And thats where you are wrong. I watch a thriller movie thats PG13 and goto bed and my wife does not sleep well for 3 nights. Same with MMOing the thrill my wife gets from PvE is at the level of rush she is having fun. The rush of PvP and she gets upset and logs off. We all have a level of rush we enjoy. I love jumpping out of planes. My wife thinks a bike ride is a rush going down a hill.
We all like to game at our own speed.
Not every MMORPG needs to be Disney movie so your wife can play it. Problem solved.
And not every MMO needs to be a hack and slash film so you can feel like your a bad ass. I say we stop calling pure PvEers carebears and just wait and see what SoE has in mind for EQN. Maybe you get what you want or maybe PvEers get their dream MMO.
I would hate for EQ Next to be PvP... what's wrong with the way they always have been??
If however, that is where SOE decides to take it, then I hope it's completely open world PvP so the gankers can get everything out of their system and we can get on with playing the game. Having zones and flags and all that is just annoying. Either give me a full PvE (preferred) server with zero PvP or just make the whole thing PvP and hopefully decency and honor will play some sort of part in the entire equation.
I think F2P plus open world PvP is a combo that is just begging to turn off every single hard core Everquest fan since the beginning of the genre. Most smart business decisions don't start by completely alienating your entire fan base.
And not every MMO needs to be a hack and slash film so you can feel like your a bad ass. I say we stop calling pure PvEers carebears and just wait and see what SoE has in mind for EQN. Maybe you get what you want or maybe PvEers get their dream MMO.
I have never called anyone a carebear. I actually quite enjoy PVE. What I don't like is the assumption that every game that comes out needs to be for that specific gamer. Companies offer a product and it's either for that consumer or it's not.
I think F2P plus open world PvP is a combo that is just begging to turn off every single hard core Everquest fan since the beginning of the genre.
Why would they want to pull those hardcores from their other games? Wouldn't it make more sense to try to bring in new blood or bring people back that might be...I don't know...tired from the way things have been done for the last decade in the Themepark realm?
PVE Sandbox with PVP lakes and border towns. /done
How about we give you pve guys the lakes for once.
PvP sandbox with PVE lakes and hobbit towns. /done
edit:
I guess I should clarify why my response is so unenthusiastic.
Segregating PvP players to their own little island isn't the sort of game i'd like to play. I see it as the sort of "compromise" that just tries to hide us away so we can all play together and get us all out of everyone else's way.
If i'm just going to play together with other people who want to pvp I would rather just do it in a game properly designed for people like that.
You guys don't need us whining about how the pvp in our little hole needs more attention and we don't need to stick around in a game that obviously isn't really designed with us in mind.
But there is risk if you dont pvp . Its just risk vrs the environment. The risk doesn't have to be exactly the same for everyone in the game to be just as important for everyone.
If there IS unlimited pvp , there needs to be some sort of anti griefing measures in place
I've never played a non-ow pvp MMO that gives me the same thrill and excitement as an ow pvp one. Whatever feeling you'd like to call it, that's what we want.
Besides, you can't have the same kind of risk with pve. Even if you had a system where dying to a mob causes you to lose some items or whatever. That'll never perfectly emulate what you get when there are players involved. You'll never have the same politics or reputation elements. There are even times I've died to mobs and had to res and run back to my body.... blood pumping in anticipation to see if anybody has looted my corpse.
And thats where you are wrong. I watch a thriller movie thats PG13 and goto bed and my wife does not sleep well for 3 nights. Same with MMOing the thrill my wife gets from PvE is at the level of rush she is having fun. The rush of PvP and she gets upset and logs off. We all have a level of rush we enjoy. I love jumpping out of planes. My wife thinks a bike ride is a rush going down a hill.
We all like to game our own speed.
Not sure how I can be wrong about the feelings I get when I play a game.
If you're suggesting that there's less of a thrill with pve and that's ok with some people, I agree with you. That's actually my exact position.
Sorry if I read your post wrong. Im a huge fan of PvP but alot of PvPers seem to feel PvEers are wimps and I find that stand to be very thin.
I find pve players seem to feel pvp players are assholes.
PVE Sandbox with PVP lakes and border towns. /done
How about we give you pve guys the lakes for once.
PvP sandbox with PVE lakes and hobbit towns. /done
edit:
I guess I should clarify why my response is so unenthusiastic.
Segregating PvP players to their own little island isn't the sort of game i'd like to play. I see it as the sort of "compromise" that just tries to hide us away so we can all play together and get us all out of everyone else's way.
If i'm just going to play together with other people who want to pvp I would rather just do it in a game properly designed for people like that.
You guys don't need us whining about how the pvp in our little hole needs more attention and we don't need to stick around in a game that obviously isn't really designed with us in mind.
To be honest I would love the inversion. It would be nice if for once a game was made with pvp embedded into the core gameplay, and then they could offer a server with it simply turned off. I would love to come back here and hear people's reactions to what it's like to be thrown a picked clean bone and act like you've been given filet mignon.
But there is risk if you dont pvp . Its just risk vrs the environment. The risk doesn't have to be exactly the same for everyone in the game to be just as important for everyone.
If there IS unlimited pvp , there needs to be some sort of anti griefing measures in place
I've never played a non-ow pvp MMO that gives me the same thrill and excitement as an ow pvp one. Whatever feeling you'd like to call it, that's what we want.
Besides, you can't have the same kind of risk with pve. Even if you had a system where dying to a mob causes you to lose some items or whatever. That'll never perfectly emulate what you get when there are players involved. You'll never have the same politics or reputation elements. There are even times I've died to mobs and had to res and run back to my body.... blood pumping in anticipation to see if anybody has looted my corpse.
How would regular players not wanting to pvp 24/7 in a consent only pvp game remove your thrill of pvping? Unless there truly aren't as many people who want full time pvp as you think?
In the option I described you , the full time pvper, would be able to be attacked by absolutely everyone , is that not thrilling enough?
If full time pvp is what everyone wants , then a LOT of people would flag for it yes? So you would still have lots of people to fight. You just wont be able to gank people who don't want to be ganked. Thats ALL.
Are you in favor of ganking? Anyone who IS is someone I woyuld rather not be playing a game with anyways. Jerks ! all of them haha
You can't get attacked unless you help your npc's by attacking the enemy faction that is trying to kill your npc faction.
So it's a large safe area.
Safe areas work well.
The game will be huge and there will be dungeons and resources to fight over. this is where the pvp will take place in a medium size circle around these sort of areas.
This way, it encourages pvp over dungeons, loot, and crafting nodes.
There will be plenty of vanilla non-pvp craftable materials and mobs to fight. but the best stuff is within the "danger zone".
So there we have it. non-pvpers can pay pvpers to go and gather stuff for them. or can trade for items that pvpers got from a dungeon.
Or they can try out the pvp mechanics and see if they work out for themselves. Dip a toe into the pvp pond if you will......
I Believe in SoE's mission statement in EQN.. A world we can shape, build, and destroy..
But to make this possible they have to appease both sides of MMO gamers PvE and PvP.. If they want to make this a successful games and draw people away from what they are playing right now they have to please everyone in some respect.. I firmly believe in FFA PvP... Why? Because IMO it makes the game feel more "Real"...
There is also no escaping either because PvP will be implemented into this game.. How? We don't know the specifics yet but you can bet it will be in there.. Point is no matter how "Hard Core" your stance on PvP or PvE is they go hand in hand!! its like marriage you can't have one without the other anymore.. You cant tell me you dodged every crab on the beach because you where so "Hard Core" against PvE that you didn't kill the damn thing to lvl... You also cant tell me you dodged every crab on the beaches aggro circle in the middle of getting jumped by 5 people!! Or farm and farm instance dungeons for rare items cause you needed the cash for upgrades... or ever took a quest??
Just let us be free!!! or divide the people that are soooo against PvP on their own Non-PvP Server!!!
I like a world where people (and not the games AI) comes to hunt me down and kill me. This is because of the unpredictability, the suspense, and not knowing what comes next.. this always keeps the game interesting.. But lets face it like the book says we the players are "The Most Dangerous Game"..
I Believe in SoE's mission statement in EQN.. A world we can shape, build, and destroy..
But to make this possible they have to appease both sides of MMO gamers PvE and PvP.. If they want to make this a successful games and draw people away from what they are playing right now they have to please everyone in some respect.. I firmly believe in FFA PvP... Why? Because IMO it makes the game feel more "Real"...
There is also no escaping either because PvP will be implemented into this game.. How? We don't know the specifics yet but you can bet it will be in there.. Point is no matter how "Hard Core" your stance on PvP or PvE is they go hand in hand!! its like marriage you can't have one without the other anymore.. You cant tell me you dodged every crab on the beach because you where so "Hard Core" against PvE that you didn't kill the damn thing to lvl... You also cant tell me you dodged every crab on the beaches aggro circle in the middle of getting jumped by 5 people!! Or farm and farm instance dungeons for rare items cause you needed the cash for upgrades... or ever took a quest??
Just let us be free!!! or divide the people that are soooo against PvP on their own Non-PvP Server!!!
I like a world where people (and not the games AI) comes to hunt me down and kill me. This is because of the unpredictability, the suspense, and not knowing what comes next.. this always keeps the game interesting.. But lets face it like the book says we the players are "The Most Dangerous Game"..
Not suggesting that you wont be hunted. With consentual pvp you'll still get hunted . youll still get to kill people. you can fight in all zones, you just wont be able to gank people. People you may want to buy crafted items from or sell loot to. People who might see you wandering through a low level area and want to kill you anyways and flag for temporary pvp. Separate servers are bad for you , less bad for us.
But if you like ganking lowbies so much , you would just have to convince them to want to fight you
Well, everything has been said although I'd like to put my grain of sand to the discussion.
As I've discussed - or bang my head against a wall..- in other threads is that sandbox is as inherent to Role Playing as "OW PvP with a criminal/reputation system aligned to the lore" is to sandbox. Of course, we all have to know what RPG is:
A role-playing game is a game in which the participants assume the roles of characters and collaboratively create stories. Participants determine the actions of their characters based on their characterisation, and the actions succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines. Within the rules, they may improvise freely; their choices shape the direction and outcome of the games.
In other words, a sandbox RPG (not to confound with RPG alike arcade) is a virtual world where players can shape the world and develop their own narratives in accordance with the rules marked by the lore. As you may imagine, player driven economy and politics is a must. And when I say politics and economy I mean literally: world assets & resources, political backstabbing, betrayal, joint-ventures, rogues/pirates that really steal....
Example: As ridiculous as it may sound, these are typical player made Role Playing Scenarios:
"Baron Squabby thinks that King Truffus is not sufficiently appreciating his efforts so he and his comrades decide to break up with him and start a civil war. Baron Squabby will align with The Budrisers Gang, a bunch of ale loving hobgoblings from King Truffus' enemy faction, to get some extra muscle"
"Carlsberg the Rogue decides to start up a tavern to supply with beverages to the soldiers fighting in the Squabby-Truffus struggle. Carlsberg sees a business opportunity in supplying an extra bit of fun to the soldiers coming back from the frontline, especially to those that return with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. That is, he will go for a joint-venture with the Kool-Aid Gang, a guild of crafters and explorers who specialize in obtaining rare herbs and distilling them into narcotics."
"Ariel the White Knight is concerned about the rise of bandoleers after the beginning of the Squabby-Truffus confrontation (the opening of that damn tavern supplying nasty stuff didn't help either, nor the rise of druggies stealing to the traders and robbing in the nearby houses for a quick fix). He decides to found a guild of mercenaries that will protect the highways and the traders (for a fair price)"
These scenarios can only be properly performed in a sandbox OW PvP model where there'd be a criminal system that'd make sense with the lore, there is not other way. It's just so fucking obvious (pardon my language) that I find mind-blogging that some people cannot get it. I don't know if this is because they've never played a properly done RPG game (Ultima, EVE, tabletop Masquerade...) and are ignorant, or perhaps because they have some interest in perpetuating a fallacy or maybe because they have their heads so stuck in their themepark-butts that the flatulences prevent them from having a grasp of what RPG and sandbox is all about.
I'm not sure and in all honesty i'm tired of banging my head against the wall. Some people will not get it, that simple. Ergo, no compromise is possible. RPGers will go their way and hack'n'slashers and arcadeers will go theirs, perhaps even to a game that let them "build things" for the sake of nothing (this is, the definition that some genius here have of sandbox...friggin mindboggling...).
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
But there is risk if you dont pvp . Its just risk vrs the environment. The risk doesn't have to be exactly the same for everyone in the game to be just as important for everyone.
If there IS unlimited pvp , there needs to be some sort of anti griefing measures in place
I've never played a non-ow pvp MMO that gives me the same thrill and excitement as an ow pvp one. Whatever feeling you'd like to call it, that's what we want.
Besides, you can't have the same kind of risk with pve. Even if you had a system where dying to a mob causes you to lose some items or whatever. That'll never perfectly emulate what you get when there are players involved. You'll never have the same politics or reputation elements. There are even times I've died to mobs and had to res and run back to my body.... blood pumping in anticipation to see if anybody has looted my corpse.
How would regular players not wanting to pvp 24/7 in a consent only pvp game remove your thrill of pvping? Unless there truly aren't as many people who want full time pvp as you think?
In the option I described you , the full time pvper, would be able to be attacked by absolutely everyone , is that not thrilling enough?
If full time pvp is what everyone wants , then a LOT of people would flag for it yes? So you would still have lots of people to fight. You just wont be able to gank people who don't want to be ganked. Thats ALL.
Are you in favor of ganking? Anyone who IS is someone I woyuld rather not be playing a game with anyways. Jerks ! all of them haha
What option did you describe exactly?
Flagging systems fall short because everybody would flag themselves off for pvp when they're pveing, hell even I probably would. It's like programming in a button that gives you infinite money. Everybody would press it, but nobody would actually want it in the game if given the choice. But IF it's in, you'd be stupid not to press it because you'll put yourself at disadvantage. If I'm the only flagging myself for pvp, all of the people who aren't are playing a different game than I am. They're farming resources/materials/experience/whatever else much more efficiently than I am.
And what do you mean by ganking? If you mean killing people, then yes I'm totally in favor of that. Pretty much the only things I'm not in favor of are scamming and griefing. Griefing meaning doing something where the ONLY purpose is to ruin the other person's experience. That does NOT include killing a miner to get his resources. Criminals should be a part of the game, just like anti-criminal guilds and bounty hunters should be a part of the game.
And thats where you are wrong. I watch a thriller movie thats PG13 and goto bed and my wife does not sleep well for 3 nights. Same with MMOing the thrill my wife gets from PvE is at the level of rush she is having fun. The rush of PvP and she gets upset and logs off. We all have a level of rush we enjoy. I love jumpping out of planes. My wife thinks a bike ride is a rush going down a hill.
We all like to game at our own speed.
Not every MMORPG needs to be Disney movie so your wife can play it. Problem solved.
And not every MMO needs to be a hack and slash film so you can feel like your a bad ass. I say we stop calling pure PvEers carebears and just wait and see what SoE has in mind for EQN. Maybe you get what you want or maybe PvEers get their dream MMO.
And not every MMO needs to be a hack and slash film so you can feel like your a bad ass. I say we stop calling pure PvEers carebears and just wait and see what SoE has in mind for EQN. Maybe you get what you want or maybe PvEers get their dream MMO.
I have never called anyone a carebear. I actually quite enjoy PVE. What I don't like is the assumption that every game that comes out needs to be for that specific gamer. Companies offer a product and it's either for that consumer or it's not.
But you did say because my wife is not a PvP fan she should go play one thats Disney rated. Two sides of the same coin =-) As I said before I am a huge PvP fan. I played DAoC for years and every MMO I played after that I always looked for that next PvP rush. What ticks me off as a PvPer is the PvP fans that call PvE players carebears or dont know how to play a real game. Or that the only real challenge in a MMO is fighting a player so PvEers are not as good at MMOing. This seems to come mostly from the FFA PvPers. I really hope the PvP in this game is themepark all the way. With a DAoC zone for PvP and PvEers never have to worry about beening flagged and attacked by PvPers. IMO a real PvPer is only worth his salt if he looks for a fair fight, killing willing players that are equal in level and gear.
Originally posted by Holophonist Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard Originally posted by Nanfoodle Originally posted by jdnyc Originally posted by Nanfoodle
And thats where you are wrong. I watch a thriller movie thats PG13 and goto bed and my wife does not sleep well for 3 nights. Same with MMOing the thrill my wife gets from PvE is at the level of rush she is having fun. The rush of PvP and she gets upset and logs off. We all have a level of rush we enjoy. I love jumpping out of planes. My wife thinks a bike ride is a rush going down a hill.
We all like to game at our own speed.
Not every MMORPG needs to be Disney movie so your wife can play it. Problem solved.
And not every MMO needs to be a hack and slash film so you can feel like your a bad ass. I say we stop calling pure PvEers carebears and just wait and see what SoE has in mind for EQN. Maybe you get what you want or maybe PvEers get their dream MMO.
Or maybe both...
Doesn't exist.
Do not limit what is possible to the limits of your own imagination...
What we want is diametrically opposed to what the pve crowd wants.
problem is not that i (aka person who dont like pvp, especially the ffa kind) am saying "you cannt have ffa pvp game" or "we want you to play our way." problem is, that it is you (aka ffa pvp fans) who insist that every sandbox mmorpg HAS TO HAVE ffa pvp and as a result we have now already 10+ existing or in-development ffa pvp sandbox games, and not a single one which would be pve focused. I want to have at least ONE sandbox game i can play without having to pvp.
Originally posted by Holophonist Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard Originally posted by Nanfoodle Originally posted by jdnyc Originally posted by Nanfoodle
And thats where you are wrong. I watch a thriller movie thats PG13 and goto bed and my wife does not sleep well for 3 nights. Same with MMOing the thrill my wife gets from PvE is at the level of rush she is having fun. The rush of PvP and she gets upset and logs off. We all have a level of rush we enjoy. I love jumpping out of planes. My wife thinks a bike ride is a rush going down a hill.
We all like to game at our own speed.
Not every MMORPG needs to be Disney movie so your wife can play it. Problem solved.
And not every MMO needs to be a hack and slash film so you can feel like your a bad ass. I say we stop calling pure PvEers carebears and just wait and see what SoE has in mind for EQN. Maybe you get what you want or maybe PvEers get their dream MMO.
Or maybe both...
Doesn't exist.
Do not limit what is possible to the limits of your own imagination...
And what if they manage to pull it off? What if they manage to make FFA PvP and restricted PvP coexists in the same game, without affecting each other negatively? What if they manage to make both PvP and PvE servers (with optional PvP) coexist in a great game? Will you still skip the game just because it's not 100% FFA PvP?
No, I play many games and will probably try EQN even if it's not at all my ideal game... which it almost certainly will not be.
But the idea that you can have separate pvp and pve servers doesn't really make sense to me. In order to be games that would satisfy each playerbase, they'd have to be incredibly different games. The economies of full loot games compared to no loot games are so dissimilar I would think they'd just make separate games at that point.
(repost of my post from another thread):problem is not that i (aka person who dont like pvp, especially the ffa kind) am saying "you cannt have ffa pvp game" or "we want you to play our way." problem is, that it is you (aka ffa pvp fans) who insist that every sandbox mmorpg HAS TO HAVE ffa pvp and as a result we have now already 10+ existing or in-development ffa pvp sandbox games, and not a single one which would be pve focused. I want to have at least ONE sandbox game i can play without having to pvp.
Myself and others have pointed out that the reason for this is because pvp is an inherently sandbox feature. By removing pvp you're removing a lot of things other than just fighting people. City building/sieging is a big one.
problem is not that i (aka person who dont like pvp, especially the ffa kind) am saying "you cannt have ffa pvp game" or "we want you to play our way." problem is, that it is you (aka ffa pvp fans) who insist that every sandbox mmorpg HAS TO HAVE ffa pvp and as a result we have now already 10+ existing or in-development ffa pvp sandbox games, and not a single one which would be pve focused. I want to have at least ONE sandbox game i can play without having to pvp.
Myself and others have pointed out that the reason for this is because pvp is an inherently sandbox feature. By removing pvp you're removing a lot of things other than just fighting people. City building/sieging is a big one.
actually city building/sieging is a feature that can very well exist in pve sandbox as well, if the pve "faction" is working as in e.g. rts style games.
and about pvp being inherently sandbox feature - there is no generally agreed upon definition of sandbox, for me pvp definitelly ISN'T inherently sandbox feature
Myself and others have pointed out that the reason for this is because pvp is an inherently sandbox feature. By removing pvp you're removing a lot of things other than just fighting people. City building/sieging is a big one.
Exactly.
OW PvP provides with the only viable framework for players to engage in complex political relationships and to sustain a real economy, thus creating networks of dependency among players with different RPG narratives associated and, consequently, guaranteeing the long-term sustainability of the whole thing. Combat is just a possibility derived from the nature of the political intercourse between players, and in any case the offender would have to accept the consequences of its actions.
Unfortunately and for whatever reason, some people here are so narrow minded that cannot see the forest from the trees, hyping up ganking to the point of hysteria.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Originally posted by Holophonist Originally posted by Benedikt (repost of my post from another thread):problem is not that i (aka person who dont like pvp, especially the ffa kind) am saying "you cannt have ffa pvp game" or "we want you to play our way." problem is, that it is you (aka ffa pvp fans) who insist that every sandbox mmorpg HAS TO HAVE ffa pvp and as a result we have now already 10+ existing or in-development ffa pvp sandbox games, and not a single one which would be pve focused. I want to have at least ONE sandbox game i can play without having to pvp.
Myself and others have pointed out that the reason for this is because pvp is an inherently sandbox feature. By removing pvp you're removing a lot of things other than just fighting people. City building/sieging is a big one.
actually city building/sieging is a feature that can very well exist in pve sandbox as well, if the pve "faction" is working as in e.g. rts style games.
and about pvp being inherently sandbox feature - there is no generally agreed upon definition of sandbox, for me pvp definitelly ISN'T inherently sandbox feature
Sandbox means less restrictions, and giving the tools to players to create their own content. I'm not sure what pve content the players could make for themselves. Pvp is inherently a sandbox feature because it means more freedom and more player driven economies and content.
Myself and others have pointed out that the reason for this is because pvp is an inherently sandbox feature. By removing pvp you're removing a lot of things other than just fighting people. City building/sieging is a big one.
Exactly.
OW PvP provides with the only viable framework for players to engage in complex political relationships and to sustain a real economy, thus creating networks of dependency among players with different RPG narratives associated and, consequently, guaranteeing the long-term sustainability of the whole thing. Combat is just a possibility derived from the nature of the political intercourse between players, and in any case the offender would have to accept the consequences of its actions.
Unfortunately and for whatever reason, some people here are so narrow minded that cannot see the forest from the trees, hyping up ganking to the point of hysteria.
first of all - neither is true
second of all - even if it was true - why cannt you allow us even SINGLE non-pvp sandbox game, when you got your way already on almost every other out there (and that almost is only because of e.g. ATITD, which doesnt have pvp nor pve)
actually city building/sieging is a feature that can very well exist in pve sandbox as well, if the pve "faction" is working as in e.g. rts style games.
and about pvp being inherently sandbox feature - there is no generally agreed upon definition of sandbox, for me pvp definitelly ISN'T inherently sandbox feature
I'm not going to call you wrong here.
I'd just like to point out though that removing something like PvP from a game does have more repercussions than some would like to admit.
If I can go mine ore I can do that in a PVE or PvP environment.
Then the emergent gameplay part kicks in.
I can only decide I want to be an ore thief or try to make a living killing miners and selling their pickaxes if there is pvp.
If I am a miner I only need to hire a guard, make friends to guard me, or join up with a mining crew that is allied with a group that will guard our territory if there is pvp. These are real players that suddenly become involved in my ore mining, players than now have something to do!
So theres Ore miners in pve. Then there is Ore miner killers and Ore miner killer killers in pvp games. Thats 2 more jobs that opened up just by adding pvp.
Why do the pve guys always want to take our jobs? <- that was a joke.
This is one very very limited and small example of the type of emergent gameplay that isn't possible in a restricted environment (or is it?) and it is this type of gameplay that is EXTREMELY important to many people's willingness to declare a game "sandboxy."
I'm not going to claim there is no way to have a PVE sandbox, but the type of thing I outlined above is the kind of sanbox element I personally enjoy.
Comments
And not every MMO needs to be a hack and slash film so you can feel like your a bad ass. I say we stop calling pure PvEers carebears and just wait and see what SoE has in mind for EQN. Maybe you get what you want or maybe PvEers get their dream MMO.
I would hate for EQ Next to be PvP... what's wrong with the way they always have been??
If however, that is where SOE decides to take it, then I hope it's completely open world PvP so the gankers can get everything out of their system and we can get on with playing the game. Having zones and flags and all that is just annoying. Either give me a full PvE (preferred) server with zero PvP or just make the whole thing PvP and hopefully decency and honor will play some sort of part in the entire equation.
I think F2P plus open world PvP is a combo that is just begging to turn off every single hard core Everquest fan since the beginning of the genre. Most smart business decisions don't start by completely alienating your entire fan base.
No bitchers.
I have never called anyone a carebear. I actually quite enjoy PVE. What I don't like is the assumption that every game that comes out needs to be for that specific gamer. Companies offer a product and it's either for that consumer or it's not.
It could work.
If I were SOE I wouldn't want my fanbase.
I'd want my fanbase plus every other guy's fanbase.
Why would they want to pull those hardcores from their other games? Wouldn't it make more sense to try to bring in new blood or bring people back that might be...I don't know...tired from the way things have been done for the last decade in the Themepark realm?
How about we give you pve guys the lakes for once.
PvP sandbox with PVE lakes and hobbit towns. /done
edit:
I guess I should clarify why my response is so unenthusiastic.
Segregating PvP players to their own little island isn't the sort of game i'd like to play. I see it as the sort of "compromise" that just tries to hide us away so we can all play together and get us all out of everyone else's way.
If i'm just going to play together with other people who want to pvp I would rather just do it in a game properly designed for people like that.
You guys don't need us whining about how the pvp in our little hole needs more attention and we don't need to stick around in a game that obviously isn't really designed with us in mind.
I find pve players seem to feel pvp players are assholes.
To be honest I would love the inversion. It would be nice if for once a game was made with pvp embedded into the core gameplay, and then they could offer a server with it simply turned off. I would love to come back here and hear people's reactions to what it's like to be thrown a picked clean bone and act like you've been given filet mignon.
How would regular players not wanting to pvp 24/7 in a consent only pvp game remove your thrill of pvping? Unless there truly aren't as many people who want full time pvp as you think?
In the option I described you , the full time pvper, would be able to be attacked by absolutely everyone , is that not thrilling enough?
If full time pvp is what everyone wants , then a LOT of people would flag for it yes? So you would still have lots of people to fight. You just wont be able to gank people who don't want to be ganked. Thats ALL.
Are you in favor of ganking? Anyone who IS is someone I woyuld rather not be playing a game with anyways. Jerks ! all of them haha
How about this....
We have team based faction pvp.
You can't get attacked unless you help your npc's by attacking the enemy faction that is trying to kill your npc faction.
So it's a large safe area.
Safe areas work well.
The game will be huge and there will be dungeons and resources to fight over. this is where the pvp will take place in a medium size circle around these sort of areas.
This way, it encourages pvp over dungeons, loot, and crafting nodes.
There will be plenty of vanilla non-pvp craftable materials and mobs to fight. but the best stuff is within the "danger zone".
So there we have it. non-pvpers can pay pvpers to go and gather stuff for them. or can trade for items that pvpers got from a dungeon.
Or they can try out the pvp mechanics and see if they work out for themselves. Dip a toe into the pvp pond if you will......
I Believe in SoE's mission statement in EQN.. A world we can shape, build, and destroy..
But to make this possible they have to appease both sides of MMO gamers PvE and PvP.. If they want to make this a successful games and draw people away from what they are playing right now they have to please everyone in some respect.. I firmly believe in FFA PvP... Why? Because IMO it makes the game feel more "Real"...
There is also no escaping either because PvP will be implemented into this game.. How? We don't know the specifics yet but you can bet it will be in there.. Point is no matter how "Hard Core" your stance on PvP or PvE is they go hand in hand!! its like marriage you can't have one without the other anymore.. You cant tell me you dodged every crab on the beach because you where so "Hard Core" against PvE that you didn't kill the damn thing to lvl... You also cant tell me you dodged every crab on the beaches aggro circle in the middle of getting jumped by 5 people!! Or farm and farm instance dungeons for rare items cause you needed the cash for upgrades... or ever took a quest??
Just let us be free!!! or divide the people that are soooo against PvP on their own Non-PvP Server!!!
I like a world where people (and not the games AI) comes to hunt me down and kill me. This is because of the unpredictability, the suspense, and not knowing what comes next.. this always keeps the game interesting.. But lets face it like the book says we the players are "The Most Dangerous Game"..
Not suggesting that you wont be hunted. With consentual pvp you'll still get hunted . youll still get to kill people. you can fight in all zones, you just wont be able to gank people. People you may want to buy crafted items from or sell loot to. People who might see you wandering through a low level area and want to kill you anyways and flag for temporary pvp. Separate servers are bad for you , less bad for us.
But if you like ganking lowbies so much , you would just have to convince them to want to fight you
Well, everything has been said although I'd like to put my grain of sand to the discussion.
As I've discussed - or bang my head against a wall..- in other threads is that sandbox is as inherent to Role Playing as "OW PvP with a criminal/reputation system aligned to the lore" is to sandbox. Of course, we all have to know what RPG is:
A role-playing game is a game in which the participants assume the roles of characters and collaboratively create stories. Participants determine the actions of their characters based on their characterisation, and the actions succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines. Within the rules, they may improvise freely; their choices shape the direction and outcome of the games.
In other words, a sandbox RPG (not to confound with RPG alike arcade) is a virtual world where players can shape the world and develop their own narratives in accordance with the rules marked by the lore. As you may imagine, player driven economy and politics is a must. And when I say politics and economy I mean literally: world assets & resources, political backstabbing, betrayal, joint-ventures, rogues/pirates that really steal....
Example: As ridiculous as it may sound, these are typical player made Role Playing Scenarios:
"Baron Squabby thinks that King Truffus is not sufficiently appreciating his efforts so he and his comrades decide to break up with him and start a civil war. Baron Squabby will align with The Budrisers Gang, a bunch of ale loving hobgoblings from King Truffus' enemy faction, to get some extra muscle"
"Carlsberg the Rogue decides to start up a tavern to supply with beverages to the soldiers fighting in the Squabby-Truffus struggle. Carlsberg sees a business opportunity in supplying an extra bit of fun to the soldiers coming back from the frontline, especially to those that return with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. That is, he will go for a joint-venture with the Kool-Aid Gang, a guild of crafters and explorers who specialize in obtaining rare herbs and distilling them into narcotics."
"Ariel the White Knight is concerned about the rise of bandoleers after the beginning of the Squabby-Truffus confrontation (the opening of that damn tavern supplying nasty stuff didn't help either, nor the rise of druggies stealing to the traders and robbing in the nearby houses for a quick fix). He decides to found a guild of mercenaries that will protect the highways and the traders (for a fair price)"
These scenarios can only be properly performed in a sandbox OW PvP model where there'd be a criminal system that'd make sense with the lore, there is not other way. It's just so fucking obvious (pardon my language) that I find mind-blogging that some people cannot get it. I don't know if this is because they've never played a properly done RPG game (Ultima, EVE, tabletop Masquerade...) and are ignorant, or perhaps because they have some interest in perpetuating a fallacy or maybe because they have their heads so stuck in their themepark-butts that the flatulences prevent them from having a grasp of what RPG and sandbox is all about.
I'm not sure and in all honesty i'm tired of banging my head against the wall. Some people will not get it, that simple. Ergo, no compromise is possible. RPGers will go their way and hack'n'slashers and arcadeers will go theirs, perhaps even to a game that let them "build things" for the sake of nothing (this is, the definition that some genius here have of sandbox...friggin mindboggling...).
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
What option did you describe exactly?
Flagging systems fall short because everybody would flag themselves off for pvp when they're pveing, hell even I probably would. It's like programming in a button that gives you infinite money. Everybody would press it, but nobody would actually want it in the game if given the choice. But IF it's in, you'd be stupid not to press it because you'll put yourself at disadvantage. If I'm the only flagging myself for pvp, all of the people who aren't are playing a different game than I am. They're farming resources/materials/experience/whatever else much more efficiently than I am.
And what do you mean by ganking? If you mean killing people, then yes I'm totally in favor of that. Pretty much the only things I'm not in favor of are scamming and griefing. Griefing meaning doing something where the ONLY purpose is to ruin the other person's experience. That does NOT include killing a miner to get his resources. Criminals should be a part of the game, just like anti-criminal guilds and bounty hunters should be a part of the game.
Doesn't exist.
But you did say because my wife is not a PvP fan she should go play one thats Disney rated. Two sides of the same coin =-) As I said before I am a huge PvP fan. I played DAoC for years and every MMO I played after that I always looked for that next PvP rush. What ticks me off as a PvPer is the PvP fans that call PvE players carebears or dont know how to play a real game. Or that the only real challenge in a MMO is fighting a player so PvEers are not as good at MMOing. This seems to come mostly from the FFA PvPers. I really hope the PvP in this game is themepark all the way. With a DAoC zone for PvP and PvEers never have to worry about beening flagged and attacked by PvPers. IMO a real PvPer is only worth his salt if he looks for a fair fight, killing willing players that are equal in level and gear.
And thats where you are wrong. I watch a thriller movie thats PG13 and goto bed and my wife does not sleep well for 3 nights. Same with MMOing the thrill my wife gets from PvE is at the level of rush she is having fun. The rush of PvP and she gets upset and logs off. We all have a level of rush we enjoy. I love jumpping out of planes. My wife thinks a bike ride is a rush going down a hill.
We all like to game at our own speed.
Not every MMORPG needs to be Disney movie so your wife can play it. Problem solved.
And not every MMO needs to be a hack and slash film so you can feel like your a bad ass. I say we stop calling pure PvEers carebears and just wait and see what SoE has in mind for EQN. Maybe you get what you want or maybe PvEers get their dream MMO.
Or maybe both...
Doesn't exist.
Do not limit what is possible to the limits of your own imagination...
What we want is diametrically opposed to what the pve crowd wants.(repost of my post from another thread):
problem is not that i (aka person who dont like pvp, especially the ffa kind) am saying "you cannt have ffa pvp game" or "we want you to play our way." problem is, that it is you (aka ffa pvp fans) who insist that every sandbox mmorpg HAS TO HAVE ffa pvp and as a result we have now already 10+ existing or in-development ffa pvp sandbox games, and not a single one which would be pve focused. I want to have at least ONE sandbox game i can play without having to pvp.
And thats where you are wrong. I watch a thriller movie thats PG13 and goto bed and my wife does not sleep well for 3 nights. Same with MMOing the thrill my wife gets from PvE is at the level of rush she is having fun. The rush of PvP and she gets upset and logs off. We all have a level of rush we enjoy. I love jumpping out of planes. My wife thinks a bike ride is a rush going down a hill.
We all like to game at our own speed.
Not every MMORPG needs to be Disney movie so your wife can play it. Problem solved.
And not every MMO needs to be a hack and slash film so you can feel like your a bad ass. I say we stop calling pure PvEers carebears and just wait and see what SoE has in mind for EQN. Maybe you get what you want or maybe PvEers get their dream MMO.
Or maybe both...
Doesn't exist.
Do not limit what is possible to the limits of your own imagination...
And what if they manage to pull it off? What if they manage to make FFA PvP and restricted PvP coexists in the same game, without affecting each other negatively? What if they manage to make both PvP and PvE servers (with optional PvP) coexist in a great game? Will you still skip the game just because it's not 100% FFA PvP?
No, I play many games and will probably try EQN even if it's not at all my ideal game... which it almost certainly will not be.But the idea that you can have separate pvp and pve servers doesn't really make sense to me. In order to be games that would satisfy each playerbase, they'd have to be incredibly different games. The economies of full loot games compared to no loot games are so dissimilar I would think they'd just make separate games at that point.
Myself and others have pointed out that the reason for this is because pvp is an inherently sandbox feature. By removing pvp you're removing a lot of things other than just fighting people. City building/sieging is a big one.actually city building/sieging is a feature that can very well exist in pve sandbox as well, if the pve "faction" is working as in e.g. rts style games.
and about pvp being inherently sandbox feature - there is no generally agreed upon definition of sandbox, for me pvp definitelly ISN'T inherently sandbox feature
Exactly.
OW PvP provides with the only viable framework for players to engage in complex political relationships and to sustain a real economy, thus creating networks of dependency among players with different RPG narratives associated and, consequently, guaranteeing the long-term sustainability of the whole thing. Combat is just a possibility derived from the nature of the political intercourse between players, and in any case the offender would have to accept the consequences of its actions.
Unfortunately and for whatever reason, some people here are so narrow minded that cannot see the forest from the trees, hyping up ganking to the point of hysteria.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Myself and others have pointed out that the reason for this is because pvp is an inherently sandbox feature. By removing pvp you're removing a lot of things other than just fighting people. City building/sieging is a big one.actually city building/sieging is a feature that can very well exist in pve sandbox as well, if the pve "faction" is working as in e.g. rts style games.
and about pvp being inherently sandbox feature - there is no generally agreed upon definition of sandbox, for me pvp definitelly ISN'T inherently sandbox feature
Sandbox means less restrictions, and giving the tools to players to create their own content. I'm not sure what pve content the players could make for themselves. Pvp is inherently a sandbox feature because it means more freedom and more player driven economies and content.first of all - neither is true
second of all - even if it was true - why cannt you allow us even SINGLE non-pvp sandbox game, when you got your way already on almost every other out there (and that almost is only because of e.g. ATITD, which doesnt have pvp nor pve)
I'm not going to call you wrong here.
I'd just like to point out though that removing something like PvP from a game does have more repercussions than some would like to admit.
If I can go mine ore I can do that in a PVE or PvP environment.
Then the emergent gameplay part kicks in.
I can only decide I want to be an ore thief or try to make a living killing miners and selling their pickaxes if there is pvp.
If I am a miner I only need to hire a guard, make friends to guard me, or join up with a mining crew that is allied with a group that will guard our territory if there is pvp. These are real players that suddenly become involved in my ore mining, players than now have something to do!
So theres Ore miners in pve. Then there is Ore miner killers and Ore miner killer killers in pvp games. Thats 2 more jobs that opened up just by adding pvp.
Why do the pve guys always want to take our jobs? <- that was a joke.
This is one very very limited and small example of the type of emergent gameplay that isn't possible in a restricted environment (or is it?) and it is this type of gameplay that is EXTREMELY important to many people's willingness to declare a game "sandboxy."
I'm not going to claim there is no way to have a PVE sandbox, but the type of thing I outlined above is the kind of sanbox element I personally enjoy.