Originally posted by Lord.Bachus Nothing wrong with such a server, except the fact that developing different server types is actually a resource hog... its expensive and does not pay off.
I don't think people who ask for these things know or care that it costs resources to produce their pet ideas. IF they add this, resources have to be taken from somewhere else. Then there is the OMG the devs are cheap/lazy types who think there is a endless pool of money. Or the people who think that it would only take a little amount of resources to produce their pet idea.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Why split the devs time up for one group of players? This would not only eat up their time now but also after the game launched. Better off just making the game they started off making and make it as good as they can. Time games stopped trying to be something for everyone. It only makes washed out content.
Anybody who actually was a part of Mordred's community will attest to the fact that it was a great server. I'd love to see a PvP server in ESO. In fact, it would probably ensure that I would purchase the game, whereas now I'm on the fence.
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus Nothing wrong with such a server, except the fact that developing different server types is actually a resource hog... its expensive and does not pay off.
I don't think people who ask for these things know or care that it costs resources to produce their pet ideas. IF they add this, resources have to be taken from somewhere else. Then there is the OMG the devs are cheap/lazy types who think there is a endless pool of money. Or the people who think that it would only take a little amount of resources to produce their pet idea.
Interesting thing is, though, that with megaserver tech the servers are already going to be split according to playstyle. Don't see why it would be too resource intensive to implement a feature where PvP is simply open, always.
Yes, but Eve is a different style of game. A game like DAOC that relies on levels and gear, puts lower level players on a steep slope against the higher level players with no protection. UO was open PvP as well, but no levels evened the playing field somewhat providing you had some common sense, and a little bit of gear.
Originally posted by redcapp Anybody who actually was a part of Mordred's community will attest to the fact that it was a great server. I'd love to see a PvP server in ESO. In fact, it would probably ensure that I would purchase the game, whereas now I'm on the fence.
I was part of Mordreds so called "community". Other than a few guilds that actually PvPed primarily in the Frontiers, its was nothing but a bunch of bads griefing noobs in the starter towns.
And I will say this. I played UO for 6 years, from release. I played DAOC for almost 10, from release. UO was open PvP done correctly in spite of players doing their best trying to screw it up. I played thru the release which was a bloodbath, the addition of Trammel and all the rest of the crap. DAOC open PvP servers were a nightmare once players hit top level, all most scrubs wanted to do was farm the noobs because they would get slaughtered by any competent on level/geared opponent. In Mordred defense, TOA was the death knell as gearing at the start of TOA was ridiculously hard. TOA separated the "haves" from the "have nots" even more so. However RvR in DAOC was the games one redeeming quality and will always be the measuring stick that other PvP MMOs are measured by.
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus Nothing wrong with such a server, except the fact that developing different server types is actually a resource hog... its expensive and does not pay off.
I don't think people who ask for these things know or care that it costs resources to produce their pet ideas. IF they add this, resources have to be taken from somewhere else. Then there is the OMG the devs are cheap/lazy types who think there is a endless pool of money. Or the people who think that it would only take a little amount of resources to produce their pet idea.
Interesting thing is, though, that with megaserver tech the servers are already going to be split according to playstyle. Don't see why it would be too resource intensive to implement a feature where PvP is simply open, always.
I would agree.
I'd be for an ffa pvp server. Not going to happen though.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Don't know why everyone is citing Mordred as a good example for a FFA pvp server. Mordred failed because the combat in DAoC was awful and there were no consequences for dying. Also, the way that the world was constructed made it difficult for players to level. In other games like AC, people had secret leveling spots and had a lot of options for laying low while still progressing. On Mordred that wasn't really a possibility.
Everybody should really be looking at Darktide, the pvp server in Asheron's Call. Unlike Mordred and Andred, Darktide was actually incredibly successful. After 14 years of existence it's the most populous server in the game with an active and dedicated community. People stayed because pvp has consequences (there is the potential for item loss on death) and the combat requires skill. The allegiance (clan) structure in the game fostered political struggles and massive, long-term wars, creating drama and entertainment for everyone.
It would be a huge mistake if ESO didn't have an ffa pvp server, the possibility for in-game player-driven history and narrative is massive.
Don't know why everyone is citing Mordred as a good example for a FFA pvp server. Mordred failed because the combat in DAoC was awful and there were no consequences for dying. Also, the way that the world was constructed made it difficult for players to level. In other games like AC, people had secret leveling spots and had a lot of options for laying low while still progressing. On Mordred that wasn't really a possibility.
Everybody should really be looking at Darktide, the pvp server in Asheron's Call. Unlike Mordred and Andred, Darktide was actually incredibly successful. After 14 years of existence it's the most populous server in the game with an active and dedicated community. People stayed because pvp has consequences (there is the potential for item loss on death) and the combat requires skill. The allegiance (clan) structure in the game fostered political struggles and massive, long-term wars, creating drama and entertainment for everyone.
It would be a huge mistake if ESO didn't have an ffa pvp server, the possibility for in-game player-driven history and narrative is massive.
Lol thanks for necroing my old thread
Honestly the differences between Mordred and Darktide were minimal, (XP vs Item loss). I would think the largest difference would be ditching the fake and forced instance based Realm V Realm in favor of an open world Guild V Guild conflict.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus Mordred as the worst thing Mythic ever did... many tried it but only a very few stayed, the majorrity of people concluded that RvR PvP was far supperior to FFA.
Actually it had a very good population until they forced people to PVE heavily to maintain effectiveness in PVP.
The PVP server died when the majority of the PVP'ers left the game....go figure
I doubt they will introduce that, however I and sick of these lore breaking forced faction systems for game worlds that have no history of it before. Trying to turn Star wars into CATACLYSM was a disaster. It scares me that what we will end up with is a scarcity of any new ideas and just rehash of DAOC with some MOP elements thrown in, Dark age of Pandas. I have seen the pve videos, which are fine but meaningless since that kind of AI has been possible for 6 years now.
But there will have to be some world pvp in ESO for it to survive. There are two kinds of Elder Scroll players good guys who want to murder bad guys and Bad guys who want to murder good guys and steal things. This does not translate into an mmo where people will be content to go to designated pvp only areas and shoot catapults. Or zip around looking for raid parties 24/7. You ignore those people and just make a MOP clone with DAOC carrots thrown in, you will just get DAOC refugees and some bored WOW players, for 3 months or so.
Originally posted by Sleepyfish I doubt they will introduce that, however I and sick of these lore breaking forced faction systems for game worlds that have no history of it before. Trying to turn Star wars into CATACLYSM was a disaster. It scares me that what we will end up with is a scarcity of any new ideas and just rehash of DAOC with some MOP elements thrown in, Dark age of Pandas. I have seen the pve videos, which are fine but meaningless since that kind of AI has been possible for 6 years now.
But there will have to be some world pvp in ESO for it to survive. There are two kinds of Elder Scroll players good guys who want to murder bad guys and Bad guys who want to murder good guys and steal things. This does not translate into an mmo where people will be content to go to designated pvp only areas and shoot catapults. Or zip around looking for raid parties 24/7. You ignore those people and just make a MOP clone with DAOC carrots thrown in, you will just get DAOC refugees and some bored WOW players, for 3 months or so.
Totally disagree. Their design is a nice balance between PvE and PvP, just like the original DAoC was. If open world pvp was so wildly popular, there would have been a dozen mordred servers in DAoC and only 1-2 PvE/PvP server instead of the other way around. Many people want to do some PvP but don't want to do it 24/7 within seconds when they log in. No system is going to please everyone, but theirs goes a long way to striking a nice balance that makes good business sense and will please a lot of players.
And by the way, its not fair to compare DAoC's player base from the early 2000s to today's, because so many fewer players played MMORPGs 10 years ago. Its gone up by a factor of 10 since then. Instead of looking at player numbers, think market share. If ESO only gets the same market share that DAoC got, that would be a 1-2 million subs, which would be enough all by itself to make the game profitable. And ESO has the big advantage of having the Elder Scrolls name attached to it, which will certainly attract some RPG players too.
Originally posted by Sleepyfish I doubt they will introduce that, however I and sick of these lore breaking forced faction systems for game worlds that have no history of it before. Trying to turn Star wars into CATACLYSM was a disaster. It scares me that what we will end up with is a scarcity of any new ideas and just rehash of DAOC with some MOP elements thrown in, Dark age of Pandas. I have seen the pve videos, which are fine but meaningless since that kind of AI has been possible for 6 years now.
But there will have to be some world pvp in ESO for it to survive. There are two kinds of Elder Scroll players good guys who want to murder bad guys and Bad guys who want to murder good guys and steal things. This does not translate into an mmo where people will be content to go to designated pvp only areas and shoot catapults. Or zip around looking for raid parties 24/7. You ignore those people and just make a MOP clone with DAOC carrots thrown in, you will just get DAOC refugees and some bored WOW players, for 3 months or so.
Totally disagree. Their design is a nice balance between PvE and PvP, just like the original DAoC was. If open world pvp was so wildly popular, there would have been a dozen mordred servers in DAoC and only 1-2 PvE/PvP server instead of the other way around. Many people want to do some PvP but don't want to do it 24/7 within seconds when they log in. No system is going to please everyone, but theirs goes a long way to striking a nice balance that makes good business sense and will please a lot of players.
And by the way, its not fair to compare DAoC's player base from the early 2000s to today's, because so many fewer players played MMORPGs 10 years ago. Its gone up by a factor of 10 since then. Instead of looking at player numbers, think market share. If ESO only gets the same market share that DAoC got, that would be a 1-2 million subs, which would be enough all by itself to make the game profitable. And ESO has the big advantage of having the Elder Scrolls name attached to it, which will certainly attract some RPG players too.
You are right it is not fair to compare sub numbers from a game in 2002 to 2004 just like its not fair to somehow think a game trying to attract at least 3 to 4 million people can survive on the percentage of DAOC vets who still actively play mmorpgs. You need new customers and you need to play up to your fan base for a game with this well known of an IP. If just copying a model and ignoring the fan base did the trick, TOR wold be worth playing right now and GW2 would be interesting.
Open world pvp is popular that is why WIOW had so many areas dedicated to it. Besides the Instance portal it was the entire reason STV existed. If people had not wanted that so many would have not left EQ2 in the first place.
You are right it is not fair to compare sub numbers from a game in 2002 to 2004 just like its not fair to somehow think a game trying to attract at least 3 to 4 million people can survive on the percentage of DAOC vets who still actively play mmorpgs. You need new customers and you need to play up to your fan base for a game with this well known of an IP. If just copying a model and ignoring the fan base did the trick, TOR wold be worth playing right now and GW2 would be interesting.
Open world pvp is popular that is why WIOW had so many areas dedicated to it. Besides the Instance portal it was the entire reason STV existed. If people had not wanted that so many would have not left EQ2 in the first place.
who the hell is saying that ESO can survive on DAoC vets? The MMORPG audience is 10 times larger today, which means its reasonable to think that the audience for any MMORPG is potentially far larger than it was a decade ago. Its not just daoc vets, its anyone to whom a daoc-type game might appeal. I mean, that's so stupid, its like saying WoW's audience was limited to EQ vets. What a silly strawman.
I don't know what TOR has to do with this at all, another strawman. Or GW2. ESO is very different from those games in its emphasis on 3 realms with their own pve plus a huge pvp region.
As far as open world pvp being popular in wow, I guess that relative, because isn't that still a relatively small portion of WoW, just like Mordred was a small portion of DAoC's player base.
Listen, I am not saying that open world pvp isn't popular with some folks. Of course it is. But its not nearly as popular as pve or regional pvp. I think ESO has struck a pretty good balance, with traditional pve within the realms but endgame pvp outside of them. It has a pretty good chance to break the mold the endgame boss raid model that EQ made popular and WoW expanded on. I for one do not want to do endless repeats of endgame dungeons to win loot rolls and get my gear. I think there are a lot of others like that. I think open world pvp types would be better off in another game, just like I am better off not in WoW. I also think that ESO will more be more mainstream, casual game than DAoC and might turn off some of the hardcore DAoC pvp crowd. Which again I think is a smart business decision, one daoc itself probably wishes it could do over.
You are right it is not fair to compare sub numbers from a game in 2002 to 2004 just like its not fair to somehow think a game trying to attract at least 3 to 4 million people can survive on the percentage of DAOC vets who still actively play mmorpgs. You need new customers and you need to play up to your fan base for a game with this well known of an IP. If just copying a model and ignoring the fan base did the trick, TOR wold be worth playing right now and GW2 would be interesting.
Open world pvp is popular that is why WIOW had so many areas dedicated to it. Besides the Instance portal it was the entire reason STV existed. If people had not wanted that so many would have not left EQ2 in the first place.
who the hell is saying that ESO can survive on DAoC vets? The MMORPG audience is 10 times larger today, which means its reasonable to think that the audience for any MMORPG is potentially far larger than it was a decade ago. Its not just daoc vets, its anyone to whom a daoc-type game might appeal. I mean, that's so stupid, its like saying WoW's audience was limited to EQ vets. What a silly strawman.
I don't know what TOR has to do with this at all, another strawman. Or GW2. ESO is very different from those games in its emphasis on 3 realms with their own pve plus a huge pvp region.
As far as open world pvp being popular in wow, I guess that relative, because isn't that still a relatively small portion of WoW, just like Mordred was a small portion of DAoC's player base.
Listen, I am not saying that open world pvp isn't popular with some folks. Of course it is. But its not nearly as popular as pve or regional pvp. I think ESO has struck a pretty good balance, with traditional pve within the realms but endgame pvp outside of them. It has a pretty good chance to break the mold the endgame boss raid model that EQ made popular and WoW expanded on. I for one do not want to do endless repeats of endgame dungeons to win loot rolls and get my gear. I think there are a lot of others like that. I think open world pvp types would be better off in another game, just like I am better off not in WoW. I also think that ESO will more be more mainstream, casual game than DAoC and might turn off some of the hardcore DAoC pvp crowd. Which again I think is a smart business decision, one daoc itself probably wishes it could do over.
Agree to disagree on a few points however I don't agree PVE is more popular than open world pvp. I think that its easy to muddy the water between normal monster killing quest pve and raid pvp which are not the same thing. Just like for PVP there is a difference for those of us who are active in it, in battlegrounds, arenas and world pvp. I think most players like to kill creatures for mats, quests, loot and such, but I think the number of people who enjoy hard core raiding are about the same that enjoy hard core PVP, which is why if I take a game like EVE and compare it to a well done pure pve game with little to no pvp the numbers will be pretty similar 200 to 400k ish.
That being my opinion I think they at least have to let the option be open and I worry they will make pvp too constrictive and when they marginalize that player group their just going to leave. Now I have to make the point that offering a product to a player leads to them buying into other things. Just offering hard core pve and pvp will lead to those players doing other casual things, putting money into the system and making the casuals feel like they are playing a game with some, whats the word legitimacy.
But honestly world pvp in most cases is not a hard core activity. Its a casual and fun activity thats probably a bit more stimulating than hunting quest rabbits. Look the whole world does not have to be hard core but there does need to be some scary world pvp areas that are not centralized designated areas at least I feel like thats the right decision for this game. At least some PvPvE content.
Also on the first point I dont think its a strawman but I do think your point of view is just different than mine on that. The only reason I bring up those games is because they are either in decline for copying a model or adding that model in later. All I am saying is they should take care to model the game carefully to the lore and fan base and not something that is alien to them. TOR was just an example of a model that probably would not have been so bad if not for the well known IP. Instead they took something well known and made something familiar to WoW players and very very unlike a Star Wars movie, bounty hunters and smugglers faction locked a travesty.
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus Mordred as the worst thing Mythic ever did... many tried it but only a very few stayed, the majorrity of people concluded that RvR PvP was far supperior to FFA.
Absolutely.....not.
Have you even played DAOC in its prime? Mordred was always a popular server and had ~1000 players on peaktime, which was very good for a DAOC server.
Granted, Mordred was not a server for mains, it was a server for when you wanted to goof around. But it was popular and exciting in its chaos. Many people played Mordred when they got tired of RvR. Why? Because there was real excitement, and a purpose; competition.
FFA PvP is always a fantastic experience, as it brings out the true nature of players and allows real consequences. It centers around the player, not the world.
TES, from the looks of it will be another run of the mill overhyped MMO just like GW2, LOTRO, DDO etc. All hand holding, instanced BS, questing, "At level 50 the game really opens up" what a load of crap.
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus Mordred as the worst thing Mythic ever did... many tried it but only a very few stayed, the majorrity of people concluded that RvR PvP was far supperior to FFA.
sorry, that is simply not true.
mordred was the definition of pvp.
nowhere was safe, you needed to form alliances good solid guilds to be able to achieve greatness.
i started characters on mordred and a regular server, and stayed mordred, if you want to pvp, you pvp.
imho there is no such thing as a convenience pvp player, or a part time pvp player, you either pvp or you dont.
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus Mordred as the worst thing Mythic ever did... many tried it but only a very few stayed, the majorrity of people concluded that RvR PvP was far supperior to FFA.
sorry, that is simply not true.
mordred was the definition of pvp.
nowhere was safe, you needed to form alliances good solid guilds to be able to achieve greatness.
i started characters on mordred and a regular server, and stayed mordred, if you want to pvp, you pvp.
imho there is no such thing as a convenience pvp player, or a part time pvp player, you either pvp or you dont.
the problem is that on world pvp servers, over time, a few guilds become dominant, and often one guild becomes dominant, and other folks stop logging on. That is a big reasons why those servers have such big population drops. Also its very hard to bring in new players unless they are aligned with the dominant guild(s) because the high level players are entrenched on top and its very hard for new players to progress and almost impossible to catch up when there is continual advancement (realm rank, gear, whatever).
I don't think Mordred was the worst thing Mythic ever did, far from it, it was successful (at first) and gave open world pvp types a place to play. But I totally disagree that Mordred-type servers would make a good base game, at least not a financially successful one. They are much more of a fringe element around a base game with closed realms and pvp in a separate region. It would be a horrible business decision for a game with mainstream appeal like ESO. If they want to have a Mordred server, fine, but watch the fast population dropoff when the top guilds get entrenched and new blood dries up.
And by the way, saying either you pvp or you don't, isn't that ridiculous? The majority of players did both PvE and PvP in DAoC. Its ridiculous to say someone cant do both and still enjoy PvP. Come on.
In any event, this decision has been made, ESO is what it is. Not every game is for every person. Find one you like better if you want pure hardcore open world PvP. ESO is clearly taking a more mainstream approach, which is a wise business decision even if some folks wont like it. It would be pretty stupid for a game linked to Elder Scrolls, with such a wide fan base, to do a 180 when it became a MMORPG and be hardcore open world. Jeesh.
the problem is that on world pvp servers, over time, a few guilds become dominant, and often one guild becomes dominant, and other folks stop logging on. That is a big reasons why those servers have such big population drops. Also its very hard to bring in new players unless they are aligned with the dominant guild(s) because the high level players are entrenched on top and its very hard for new players to progress and almost impossible to catch up when there is continual advancement (realm rank, gear, whatever).
I don't think Mordred was the worst thing Mythic ever did, far from it, it was successful (at first) and gave open world pvp types a place to play. But I totally disagree that Mordred-type servers would make a good base game, at least not a financially successful one. They are much more of a fringe element around a base game with closed realms and pvp in a separate region. It would be a horrible business decision for a game with mainstream appeal like ESO. If they want to have a Mordred server, fine, but watch the fast population dropoff when the top guilds get entrenched and new blood dries up.
And by the way, saying either you pvp or you don't, isn't that ridiculous? The majority of players did both PvE and PvP in DAoC. Its ridiculous to say someone cant do both and still enjoy PvP. Come on.
In any event, this decision has been made, ESO is what it is. Not every game is for every person. Find one you like better if you want pure hardcore open world PvP. ESO is clearly taking a more mainstream approach, which is a wise business decision even if some folks wont like it. It would be pretty stupid for a game linked to Elder Scrolls, with such a wide fan base, to do a 180 when it became a MMORPG and be hardcore open world. Jeesh.
Once again, I don't think anyone is suggesting making open world PvP the common ruleset, but it would be great to have that option on a separate non-instanced server.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
Originally posted by PsychoticHamster You'd think people would take the time to actually learn about a game before just spouting stuff off. PvP is handled entirely inside Cyrodiil, which is supposed to be larger than any other province within the game. Outside of that there is no PvP/interaction with other factions. ZOS has been pretty adamant about keeping it that way, and if you want to blame somebody; its Matt Firor. Think of ESO as the 2nd incarnation of DAoC, its PvP is nearly identical to it.
We understand, we just want that to change.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
Once again, I don't think anyone is suggesting making open world PvP the common ruleset, but it would be great to have that option on a separate non-instanced server.
understood. Since there aren't really 'servers' but rather 'campaigns' where you are assigned based on friends and play patterns etc, not sure if it would be that simple. Even with DAoC, the Mordred servers came well long after the game was released. That's probably a more realistic goal here, a separate campaign with a separate ruleset implemented well after release. They will probably have their hands full for release; a bad release will ruin a game.
Comments
People left because it became a gear orientated game.
Was a silly thing to do, especially when you consider all the EQ players that came to daoc when EQ went all gear grind end game
I don't think people who ask for these things know or care that it costs resources to produce their pet ideas. IF they add this, resources have to be taken from somewhere else. Then there is the OMG the devs are cheap/lazy types who think there is a endless pool of money. Or the people who think that it would only take a little amount of resources to produce their pet idea.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
SUP
doesnt hamper eve at all....
Interesting thing is, though, that with megaserver tech the servers are already going to be split according to playstyle. Don't see why it would be too resource intensive to implement a feature where PvP is simply open, always.
Mordred was the best gaming experience of my life.
BRING IT BACK RIGHT MEOW.
There are two kinds of people in this world. People who pick their nose.. and liars.
Yes, but Eve is a different style of game. A game like DAOC that relies on levels and gear, puts lower level players on a steep slope against the higher level players with no protection. UO was open PvP as well, but no levels evened the playing field somewhat providing you had some common sense, and a little bit of gear.
I was part of Mordreds so called "community". Other than a few guilds that actually PvPed primarily in the Frontiers, its was nothing but a bunch of bads griefing noobs in the starter towns.
And I will say this. I played UO for 6 years, from release. I played DAOC for almost 10, from release. UO was open PvP done correctly in spite of players doing their best trying to screw it up. I played thru the release which was a bloodbath, the addition of Trammel and all the rest of the crap. DAOC open PvP servers were a nightmare once players hit top level, all most scrubs wanted to do was farm the noobs because they would get slaughtered by any competent on level/geared opponent. In Mordred defense, TOA was the death knell as gearing at the start of TOA was ridiculously hard. TOA separated the "haves" from the "have nots" even more so. However RvR in DAOC was the games one redeeming quality and will always be the measuring stick that other PvP MMOs are measured by.
You cant fix stupid - Ron White
I would agree.
I'd be for an ffa pvp server. Not going to happen though.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Don't know why everyone is citing Mordred as a good example for a FFA pvp server. Mordred failed because the combat in DAoC was awful and there were no consequences for dying. Also, the way that the world was constructed made it difficult for players to level. In other games like AC, people had secret leveling spots and had a lot of options for laying low while still progressing. On Mordred that wasn't really a possibility.
Everybody should really be looking at Darktide, the pvp server in Asheron's Call. Unlike Mordred and Andred, Darktide was actually incredibly successful. After 14 years of existence it's the most populous server in the game with an active and dedicated community. People stayed because pvp has consequences (there is the potential for item loss on death) and the combat requires skill. The allegiance (clan) structure in the game fostered political struggles and massive, long-term wars, creating drama and entertainment for everyone.
It would be a huge mistake if ESO didn't have an ffa pvp server, the possibility for in-game player-driven history and narrative is massive.
Lol thanks for necroing my old thread
Honestly the differences between Mordred and Darktide were minimal, (XP vs Item loss). I would think the largest difference would be ditching the fake and forced instance based Realm V Realm in favor of an open world Guild V Guild conflict.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
I doubt they will introduce that, however I and sick of these lore breaking forced faction systems for game worlds that have no history of it before. Trying to turn Star wars into CATACLYSM was a disaster. It scares me that what we will end up with is a scarcity of any new ideas and just rehash of DAOC with some MOP elements thrown in, Dark age of Pandas. I have seen the pve videos, which are fine but meaningless since that kind of AI has been possible for 6 years now.
But there will have to be some world pvp in ESO for it to survive. There are two kinds of Elder Scroll players good guys who want to murder bad guys and Bad guys who want to murder good guys and steal things. This does not translate into an mmo where people will be content to go to designated pvp only areas and shoot catapults. Or zip around looking for raid parties 24/7. You ignore those people and just make a MOP clone with DAOC carrots thrown in, you will just get DAOC refugees and some bored WOW players, for 3 months or so.
Totally disagree. Their design is a nice balance between PvE and PvP, just like the original DAoC was. If open world pvp was so wildly popular, there would have been a dozen mordred servers in DAoC and only 1-2 PvE/PvP server instead of the other way around. Many people want to do some PvP but don't want to do it 24/7 within seconds when they log in. No system is going to please everyone, but theirs goes a long way to striking a nice balance that makes good business sense and will please a lot of players.
And by the way, its not fair to compare DAoC's player base from the early 2000s to today's, because so many fewer players played MMORPGs 10 years ago. Its gone up by a factor of 10 since then. Instead of looking at player numbers, think market share. If ESO only gets the same market share that DAoC got, that would be a 1-2 million subs, which would be enough all by itself to make the game profitable. And ESO has the big advantage of having the Elder Scrolls name attached to it, which will certainly attract some RPG players too.
Elladan - ESO (AD)
Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
Kili - WoW
Eol - Lineage 2
Camring - SWG
Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC
You are right it is not fair to compare sub numbers from a game in 2002 to 2004 just like its not fair to somehow think a game trying to attract at least 3 to 4 million people can survive on the percentage of DAOC vets who still actively play mmorpgs. You need new customers and you need to play up to your fan base for a game with this well known of an IP. If just copying a model and ignoring the fan base did the trick, TOR wold be worth playing right now and GW2 would be interesting.
Open world pvp is popular that is why WIOW had so many areas dedicated to it. Besides the Instance portal it was the entire reason STV existed. If people had not wanted that so many would have not left EQ2 in the first place.
who the hell is saying that ESO can survive on DAoC vets? The MMORPG audience is 10 times larger today, which means its reasonable to think that the audience for any MMORPG is potentially far larger than it was a decade ago. Its not just daoc vets, its anyone to whom a daoc-type game might appeal. I mean, that's so stupid, its like saying WoW's audience was limited to EQ vets. What a silly strawman.
I don't know what TOR has to do with this at all, another strawman. Or GW2. ESO is very different from those games in its emphasis on 3 realms with their own pve plus a huge pvp region.
As far as open world pvp being popular in wow, I guess that relative, because isn't that still a relatively small portion of WoW, just like Mordred was a small portion of DAoC's player base.
Listen, I am not saying that open world pvp isn't popular with some folks. Of course it is. But its not nearly as popular as pve or regional pvp. I think ESO has struck a pretty good balance, with traditional pve within the realms but endgame pvp outside of them. It has a pretty good chance to break the mold the endgame boss raid model that EQ made popular and WoW expanded on. I for one do not want to do endless repeats of endgame dungeons to win loot rolls and get my gear. I think there are a lot of others like that. I think open world pvp types would be better off in another game, just like I am better off not in WoW. I also think that ESO will more be more mainstream, casual game than DAoC and might turn off some of the hardcore DAoC pvp crowd. Which again I think is a smart business decision, one daoc itself probably wishes it could do over.
Elladan - ESO (AD)
Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
Kili - WoW
Eol - Lineage 2
Camring - SWG
Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC
Agree to disagree on a few points however I don't agree PVE is more popular than open world pvp. I think that its easy to muddy the water between normal monster killing quest pve and raid pvp which are not the same thing. Just like for PVP there is a difference for those of us who are active in it, in battlegrounds, arenas and world pvp. I think most players like to kill creatures for mats, quests, loot and such, but I think the number of people who enjoy hard core raiding are about the same that enjoy hard core PVP, which is why if I take a game like EVE and compare it to a well done pure pve game with little to no pvp the numbers will be pretty similar 200 to 400k ish.
That being my opinion I think they at least have to let the option be open and I worry they will make pvp too constrictive and when they marginalize that player group their just going to leave. Now I have to make the point that offering a product to a player leads to them buying into other things. Just offering hard core pve and pvp will lead to those players doing other casual things, putting money into the system and making the casuals feel like they are playing a game with some, whats the word legitimacy.
But honestly world pvp in most cases is not a hard core activity. Its a casual and fun activity thats probably a bit more stimulating than hunting quest rabbits. Look the whole world does not have to be hard core but there does need to be some scary world pvp areas that are not centralized designated areas at least I feel like thats the right decision for this game. At least some PvPvE content.
Also on the first point I dont think its a strawman but I do think your point of view is just different than mine on that. The only reason I bring up those games is because they are either in decline for copying a model or adding that model in later. All I am saying is they should take care to model the game carefully to the lore and fan base and not something that is alien to them. TOR was just an example of a model that probably would not have been so bad if not for the well known IP. Instead they took something well known and made something familiar to WoW players and very very unlike a Star Wars movie, bounty hunters and smugglers faction locked a travesty.
Absolutely.....not.
Have you even played DAOC in its prime? Mordred was always a popular server and had ~1000 players on peaktime, which was very good for a DAOC server.
Granted, Mordred was not a server for mains, it was a server for when you wanted to goof around. But it was popular and exciting in its chaos. Many people played Mordred when they got tired of RvR. Why? Because there was real excitement, and a purpose; competition.
FFA PvP is always a fantastic experience, as it brings out the true nature of players and allows real consequences. It centers around the player, not the world.
TES, from the looks of it will be another run of the mill overhyped MMO just like GW2, LOTRO, DDO etc. All hand holding, instanced BS, questing, "At level 50 the game really opens up" what a load of crap.
sorry, that is simply not true.
mordred was the definition of pvp.
nowhere was safe, you needed to form alliances good solid guilds to be able to achieve greatness.
i started characters on mordred and a regular server, and stayed mordred, if you want to pvp, you pvp.
imho there is no such thing as a convenience pvp player, or a part time pvp player, you either pvp or you dont.
over 20 years of mmorpg's and counting...
the problem is that on world pvp servers, over time, a few guilds become dominant, and often one guild becomes dominant, and other folks stop logging on. That is a big reasons why those servers have such big population drops. Also its very hard to bring in new players unless they are aligned with the dominant guild(s) because the high level players are entrenched on top and its very hard for new players to progress and almost impossible to catch up when there is continual advancement (realm rank, gear, whatever).
I don't think Mordred was the worst thing Mythic ever did, far from it, it was successful (at first) and gave open world pvp types a place to play. But I totally disagree that Mordred-type servers would make a good base game, at least not a financially successful one. They are much more of a fringe element around a base game with closed realms and pvp in a separate region. It would be a horrible business decision for a game with mainstream appeal like ESO. If they want to have a Mordred server, fine, but watch the fast population dropoff when the top guilds get entrenched and new blood dries up.
And by the way, saying either you pvp or you don't, isn't that ridiculous? The majority of players did both PvE and PvP in DAoC. Its ridiculous to say someone cant do both and still enjoy PvP. Come on.
In any event, this decision has been made, ESO is what it is. Not every game is for every person. Find one you like better if you want pure hardcore open world PvP. ESO is clearly taking a more mainstream approach, which is a wise business decision even if some folks wont like it. It would be pretty stupid for a game linked to Elder Scrolls, with such a wide fan base, to do a 180 when it became a MMORPG and be hardcore open world. Jeesh.
Elladan - ESO (AD)
Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
Kili - WoW
Eol - Lineage 2
Camring - SWG
Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC
Once again, I don't think anyone is suggesting making open world PvP the common ruleset, but it would be great to have that option on a separate non-instanced server.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
We understand, we just want that to change.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
understood. Since there aren't really 'servers' but rather 'campaigns' where you are assigned based on friends and play patterns etc, not sure if it would be that simple. Even with DAoC, the Mordred servers came well long after the game was released. That's probably a more realistic goal here, a separate campaign with a separate ruleset implemented well after release. They will probably have their hands full for release; a bad release will ruin a game.
Elladan - ESO (AD)
Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
Kili - WoW
Eol - Lineage 2
Camring - SWG
Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC