or the other. The things I mentioned are all anti-sandbox features. Including OW PvP makes your game that much more of a sandbox and less of a themepark. Restricting OW PvP makes it that much less of a sandbox.
Some people do not want to be killed by other people in a fantasy MMO. No matter what you or any other person tries to add to that it wont change. Trying to do so by calling names or stereotyping just makes said person look foolish.
The PvE crowd is CONSTANTLY insulting and slandering the PvP crowd. In fact rarely does the pvp crowd get heated over people simply saying they don't want to play a game with ow pvp. We get heated when you guys arrogantly claim something about us, while at the same time totally misunderstanding our intentions. For instance, the way people act like separate pvp and non-pvp servers is the answer... even though it's been debunked in detail several times. Or the way they say pvp advocates just want to gank people and bind camp them, etc. This has happened to me personally at least half a dozen times in this very thread.
I agree that no one should be insulting others over features in a video game. Using the word "carebear" is an example of this making those that don't like PvP seem weak. You have to admit that some PvP advocates carry a type of brovado because they PvP. It looks bad on both sides. An argument for seperate servers does not need to be "corrected" and should not be taken as an insult. It's not a PvE problem that PvP has to be all on or all off. It's unfortunate that it needs to be that way and will be a major hurdle for developers. The ganking issue is per player for both sides. You may not do it but you only speak for yourself. I myself played through constant ganking in Aion. It does happen and if you aren't one of them why would you be insulted when someone brings it up?
It's not that people want pvp and pve servers, it's that they continue to think it's a "win-win" situation. It isn't.
Yes, I'm sure some of the pvp-crowd have an arrogance to them because they think they're gaming gods. Most of those people aren't the ones on the forums advocating for ow pvp games. And you may not like being called weak, but odds are if you don't like pvp, you're probably not good at it. It doesn't mean you don't like it BECAUSE you're not good at it. But if you don't like it, you probably don't participate in it much, and if you don't participate in it much, you're probably not very well practiced in it.
I think it's wrong to assume that just because it's an opinion opposite yours that it's wrong. Many people on this site, including myself, have been playing MMOs 10+ years. While this by no means makes anyone an expert most have played through quite a few titles.
I call people wrong when they're wrong, that's all. I've never said people are wrong for wanting anything. For instance, I never said people are wrong for wanting pvp/pve servers. However, they ARE wrong when they submit that as an acceptable compromise. All it does is give them what they want, while we don't get what we want.
Bottom line: the pvp crowd is far more reasonable and level-headed than the pve crowd. The pve crowd is constantly chiming in with tired ideas and arrogantly presenting them like THEY HAVE THE MAGICAL SOLUTION.... meanwhile their posts make it clear they're incredibly inexperienced in ow pvp games. The majority of the pvp crowd's posts are correcting people in their incorrect assumptions, or defending their character after being called a baby killer or whatever.
No, I don't think so. The PvP standpoint in this thread is so rigid it would break in a breeze. I think that good points have been made for why it needs to be that way (thank Ramanadjinn) but it is far from reasonable. The "corrections" have come in the form of talking down every attempt at a compromise, which this thread was about in the first place. I agree again that slander is uncalled for no matter who it's said to.
Being rigid isn't a negative! We're not asking for a compromise because a compromise would ruin the type of game we want. That's not being unreasonable. I'm not telling you you have to play this game I'm asking for. Where the pve crowd is unreasonable is in the details. You can say this thread started because it was talking about the compromise, but you know darn well that after 50+ pages, a lot of SPECIFIC issues get discussed. And it's in those discussions where the pve crowd is unreasonable.
I'm not specifically talking to you DavisFlight about the above comments but am aiming it more towards the fact there is no misunderstanding here. We understand completely. To be a good PvP game it must be the most important aspect that all other game system form around. Well PvE isn't like that, it's not as rigid and is more appealing to developers because as strong as the want is from PvPers to have a "pure" PvP game I bet they will still play if the PvP is good and meaningful.
It doesn't have to be the most important aspect. It just has to be built into the game rather than be an afterthought or a mini-game. And the other systems of the game don't have to "form around" it. They should work interdependently. We don't want a "pure" pvp game... we just don't want a game that puts restrictions on us because of the whims of the most vocal players.
You had me all the way until the end. Not having those restrictions makes the whole argument ground out. It's very simple, let PvP be consentual and you'll have many, many people on board. Again, it's all or nothing I guess, which is fine I guess. I think part of the reason people have preconcieved notions about PvP is that it tries to dictate what can be done to others. When someone plays a game with thier free time they don't want it decided by someone else. It's an MMO of course and that will happen regardless to a point but even bad group members are still intending to work towards the same goal.
First of all, the paragraph you're responding to is me correcting your misconceptions about the kind of game we want. Second, I'm not sure why you guys argue from the standpoint that this has to be a game for everybody. Consensual pvp is NO compromise. To think it is shows that you guys are just completely unwilling to read the things we've said OVER AND OVER AND OVER. The type of game we want is one with risk/reward...... RISK/reward. If I can farm/harvest in peace, there's no risk.
First of all, the paragraph you're responding to is me correcting your misconceptions about the kind of game we want. Second, I'm not sure why you guys argue from the standpoint that this has to be a game for everybody. Consensual pvp is NO compromise. To think it is shows that you guys are just completely unwilling to read the things we've said OVER AND OVER AND OVER. The type of game we want is one with risk/reward...... RISK/reward. If I can farm/harvest in peace, there's no risk.
Can risk/reward only be achieved by having OW PVP? Isn't it possible to have the danger provided by mobs. What if the monsters would loot your body after they have killed you?
Do you think that the PVE players don't want risk/rewards?
you're assuming it would be free for all pking. There should be interesting rules/laws/penalties involving killing people (especially people of the same faction/clan/race/whatever), but it shouldn't be IMPOSSIBLE. You should always have the possibility of somebody being evil and betraying his own kin. How is it fun or interesting to have things be scripted and predictable?
Because what you offer is more predictable, everyone will turn into an asshole. When you go into lowsec in EVE, do you assume most people are not interested in shooting you? Will most people not bother you? Completely false. Not to mention every alliance being NBSI.
I don't know anything about EVE. But in UO the vast majority of the people you met out in the wild were "blue" and absolutely did not attack you. There were PK's for sure, but by far the most people you ran into were law abiding citizens. So as usual from the PvE crowd, you're just assuming things about ow pvp games that simply aren't true. I'm sure SOME games are like that, but the fact that games have done it right (UO) means that it can be done again. And UO didn't even do everything it could. Like I've said before, the bounty hunter system was basically non-existent, and you STILL had guilds that specialized in hunting reds.
People are stupid, in MMO's they become even more stupid because it's "just a game", you need to give them some boundaries and structure so they don't go haywire.
Yes. NOBODY is saying to have no boundaries. I'm not sure why we have to say this so often. Do you guys just not read our posts? We have consistently said that there should be rules in place, just like there are in real life.
As for penalties, sure. Like I said in another thread. Murder? Banished from all main cities forever and KOS for all guards (well, actually, there are funkier things to do here with EQ's lore). Killed someone 3 times? Death penalty and character wipe. If you implement that, I'll be happy. Don't like it? Well, shit, murdering people kinda has consequences, you know.
This is a HORRIBLE idea. Basically what it will mean is nobody will PK ever. period.
Sorry if you already gave your ideas, but what are your suggestions for rules/policing OW PVP?
After a year or so playing FFA DAoC, I never game another FFA fantasy mmo a chance. I don't believe any have had long term success since. DAoC only managed to keep people interested for a year on the two FFA servers before they imploded and people went to the regular PVP servers and then on to WoW "PvP" servers.
I'm one of those in favor of either a FFA PVP system with little dev built rules or a flag system that would please the majority of players (obviously not those on the far ends of PVE/PVP).
I think FFA or OW PVP sounds great in theory, but in reality, it doesn't seem to pan out. UO and EVE are kind of their own thing and I don't see the same success happening in other games that don't also copy what makes UO and EVE what they are.
Hopefully CU and PFO make it to release one day and do OW PVP right, but only time will tell. I'm assuming EQN will not be what many of us are looking for when it comes to PVP, but hopefully it is still a great game for what it is.
I'm expecting a flag system that rewards and encourages those that choose to PVP and take risks, while still letting those that wish to stay safe to have an enjoyable experience, but not the "full" experience.
Originally posted by DamonVile If a pve player can be killed by a pvp player it's a pvp game. It doesn't matter what mechanic you use.
In a sandbox game there are no PvE, nor PvP players. I don't think I've played many sandbox games, if any, that didn't allow PvP combat mechanics to take place. Even in "safe" places.
Come to think of it, I also can not think of a single sandbox game without pvp either.
And for some reason people try to argue with me when I say that pvp is inherently a sandbox feature.
amazing what wishful thinking can do to some people!
let me rephrase that : pvp is inherently a feature for you.
you're assuming it would be free for all pking. There should be interesting rules/laws/penalties involving killing people (especially people of the same faction/clan/race/whatever), but it shouldn't be IMPOSSIBLE. You should always have the possibility of somebody being evil and betraying his own kin. How is it fun or interesting to have things be scripted and predictable?
Because what you offer is more predictable, everyone will turn into an asshole. When you go into lowsec in EVE, do you assume most people are not interested in shooting you? Will most people not bother you? Completely false. Not to mention every alliance being NBSI.
I don't know anything about EVE. But in UO the vast majority of the people you met out in the wild were "blue" and absolutely did not attack you. There were PK's for sure, but by far the most people you ran into were law abiding citizens. So as usual from the PvE crowd, you're just assuming things about ow pvp games that simply aren't true. I'm sure SOME games are like that, but the fact that games have done it right (UO) means that it can be done again. And UO didn't even do everything it could. Like I've said before, the bounty hunter system was basically non-existent, and you STILL had guilds that specialized in hunting reds.
People are stupid, in MMO's they become even more stupid because it's "just a game", you need to give them some boundaries and structure so they don't go haywire.
Yes. NOBODY is saying to have no boundaries. I'm not sure why we have to say this so often. Do you guys just not read our posts? We have consistently said that there should be rules in place, just like there are in real life.
As for penalties, sure. Like I said in another thread. Murder? Banished from all main cities forever and KOS for all guards (well, actually, there are funkier things to do here with EQ's lore). Killed someone 3 times? Death penalty and character wipe. If you implement that, I'll be happy. Don't like it? Well, shit, murdering people kinda has consequences, you know.
This is a HORRIBLE idea. Basically what it will mean is nobody will PK ever. period.
unfortunately the communities we had in UO days, have degraded for the worse. back in those days. people enjoyed fair fights, enjoyed challenge. had something called Honor and respect for their foes, (for the most part) back in those days, if you were a douchebag, you would risk facing perma isolation from the server. reputation was something that mattered.
nowadays we have a new kind of gamer. much younger generation. (i call it the wow generation) that's the reason that pvp nowadays is not what it used to be. and that s the reason so many former hardcore pvpers (including myself) avoid that kind of games like the plague, and rather play shooters instead.
For me the real problem with an OW FFA PvP, is that the vast majority of people that want this kind of PvP is only interested in ganking other players. Someone have said that some rules can be introduced to discourage this behaviour but i dont think that PKers will stop just for some limitations or malus, Futhermore if you implement this type of PvP you cant harshly punish people that do it, is a contradiction.
The fact that in EQN will be factions dont change the situation, i think that PKers are not really interested in the RP aspect of the PVP and if the game will allow to attack even members of the same faction (as someone have proposed) they will start to kill their faction's mates too...not the kind of people i want to play with.
Also in an OW FFA PvP game, a complex PvE will be impossible if you dont istance all the PvE contents, because you cant simoultaneously handle a difficult dungeon or raid and an enemy players attack and i dont want to see an all istanced world.
"Brute force not work? It because you not use enought of it" -Karg, Ogryn Bone'ead.
For me the real problem with an OW FFA PvP, is that the vast majority of people that want this kind of PvP is only interested in ganking other players. Someone have said that some rules can be introduced to discourage this behaviour but i dont think that PKers will stop just for some limitations or malus, Futhermore if you implement this type of PvP you cant harshly punish people that do it, is a contradiction.
The fact that in EQN will be factions dont change the situation, i think that PKers are not really interested in the RP aspect of the PVP and if the game will allow to attack even members of the same faction (as someone have proposed) they will start to kill their faction's mates too...not the kind of people i want to play with.
Also in an OW FFA PvP game, a complex PvE will be impossible if you dont istance all the PvE contents, because you cant simoultaneously handle a difficult dungeon or raid and an enemy players attack and i dont want to see an all istanced world.
the penalties are a joke, take archeage as an example. or even lineage 2, in lineage 2 if you were a red player, pker, you were kos in every city yes, you also had a higher % of dropping equipped items that could be looted by whoever killed you. but those penalties became very easy to bypass. all you needed was a few buddies to help you out. they would hold your valuable items for you. and you could get rid of the red pker status after grinding some mobs for a few mins. then you were ready to pk again.
in archeage, they have a penalty that sends the pker, to a jail, after some kills. while in jail, you can have fun playing mini games, or you can iether escape. (that penalty seems more like a reward to me)
I feel like a lot of you have forgotten how EQ1 (pre luclin) days of faction grinding and what that truly meant. You needed faction reputation for everything! Epic weapons, higher lvl spells, etc...
If you "gank" someone, you lose faction from whatever main faction they belong to. Like maybe you are an Ogre, and you kill a Dark Elf you lose Neriak faction. If you go to Neriak, those guards will KILL YOU! But maybe you need that Neriak reputation as an Ogre? So you just don't gank Dark Elves. If either a Dark Elf or an Ogre go to the Dwarf area, THOSE guards will kill you lol.
This also means that you can switch sides of a fight and be a Freeport Ogre.
I played on FFA PvP servers, and there were guards that where your friend in almost every zone till later in the game. That means that there are safe areas in every part of the game. You would have to go out into the middle of nowhere to get ganked. And no one is just gonna stroll out to the middle of nowhere and wait for people.
The old hotspots for ganking were also at the entrances to various dungeons. With all the new technology that the MMO dev teams have, it's not really an issue anymore.
So I say that they should make it all PvP. Just make it super sandboxy. If some dude is being a troll in my party, I want to have the right to slay him! I want to camp that dude! I want him to know that his behavior is not gonna fly. I'll just farm the rep back up later. To me, it's worth it.
Lastly, I really feel that if I can't run through the sewers of Free Port and not be scared of being ganked, that it will break immersion. And immersion is something that A LOT of games lack today. Immersion was something that EQ1 had nailed down. Hence why WoW was an EQ clone, and not a UA or DAoC clone.
the penalties are a joke, take archeage as an example. or even lineage 2, in lineage 2 if you were a red player, pker, you were kos in every city yes, you also had a higher % of dropping equipped items that could be looted by whoever killed you. but those penalties became very easy to bypass. all you needed was a few buddies to help you out. they would hold your valuable items for you. and you could get rid of the red pker status after grinding some mobs for a few mins. then you were ready to pk again.
in archeage, they have a penalty that sends the pker, to a jail, after some kills. while in jail, you can have fun playing mini games, or you can iether escape. (that penalty seems more like a reward to me)
in Aion, Tera, penalty for pking, also a joke.
Age of Wusgu seems to have the harsher penalties (I saw a ganker QQing over it in fact), but you can still be busted out of jail by friends.
I personally think that FFA PvP games should have the same penalty as real life for crimes. Depending on the severity: permadeath/jail for life (aka character banning) , long jail time (suspended character, time depends on crime) with a brand that never leave once you have done your time, heavy financial penalties, etc.
The point is to discourage deviant behaviors (player hunting is not a community building tool), while allowing people to role-play criminals (with everything that come with it). Non-consentual PvP should always have harsh penalty, because this is how society have been able to maintain order. These penalty do not apply if the player consent to fight: so arena, duels, war (with a declaration of war), etc. would follow other rules.
If EQ allows for ANY FORM of nonconsensual killing, I won't stay around.. I will only play PvE games, PvP should have their own dedicated servers, like it was in the beginning..
Originally posted by Rydeson If EQ allows for ANY FORM of nonconsensual killing, I won't stay around.. I will only play PvE games, PvP should have their own dedicated servers, like it was in the beginning..
it seems, every upcoming sandbox is going the Free for all pvp route. not a very smart approach.
First of all, the paragraph you're responding to is me correcting your misconceptions about the kind of game we want. Second, I'm not sure why you guys argue from the standpoint that this has to be a game for everybody. Consensual pvp is NO compromise. To think it is shows that you guys are just completely unwilling to read the things we've said OVER AND OVER AND OVER. The type of game we want is one with risk/reward...... RISK/reward. If I can farm/harvest in peace, there's no risk.
Can risk/reward only be achieved by having OW PVP? Isn't it possible to have the danger provided by mobs. What if the monsters would loot your body after they have killed you?
Do you think that the PVE players don't want risk/rewards?
I think in general pve players are less interested in risk/rewards than the ow pvp players.
And yes it's possible to have risk without ow pvp. But OW PvP is the most interesting and deep way to do it because you can then have things like community politics and self policing. It's also an organic way to have pvp for the people who enjoy fighting, without having it be some tacked on arena or battleground.
Let me ask you this, if a pve player is ok with dying to mobs and losing their stuff (which is what I assume the risk would be) why are they not ok with dying to a player and losing their stuff?
you're assuming it would be free for all pking. There should be interesting rules/laws/penalties involving killing people (especially people of the same faction/clan/race/whatever), but it shouldn't be IMPOSSIBLE. You should always have the possibility of somebody being evil and betraying his own kin. How is it fun or interesting to have things be scripted and predictable?
Because what you offer is more predictable, everyone will turn into an asshole. When you go into lowsec in EVE, do you assume most people are not interested in shooting you? Will most people not bother you? Completely false. Not to mention every alliance being NBSI.
I don't know anything about EVE. But in UO the vast majority of the people you met out in the wild were "blue" and absolutely did not attack you. There were PK's for sure, but by far the most people you ran into were law abiding citizens. So as usual from the PvE crowd, you're just assuming things about ow pvp games that simply aren't true. I'm sure SOME games are like that, but the fact that games have done it right (UO) means that it can be done again. And UO didn't even do everything it could. Like I've said before, the bounty hunter system was basically non-existent, and you STILL had guilds that specialized in hunting reds.
People are stupid, in MMO's they become even more stupid because it's "just a game", you need to give them some boundaries and structure so they don't go haywire.
Yes. NOBODY is saying to have no boundaries. I'm not sure why we have to say this so often. Do you guys just not read our posts? We have consistently said that there should be rules in place, just like there are in real life.
As for penalties, sure. Like I said in another thread. Murder? Banished from all main cities forever and KOS for all guards (well, actually, there are funkier things to do here with EQ's lore). Killed someone 3 times? Death penalty and character wipe. If you implement that, I'll be happy. Don't like it? Well, shit, murdering people kinda has consequences, you know.
This is a HORRIBLE idea. Basically what it will mean is nobody will PK ever. period.
Sorry if you already gave your ideas, but what are your suggestions for rules/policing OW PVP?
Basically UO's system except with a better bounty hunting system. NPC guards in the major cities that attack anybody who commits a crime within the city or any known murderers (reds) regardless of whether they've committed a crime recently. Have 1 or 2 cities with NO guards so the reds can still bank and buy stuff from npc's. Buccaneer's Den in UO was like this and it was a dangerous dangerous place. It was interesting and made for a good pvp hotspot for people looking for reds to kill.
Stick with their blue, grey red system. Blue = innocent. Grey = commited a crime (grey status goes away in a few minutes, depending on crime). Red = murderer (5 counts or so, can be tweaked). Murder counts decay at a rate of 1/24hours (can also be tweaked).
As for the bounty system, whenever somebody is murdered by another player, you have the opportunity to place a bounty on the person's head. If anybody kills that murderer and brings his head to a designated NPC, that player receives the full bounty and the murderer receives temporary statloss corresponding to how many kill counts he has. Also there will be a bounty board in the major cities with the murder counts of all players, and their last known kill location.
All of these things can be tweaked accordingly. For instance, you can have NPC's chipping on bounties to give more of an incentive for people to become bounty hunters if the player bounties don't end up being enough.
After a year or so playing FFA DAoC, I never game another FFA fantasy mmo a chance. I don't believe any have had long term success since. DAoC only managed to keep people interested for a year on the two FFA servers before they imploded and people went to the regular PVP servers and then on to WoW "PvP" servers.
I'm one of those in favor of either a FFA PVP system with little dev built rules or a flag system that would please the majority of players (obviously not those on the far ends of PVE/PVP).
I think FFA or OW PVP sounds great in theory, but in reality, it doesn't seem to pan out. UO and EVE are kind of their own thing and I don't see the same success happening in other games that don't also copy what makes UO and EVE what they are.
Hopefully CU and PFO make it to release one day and do OW PVP right, but only time will tell. I'm assuming EQN will not be what many of us are looking for when it comes to PVP, but hopefully it is still a great game for what it is.
I'm expecting a flag system that rewards and encourages those that choose to PVP and take risks, while still letting those that wish to stay safe to have an enjoyable experience, but not the "full" experience.
Maybe it'll be hard to replicate EVE's and UO's success, but nobody has really made one similar since so it's impossible to say. The only ones that have been close have been MO and DF, which both were too harsh and had too few penalties. They were also buggy and had other problems. So as far as I'm concerned, we have no reason to think a well made, fair, ow pvp sandbox game couldn't do extremely well.
Originally posted by DamonVile If a pve player can be killed by a pvp player it's a pvp game. It doesn't matter what mechanic you use.
In a sandbox game there are no PvE, nor PvP players. I don't think I've played many sandbox games, if any, that didn't allow PvP combat mechanics to take place. Even in "safe" places.
Come to think of it, I also can not think of a single sandbox game without pvp either.
And for some reason people try to argue with me when I say that pvp is inherently a sandbox feature.
amazing what wishful thinking can do to some people!
let me rephrase that : pvp is inherently a feature for you.
No, it's inherently a sandbox feature. It's not subjective. Sandbox feature isn't just whatever you like it to be. OW PvP is a sandbox feature because sandbox games aim to reduce artificial restrictions on players.
you're assuming it would be free for all pking. There should be interesting rules/laws/penalties involving killing people (especially people of the same faction/clan/race/whatever), but it shouldn't be IMPOSSIBLE. You should always have the possibility of somebody being evil and betraying his own kin. How is it fun or interesting to have things be scripted and predictable?
Because what you offer is more predictable, everyone will turn into an asshole. When you go into lowsec in EVE, do you assume most people are not interested in shooting you? Will most people not bother you? Completely false. Not to mention every alliance being NBSI.
I don't know anything about EVE. But in UO the vast majority of the people you met out in the wild were "blue" and absolutely did not attack you. There were PK's for sure, but by far the most people you ran into were law abiding citizens. So as usual from the PvE crowd, you're just assuming things about ow pvp games that simply aren't true. I'm sure SOME games are like that, but the fact that games have done it right (UO) means that it can be done again. And UO didn't even do everything it could. Like I've said before, the bounty hunter system was basically non-existent, and you STILL had guilds that specialized in hunting reds.
People are stupid, in MMO's they become even more stupid because it's "just a game", you need to give them some boundaries and structure so they don't go haywire.
Yes. NOBODY is saying to have no boundaries. I'm not sure why we have to say this so often. Do you guys just not read our posts? We have consistently said that there should be rules in place, just like there are in real life.
As for penalties, sure. Like I said in another thread. Murder? Banished from all main cities forever and KOS for all guards (well, actually, there are funkier things to do here with EQ's lore). Killed someone 3 times? Death penalty and character wipe. If you implement that, I'll be happy. Don't like it? Well, shit, murdering people kinda has consequences, you know.
This is a HORRIBLE idea. Basically what it will mean is nobody will PK ever. period.
unfortunately the communities we had in UO days, have degraded for the worse. back in those days. people enjoyed fair fights, enjoyed challenge. had something called Honor and respect for their foes, (for the most part) back in those days, if you were a douchebag, you would risk facing perma isolation from the server. reputation was something that mattered.
nowadays we have a new kind of gamer. much younger generation. (i call it the wow generation) that's the reason that pvp nowadays is not what it used to be. and that s the reason so many former hardcore pvpers (including myself) avoid that kind of games like the plague, and rather play shooters instead.
Just another pve crowd person talking about something they have no experience in. It's only your warped biased perception that people don't have "honor" or "respect" for their foes. The Darkfall community (one of the most hardcore communities out there) look down on griefers and people who jump low level people at mob spawns. It's like a very common thing for somebody to post some pvp video on the forums, only to be ridiculed by everybody because it shows him doing these things. And that's in a game that puts almost no limits on crimes/murdering people.
For me the real problem with an OW FFA PvP, is that the vast majority of people that want this kind of PvP is only interested in ganking other players.
Honestly, you people should be banned for this ridiculous slander. You have NO idea what you're talking about. No pvp-crowd person here has indicated that, yet you guys keep saying this. Stop making stuff up about us please. It shows you have no real argument.
Someone have said that some rules can be introduced to discourage this behaviour but i dont think that PKers will stop just for some limitations or malus, Futhermore if you implement this type of PvP you cant harshly punish people that do it, is a contradiction.
Wrong. I'm not sure what to say besides just flat out wrong. If you went out into the harsh wilderness of UO, the VAST majority of the people were "blue" players and didn't attack you. the VAST majority. And UO's system wasn't even particularly well-suited to stop pking.
Also, it's not a contradiction at all. What are you even talking about? What's wrong with saying "yes you can murder people, but there will be consequences?" That's not a contradiction.
The fact that in EQN will be factions dont change the situation, i think that PKers are not really interested in the RP aspect of the PVP and if the game will allow to attack even members of the same faction (as someone have proposed) they will start to kill their faction's mates too...not the kind of people i want to play with.
Well good thing those people would be basically non-existent if the game is done well. I'm in a very large clan in DFUW and we never.... NEVER have people ganking members. Not even members of allied clans. I can think of ONE time it has happened since the game launched in mid april. ONE TIME! And this is among hundreds of players. And there isn't even any systematic reason why not. You don't get banned for it. You don't get murder counts for it. Nothing. The only thing stopping them is the community. The clan doesn't want that kind of person in it so they would get ganked/kicked from the clan.
Also in an OW FFA PvP game, a complex PvE will be impossible if you dont istance all the PvE contents, because you cant simoultaneously handle a difficult dungeon or raid and an enemy players attack and i dont want to see an all istanced world.
There are difficult dungeons in DFUW. It's just harder to accomplish than in themeparks.
the penalties are a joke, take archeage as an example. or even lineage 2, in lineage 2 if you were a red player, pker, you were kos in every city yes, you also had a higher % of dropping equipped items that could be looted by whoever killed you. but those penalties became very easy to bypass. all you needed was a few buddies to help you out. they would hold your valuable items for you. and you could get rid of the red pker status after grinding some mobs for a few mins. then you were ready to pk again.
in archeage, they have a penalty that sends the pker, to a jail, after some kills. while in jail, you can have fun playing mini games, or you can iether escape. (that penalty seems more like a reward to me)
in Aion, Tera, penalty for pking, also a joke.
Age of Wusgu seems to have the harsher penalties (I saw a ganker QQing over it in fact), but you can still be busted out of jail by friends.
I personally think that FFA PvP games should have the same penalty as real life for crimes. Depending on the severity: permadeath/jail for life (aka character banning) , long jail time (suspended character, time depends on crime) with a brand that never leave once you have done your time, heavy financial penalties, etc.
The point is to discourage deviant behaviors (player hunting is not a community building tool), while allowing people to role-play criminals (with everything that come with it). Non-consentual PvP should always have harsh penalty, because this is how society have been able to maintain order. These penalty do not apply if the player consent to fight: so arena, duels, war (with a declaration of war), etc. would follow other rules.
I'm still waiting for that...
Player hunting absolutely is a community building tool. And the kind of system you're proposing is a preposterous waste of time because it'll just mean nobody will kill anybody else. If your goal is to have 0 murderers, just turn pvp off. Why have the illusory system of "OW PVP! COME AND GET IT!" if literally nobody will ever do it?
For me the real problem with an OW FFA PvP, is that the vast majority of people that want this kind of PvP is only interested in ganking other players. Someone have said that some rules can be introduced to discourage this behaviour but i dont think that PKers will stop just for some limitations or malus, Futhermore if you implement this type of PvP you cant harshly punish people that do it, is a contradiction.
The fact that in EQN will be factions dont change the situation, i think that PKers are not really interested in the RP aspect of the PVP and if the game will allow to attack even members of the same faction (as someone have proposed) they will start to kill their faction's mates too...not the kind of people i want to play with.
Also in an OW FFA PvP game, a complex PvE will be impossible if you dont istance all the PvE contents, because you cant simoultaneously handle a difficult dungeon or raid and an enemy players attack and i dont want to see an all istanced world.
the penalties are a joke, take archeage as an example. or even lineage 2, in lineage 2 if you were a red player, pker, you were kos in every city yes, you also had a higher % of dropping equipped items that could be looted by whoever killed you. but those penalties became very easy to bypass. all you needed was a few buddies to help you out. they would hold your valuable items for you. and you could get rid of the red pker status after grinding some mobs for a few mins. then you were ready to pk again.
in archeage, they have a penalty that sends the pker, to a jail, after some kills. while in jail, you can have fun playing mini games, or you can iether escape. (that penalty seems more like a reward to me)
in Aion, Tera, penalty for pking, also a joke.
So because some games have done a bad job of implementing penalties, that means what exactly?
Comments
Because most sandboxes up until now have featured full PvP that means it has to be a feature? No, not just a feature but the main feature? This is were lines get crossed because no one is saying no PvP at all. Yet, when someone mentions (as highlighted above) that PvP wasn't on everywhere all the time it's suddenly taken as not there at all. I know, I know, it's all or nothing.
Even if your statement has been the case up until now, that sandoxes have been all PvP, what does that say? The ones that are out minus EvE are not that great. That's because the right one hasn't been produced by a AAA team right? Well the same could be said for a mixed PvP/PvE sandbox, could it not? It just hasn't been made yet. This is a matter of opinion but just because you can build things in a sandbox doesn't automatically mean it should be designed for someone else to kick down.
The desire for sandbox gameplay has finally come to the spotlight. Although it may not mean full on PvP it may just be great enough for PvPers to get on board with as well as bored themepark players. I think a lot of different playstyles can be helped by a well, and carefully made, sandbox. I hope EQN is just that. SoE is in the driver's seat and I hope they know what they are doing. Six more days!
No, I didn't say that, did I? I didn't say it has to be the main feature, and I didn't say that BECAUSE most sandbox games have pvp that means it's a sandbox feature. In fact I'm saying it's a sandbox feature and that's why most sandbox games have it. If you PvE crowd want us to not snap at you so much, try not to twist our words around so much and waste our time explaining things several times.
PvP zones, separate servers, flagging systems effectively emasculates the type of game we're asking for. For some infinitely frustrating reason you guys will not let go of the idea that we don't just want to fight people. It's not that we're the "pvp only" crowd. We want there to be consequences to playing greedy/sloppy, and we want our successes to be more satisfying. OW PvP achieves that more interestingly and organically than anything I've played. So yes, if you segregate pvp too much, or make it so people can choose when and where they fight and with whom, then that's not the game we want.
I'm not sure if you meant it sarcastically but yes, there hasn't been a really big budget ow pvp sandbox game.
I don't know what you mean by a "pvp/pve sandbox" but I assume you mean one where pvp is optional in some way? Either separated into specific zones, flagging systems, separate servers, etc? I'd venture a guess and say it's because typically people who want depth to their game, and a challenge to things like crafting or questing probably are ok with OW PvP, in general. There's no doubt in my mind that an OW PvP game, done well, is a more satisfying game than one without... it's just a matter of how much you can stomach. If you can take the losses and become intrigued by the game, there's a good chance you're gonna be a fan of the genre for life.
Why do you think such tiny games like DF, UO (big at the time but relatively small compared to AAA games), Shadowbane have such strong hardcore followings? Because they're better games that are harder to get into, but once you get into them, they're incredibly rewarding.
Sandbox games are about FREEDOM. Less restrictions. That's why I say OW PvP is an inherently sandbox feature. And when examining a game by its features, one of the biggest questions you can ask is how does it do pvp, so for a sandbox game to have such a big chunk of the game (pvp) be un-sandbox is a little bit weird.
Holophonist
I applaud you for hoisting the PvP flag like you are but some of the comments you make are far too reaching and are assuming. Between the WoW if no PvP comment to people who want depth and challange being okay with OWPvP. Those who can stomach it? You are far in friend and I see your view but can't get on board. I think this deserves to be in The Pub by now. I'll read your replies because you seem very good at relaying your point.
I can't say I hope EQN is to your liking but I can say I hope you'll play it and enjoy it as I plan to do the same.
Themepark to Sandbox is a sliding scale, it's not all one or the other. The things I mentioned are all anti-sandbox features. Including OW PvP makes your game that much more of a sandbox and less of a themepark. Restricting OW PvP makes it that much less of a sandbox.
It's not that people want pvp and pve servers, it's that they continue to think it's a "win-win" situation. It isn't.
Yes, I'm sure some of the pvp-crowd have an arrogance to them because they think they're gaming gods. Most of those people aren't the ones on the forums advocating for ow pvp games. And you may not like being called weak, but odds are if you don't like pvp, you're probably not good at it. It doesn't mean you don't like it BECAUSE you're not good at it. But if you don't like it, you probably don't participate in it much, and if you don't participate in it much, you're probably not very well practiced in it.
I call people wrong when they're wrong, that's all. I've never said people are wrong for wanting anything. For instance, I never said people are wrong for wanting pvp/pve servers. However, they ARE wrong when they submit that as an acceptable compromise. All it does is give them what they want, while we don't get what we want.
Being rigid isn't a negative! We're not asking for a compromise because a compromise would ruin the type of game we want. That's not being unreasonable. I'm not telling you you have to play this game I'm asking for. Where the pve crowd is unreasonable is in the details. You can say this thread started because it was talking about the compromise, but you know darn well that after 50+ pages, a lot of SPECIFIC issues get discussed. And it's in those discussions where the pve crowd is unreasonable.
First of all, the paragraph you're responding to is me correcting your misconceptions about the kind of game we want. Second, I'm not sure why you guys argue from the standpoint that this has to be a game for everybody. Consensual pvp is NO compromise. To think it is shows that you guys are just completely unwilling to read the things we've said OVER AND OVER AND OVER. The type of game we want is one with risk/reward...... RISK/reward. If I can farm/harvest in peace, there's no risk.
Can risk/reward only be achieved by having OW PVP? Isn't it possible to have the danger provided by mobs. What if the monsters would loot your body after they have killed you?
Do you think that the PVE players don't want risk/rewards?
Sorry if you already gave your ideas, but what are your suggestions for rules/policing OW PVP?
After a year or so playing FFA DAoC, I never game another FFA fantasy mmo a chance. I don't believe any have had long term success since. DAoC only managed to keep people interested for a year on the two FFA servers before they imploded and people went to the regular PVP servers and then on to WoW "PvP" servers.
I'm one of those in favor of either a FFA PVP system with little dev built rules or a flag system that would please the majority of players (obviously not those on the far ends of PVE/PVP).
I think FFA or OW PVP sounds great in theory, but in reality, it doesn't seem to pan out. UO and EVE are kind of their own thing and I don't see the same success happening in other games that don't also copy what makes UO and EVE what they are.
Hopefully CU and PFO make it to release one day and do OW PVP right, but only time will tell. I'm assuming EQN will not be what many of us are looking for when it comes to PVP, but hopefully it is still a great game for what it is.
I'm expecting a flag system that rewards and encourages those that choose to PVP and take risks, while still letting those that wish to stay safe to have an enjoyable experience, but not the "full" experience.
amazing what wishful thinking can do to some people!
let me rephrase that : pvp is inherently a feature for you.
unfortunately the communities we had in UO days, have degraded for the worse. back in those days. people enjoyed fair fights, enjoyed challenge. had something called Honor and respect for their foes, (for the most part) back in those days, if you were a douchebag, you would risk facing perma isolation from the server. reputation was something that mattered.
nowadays we have a new kind of gamer. much younger generation. (i call it the wow generation) that's the reason that pvp nowadays is not what it used to be. and that s the reason so many former hardcore pvpers (including myself) avoid that kind of games like the plague, and rather play shooters instead.
For me the real problem with an OW FFA PvP, is that the vast majority of people that want this kind of PvP is only interested in ganking other players. Someone have said that some rules can be introduced to discourage this behaviour but i dont think that PKers will stop just for some limitations or malus, Futhermore if you implement this type of PvP you cant harshly punish people that do it, is a contradiction.
The fact that in EQN will be factions dont change the situation, i think that PKers are not really interested in the RP aspect of the PVP and if the game will allow to attack even members of the same faction (as someone have proposed) they will start to kill their faction's mates too...not the kind of people i want to play with.
Also in an OW FFA PvP game, a complex PvE will be impossible if you dont istance all the PvE contents, because you cant simoultaneously handle a difficult dungeon or raid and an enemy players attack and i dont want to see an all istanced world.
"Brute force not work? It because you not use enought of it"
-Karg, Ogryn Bone'ead.
the penalties are a joke, take archeage as an example. or even lineage 2, in lineage 2 if you were a red player, pker, you were kos in every city yes, you also had a higher % of dropping equipped items that could be looted by whoever killed you. but those penalties became very easy to bypass. all you needed was a few buddies to help you out. they would hold your valuable items for you. and you could get rid of the red pker status after grinding some mobs for a few mins. then you were ready to pk again.
in archeage, they have a penalty that sends the pker, to a jail, after some kills. while in jail, you can have fun playing mini games, or you can iether escape. (that penalty seems more like a reward to me)
in Aion, Tera, penalty for pking, also a joke.
The days of "harsh" death penalty is long gone in triple A mmo.
and honesty i miss the excitement i got from staying alive in mmo like Shadowbane or FFXI or even Lineage II,
you also have a different kind of gamer. that's the reason why pvp is not what it used to be.
The penalty in PVP or PVE now are pretty : Click few buttons to repair the items and try over and over again until they accomplish their goal.
Someone screwed up? it's alright keep trying precious players or you can buy our in game cash shop potions.
I feel like a lot of you have forgotten how EQ1 (pre luclin) days of faction grinding and what that truly meant. You needed faction reputation for everything! Epic weapons, higher lvl spells, etc...
If you "gank" someone, you lose faction from whatever main faction they belong to. Like maybe you are an Ogre, and you kill a Dark Elf you lose Neriak faction. If you go to Neriak, those guards will KILL YOU! But maybe you need that Neriak reputation as an Ogre? So you just don't gank Dark Elves. If either a Dark Elf or an Ogre go to the Dwarf area, THOSE guards will kill you lol.
This also means that you can switch sides of a fight and be a Freeport Ogre.
I played on FFA PvP servers, and there were guards that where your friend in almost every zone till later in the game. That means that there are safe areas in every part of the game. You would have to go out into the middle of nowhere to get ganked. And no one is just gonna stroll out to the middle of nowhere and wait for people.
The old hotspots for ganking were also at the entrances to various dungeons. With all the new technology that the MMO dev teams have, it's not really an issue anymore.
So I say that they should make it all PvP. Just make it super sandboxy. If some dude is being a troll in my party, I want to have the right to slay him! I want to camp that dude! I want him to know that his behavior is not gonna fly. I'll just farm the rep back up later. To me, it's worth it.
Lastly, I really feel that if I can't run through the sewers of Free Port and not be scared of being ganked, that it will break immersion. And immersion is something that A LOT of games lack today. Immersion was something that EQ1 had nailed down. Hence why WoW was an EQ clone, and not a UA or DAoC clone.
Age of Wusgu seems to have the harsher penalties (I saw a ganker QQing over it in fact), but you can still be busted out of jail by friends.
I personally think that FFA PvP games should have the same penalty as real life for crimes. Depending on the severity: permadeath/jail for life (aka character banning) , long jail time (suspended character, time depends on crime) with a brand that never leave once you have done your time, heavy financial penalties, etc.
The point is to discourage deviant behaviors (player hunting is not a community building tool), while allowing people to role-play criminals (with everything that come with it). Non-consentual PvP should always have harsh penalty, because this is how society have been able to maintain order. These penalty do not apply if the player consent to fight: so arena, duels, war (with a declaration of war), etc. would follow other rules.
I'm still waiting for that...
it seems, every upcoming sandbox is going the Free for all pvp route. not a very smart approach.
I think in general pve players are less interested in risk/rewards than the ow pvp players.
And yes it's possible to have risk without ow pvp. But OW PvP is the most interesting and deep way to do it because you can then have things like community politics and self policing. It's also an organic way to have pvp for the people who enjoy fighting, without having it be some tacked on arena or battleground.
Let me ask you this, if a pve player is ok with dying to mobs and losing their stuff (which is what I assume the risk would be) why are they not ok with dying to a player and losing their stuff?
Basically UO's system except with a better bounty hunting system. NPC guards in the major cities that attack anybody who commits a crime within the city or any known murderers (reds) regardless of whether they've committed a crime recently. Have 1 or 2 cities with NO guards so the reds can still bank and buy stuff from npc's. Buccaneer's Den in UO was like this and it was a dangerous dangerous place. It was interesting and made for a good pvp hotspot for people looking for reds to kill.
Stick with their blue, grey red system. Blue = innocent. Grey = commited a crime (grey status goes away in a few minutes, depending on crime). Red = murderer (5 counts or so, can be tweaked). Murder counts decay at a rate of 1/24hours (can also be tweaked).
As for the bounty system, whenever somebody is murdered by another player, you have the opportunity to place a bounty on the person's head. If anybody kills that murderer and brings his head to a designated NPC, that player receives the full bounty and the murderer receives temporary statloss corresponding to how many kill counts he has. Also there will be a bounty board in the major cities with the murder counts of all players, and their last known kill location.
All of these things can be tweaked accordingly. For instance, you can have NPC's chipping on bounties to give more of an incentive for people to become bounty hunters if the player bounties don't end up being enough.
Maybe it'll be hard to replicate EVE's and UO's success, but nobody has really made one similar since so it's impossible to say. The only ones that have been close have been MO and DF, which both were too harsh and had too few penalties. They were also buggy and had other problems. So as far as I'm concerned, we have no reason to think a well made, fair, ow pvp sandbox game couldn't do extremely well.
No, it's inherently a sandbox feature. It's not subjective. Sandbox feature isn't just whatever you like it to be. OW PvP is a sandbox feature because sandbox games aim to reduce artificial restrictions on players.
Just another pve crowd person talking about something they have no experience in. It's only your warped biased perception that people don't have "honor" or "respect" for their foes. The Darkfall community (one of the most hardcore communities out there) look down on griefers and people who jump low level people at mob spawns. It's like a very common thing for somebody to post some pvp video on the forums, only to be ridiculed by everybody because it shows him doing these things. And that's in a game that puts almost no limits on crimes/murdering people.
Honestly, you people should be banned for this ridiculous slander. You have NO idea what you're talking about. No pvp-crowd person here has indicated that, yet you guys keep saying this. Stop making stuff up about us please. It shows you have no real argument.
Wrong. I'm not sure what to say besides just flat out wrong. If you went out into the harsh wilderness of UO, the VAST majority of the people were "blue" players and didn't attack you. the VAST majority. And UO's system wasn't even particularly well-suited to stop pking.
Also, it's not a contradiction at all. What are you even talking about? What's wrong with saying "yes you can murder people, but there will be consequences?" That's not a contradiction.
Well good thing those people would be basically non-existent if the game is done well. I'm in a very large clan in DFUW and we never.... NEVER have people ganking members. Not even members of allied clans. I can think of ONE time it has happened since the game launched in mid april. ONE TIME! And this is among hundreds of players. And there isn't even any systematic reason why not. You don't get banned for it. You don't get murder counts for it. Nothing. The only thing stopping them is the community. The clan doesn't want that kind of person in it so they would get ganked/kicked from the clan.
There are difficult dungeons in DFUW. It's just harder to accomplish than in themeparks.
Player hunting absolutely is a community building tool. And the kind of system you're proposing is a preposterous waste of time because it'll just mean nobody will kill anybody else. If your goal is to have 0 murderers, just turn pvp off. Why have the illusory system of "OW PVP! COME AND GET IT!" if literally nobody will ever do it?
So because some games have done a bad job of implementing penalties, that means what exactly?