No one "knows" how the game works outside of SOE. They've shown us a decent amount of info through various outlets and with a bit of common sense and past experience, it isn't to hard to come to a conclusion of how the game will work. There are some very opposing opinions on what will happen, but there seems to be common ideas amongst fans.
If you aren't willing to research, don't expect others to educate you on every detail that we don't even know that well. Come back in a year or so when the game might be coming closer to reality and not just in-development and check out what they've officially released on their main site if you can't be bothered to spend 10 minutes looking around.
We were told the AI would be like this by a poster. All I did was ask if they were sure? Im not going to research other people's claims when they could just answer the question. If people can't back up their own claims, I'm not going to.
Ill come and go as I please thanks for the advice though.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
No one "knows" how the game works outside of SOE. They've shown us a decent amount of info through various outlets and with a bit of common sense and past experience, it isn't to hard to come to a conclusion of how the game will work. There are some very opposing opinions on what will happen, but there seems to be common ideas amongst fans.
If you aren't willing to research, don't expect others to educate you on every detail that we don't even know that well. Come back in a year or so when the game might be coming closer to reality and not just in-development and check out what they've officially released on their main site if you can't be bothered to spend 10 minutes looking around.
We were told the AI would be like this by a poster. All I did was ask if they were sure? Im not going to research other people's claims when they could just answer the question. If people can't back up their own claims, I'm not going to.
Ill come and go as I please thanks for the advice though.
If they are answering you, it is safe to say they are probably sure. Unless people have the habit of making things up as they go, which is possible. To me it seemed like "How's the weather" "Good" "Are you sure"....sometimes you have to look out the window yourself.
Those that responded to you seemed to share what I believe for the most part. Either we are all wrong or all sort of on the right track.
Maybe if you asked specific questions, you'd get better answers. Although as someone else suggested, the main site and google aren't too hard to use. A lot of the info is scattered but not hard to consume in a short period.
If you just looked into Storybricks which is doing the AI in EQN, you'd have most of your answers most likely. They haven't given step by step details of how things will be, but once you understand what and how Storybricks functions, it is easier to see where the game is going.
The AI and "sandbox" approach are what will most likely make EQN similar to EVE, not a huge reliance on PVP at the forefront of the game. Going back to the OP's statements. The AI will allow for players to experience the world in a new way that will hopefully seem more organic and less hand holding or themeparkish.
No one "knows" how the game works outside of SOE. They've shown us a decent amount of info through various outlets and with a bit of common sense and past experience, it isn't to hard to come to a conclusion of how the game will work. There are some very opposing opinions on what will happen, but there seems to be common ideas amongst fans.
If you aren't willing to research, don't expect others to educate you on every detail that we don't even know that well. Come back in a year or so when the game might be coming closer to reality and not just in-development and check out what they've officially released on their main site if you can't be bothered to spend 10 minutes looking around.
We were told the AI would be like this by a poster. All I did was ask if they were sure? Im not going to research other people's claims when they could just answer the question. If people can't back up their own claims, I'm not going to.
Ill come and go as I please thanks for the advice though.
If they are answering you, it is safe to say they are probably sure. Unless people have the habit of making things up as they go, which is possible. To me it seemed like "How's the weather" "Good" "Are you sure"....sometimes you have to look out the window yourself.
Those that responded to you seemed to share what I believe for the most part. Either we are all wrong or all sort of on the right track.
Maybe if you asked specific questions, you'd get better answers. Although as someone else suggested, the main site and google aren't too hard to use. A lot of the info is scattered but not hard to consume in a short period.
If you just looked into Storybricks which is doing the AI in EQN, you'd have most of your answers most likely. They haven't given step by step details of how things will be, but once you understand what and how Storybricks functions, it is easier to see where the game is going.
The AI and "sandbox" approach are what will most likely make EQN similar to EVE, not a huge reliance on PVP at the forefront of the game. Going back to the OP's statements. The AI will allow for players to experience the world in a new way that will hopefully seem more organic and less hand holding or themeparkish.
Except Smedley CONFIRMED that SOE is headed in the direction of Eve Online with PVP. I pasted his tweets in this thread.
Back in 2010 they said the game was being built from the ground up with PVP In mind.
People rejected that statement months ago as they said it hasn't been confirmed again since they scrapped earlier iterations of the game.
Well now it has been confirmed again by the president of the company. Deny all you want. It doesn't seem logical when you look at the conventional beliefs about what an MMO should be to sell well. That's the point. They're going to solve the problems that make OWPVP fail, probably using big data and the "life of consequence" to keep griefing from being an epidemic.
People rejected that statement months ago as they said it hasn't been confirmed again since they scrapped earlier iterations of the game.
Well now it has been confirmed again by the president of the company. Deny all you want. It doesn't seem logical when you look at the conventional beliefs about what an MMO should be to sell well. That's the point. They're going to solve the problems that make OWPVP fail, probably using big data and the "life of consequence" to keep griefing from being an epidemic.
He also said they would get PVP right in an EQ game or die trying (something like that). Just in case you need more ammunition.
"in the direction" doesn't mean EQN PVP = EVE PVP. Like I said, the simple fact that there will be multiple servers is one indicator that EQN won't have the same system, it just isn't possible from a realistic stand point. Add to that their discussion on having multiple rule sets on servers.
Have they "confirmed" in stone anything specific yet? No. It is all still up in the air, sort of the point of having players involved early on. PVP is not a specific term, your definition is probably not the same as mine. They've confirmed "PVP", EQN will be a "sandbox" in some fashion, and it will resemble other games that fit into that category (EVE, SWG, UO). All 3 of those games have been used as comparisons and all 3 handled PVP completely differently. That's it. No OW, FFA, flag, battlegrounds, contested lands, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely love a "sandbox" mmorpg (especially EQ IP) with PVP as a central element of the game. Knowing what we do so far of what they have planned and previous SOE games, I just don't see it being EVE in Norrath, at least not to the level that you appear to.
I think a "life of consequence" with realistic penalties and rewards for PVP would be a huge boon to get anti-PVP on the other side of the fence or at least peaking over.
Smedly says a lot of things and has strong beliefs on what he personally wants and enjoys. That doesn't mean EQN is his baby. I've said it before, but I doubt he'll even play it with his love of more FPS/MOBA games. Of course he isn't going to admit that, but it is my opinion.
Even if there are PVP servers or if all servers have a flag system, all I'm worried about is it having a reason and point. PVP largely fails because it is pointless.
I'm not a huge EVE fan, but from my understanding, PVP (pew pew type) is overall to control areas of the game, besides just random killing for pleasure/reward. Which then leads to political, economical, societal conflicts and happenings.
There is one thing that sets EQN a part though, it is a fantasy RPG. As EQN will have a story arch and other traditional elements, I don't see them allowing guilds to control Freeport or Lavastorm. Which would lead me to think that the game will have designated PVP areas with good rewards/resources that can be player controlled in some way. Outside of the main story area.
With at least 5 tiers and a huge world, there could be plenty of room for everyone that no one is given a crap version to play because of their preference. Players that want to always be in the mix could simply never leave the huge chunk of the world that is PVP oriented or flip their switch when venturing into the more "story" side of things and hope to run into others that want to fight.
If SOE is smart, they will go after the biggest crowd. From my experience that isn't the hardcore kill everything in sight PVP crowd or the "don't sneeze in my direction" PVE crowd. Most seem to sort of hang in the middle going one way or another depending on the reward and gameplay.
Whatever they decide, I personally don't think we have a clear picture yet and all of our conclusions are mainly based on our personal hopes. It is easy to twist vague details and quotes anyway we want. I'm hoping for the best, but am not going to be surprised by anything.
People rejected that statement months ago as they said it hasn't been confirmed again since they scrapped earlier iterations of the game.
Well now it has been confirmed again by the president of the company. Deny all you want. It doesn't seem logical when you look at the conventional beliefs about what an MMO should be to sell well. That's the point. They're going to solve the problems that make OWPVP fail, probably using big data and the "life of consequence" to keep griefing from being an epidemic.
Like Allein said "in the direction" doesn't mean "exactly like it". His blog mention of EvE wasn't even about PvP, it was about how the game allow players to do everything (as supported by the game). PvP isn't this everything, you can even stay in high-sec and avoid it (for the most part). The everything is running a business, crafting everything that is used by players, mining all the materials, having to transport all that stuff everywhere (aka a trading simulator because in the end that what EvE is about). EQNext isn't going to be a trading simulation, its focus is on adventuring.
Smedley loves PvP, but that doesn't mean that SOE games will all be forced OWPvP. I can already tell you that Landmark isn't going to be.
As for the "PvP in mind" comment, you realize that BioWare/EA said the same thing about SWTOR right? Doesn't mean anything, it's just a way to keep the PvPers interested in the game long enough for them to try it. You know when a MMO focus on PvP, the marketing will focus on it. Like ESO or DAoC or Age of Wushu. Even in GW2 you could tell which PvP was the most important in term of dev time because of marketing (WvW).
Mention of EQNext PvP was a dev slip at SOE Live. They were supposed to talk about it. The only thing it means is that PvP is below Rallying Calls, Multiclassing, Storybricks and the lore and everything else they talked about at SOE Live. Doesn't mean it's not going to be possible in EQNext, it means that from a development perspective, PvP isn't the focus of the game.
As for the "life of consequence", that was in relation to the Emergent AI (aka Storybricks). Not sure how the you can jump from what is talked about in the video that is all about PvE and go OWPvP is super important for EQNext.
Now, don't get me wrong here. I'm all for OWPvP with harsh consequences that cause players to actually not want to kill each others unless the reward is really worth it. I just do not believe that EQNext will focus on that one bit going by everything I've seen and read about the game.
Eve allowing players to "do everything" includes PVP. you can attack anyone anywhere and there is no artificial wall preventing you from doing it. you just get squashed by defenses depending on where you are in the game. sometimes people do a suicide run to take someone out. and people can pay for protection in their part of space which SOE could monetize the shit out of.
The blog post mentions a lot more than EvE PvE including things like music in LotRO, though those items were left out of the OP. I have no doubt that in Landmark and EQN there will be islands or plots that are PvP as well as servers for EQN. Building an MMO with PvP in mind from the beginning does not mean everyone will be subjected to it. SoE doesn't need to do that and lose a lot of money simply because. It won't happen.
its so hard waiting for this game....my mouth has been foaming ever since i seen the graphics and physics from videos, to top that off they seem legit about their PvP systems.... ;D
People rejected that statement months ago as they said it hasn't been confirmed again since they scrapped earlier iterations of the game.
Well now it has been confirmed again by the president of the company. Deny all you want. It doesn't seem logical when you look at the conventional beliefs about what an MMO should be to sell well. That's the point. They're going to solve the problems that make OWPVP fail, probably using big data and the "life of consequence" to keep griefing from being an epidemic.
The tweet you pasted from Smed was "Yes" Not exactly a detailed tweet. Think about the thousands of Everquest fans out there... if Smed wants an Eve-like game, he wouldn't slap the Everquest name on it. Open world PvP is not Everquest's legacy. I'm not saying EQN won't have PVP, but I think you're too overly optimistic about this. Edit: "this" being open world pvp.
SWG didn't have the trinity and it was the best MMO I've played. Yet, GW2 didn't and I thought it was meh. I guess it depends on the game and all of it's mechanics.
Sorry but you don't seem to realize that EVE Online is sooooo much more than just open world pvp. Just because that is the only aspect of that game that interests you doesn't mean that it is the only aspect of the game that Smed is talking about when he says they want to move that direction. Sandbox has a lot fo dimensions to it. Economy, crafting, character progression, open world building. Sandbox doesn't have to refer to pvp ruleset at all. One of the most Sandbox games ever made was A Tale in the Dessert and that has no combat at all.
I very much doubt SOE is planning to rebuild EVE in a fantasy world. That was more Darkfall's thing.
The above subhead extrapolates an oft-disputed quote attributed to Mahatma Gandhi: “You must be the change you wish to see in the world.” I think it fits well enough for Smedley’s solution though, which is to focus “on letting players make and be content for each other.” Citing battlegrounds, LOTRO’s music system, and auction houses, his opinion is that it’s important to have additional systems that create new ways for people to play.
Smedley writes, “Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated.” He imagines a city where the rogue’s guild is made up of actual players, and a “political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase.”"
So...tell me again how this will no doubt have OWPVP in it without an option of a PvE server?
Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others... Currently Playing: GW2
I'm trolling because you don't like my theory? no. why not move along and let like minded people discuss?
the devs have said a lot about the game but have sworn to secrecy on pvp. I wonder why? because, if my theory is rigjt (which it is) they want to reveal this in a very specific way way and get as many skeptics to try it as possible
Ah now you mention it's theory not fact, you should've started it like that then it wouldn't appear that you were baiting and trolling. So it just turns out to be your own opinion and just hearsay, so it is wishful thinking on your own part, fine.
Originally posted by Bidwood I'm trolling because you don't like my theory? no. why not move along and let like minded people discuss?
the devs have said a lot about the game but have sworn to secrecy on pvp. I wonder why? because, if my theory is rigjt (which it is) they want to reveal this in a very specific way way and get as many skeptics to try it as possible
So how do the battlegrounds mentioned by Smed fit into your "theory" of open world PVP?
Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others... Currently Playing: GW2
Thank you for contacting Sony Online Entertainment. EQNL should not be PVP but this could change you can read more oabout the road map of the game here: https://forums.station.sony.com/eqnlandmark/index.php?threads/eqnl-roadmap.18810/ You do not need a forum account to look at this page. If you have any more questions or concerns, please let me know.
Regards, Stephanie B Senior Contact at SOE Account, Billing, and Technical Support
Thank you for contacting Sony Online Entertainment. EQNL should not be PVP but this could change you can read more oabout the road map of the game here: https://forums.station.sony.com/eqnlandmark/index.php?threads/eqnl-roadmap.18810/ You do not need a forum account to look at this page. If you have any more questions or concerns, please let me know.
Regards, Stephanie B Senior Contact at SOE Account, Billing, and Technical Support
Thank you for contacting Sony Online Entertainment. EQNL should not be PVP but this could change you can read more oabout the road map of the game here: https://forums.station.sony.com/eqnlandmark/index.php?threads/eqnl-roadmap.18810/ You do not need a forum account to look at this page. If you have any more questions or concerns, please let me know.
Regards, Stephanie B Senior Contact at SOE Account, Billing, and Technical Support
Cheers
Not sure what you initially asked the TSR, but an Account, Billing, Tech Support Rep probably not the best source of future development of a game. Besides that, the link you provided and multiple other confirmations are out that EQN and LM will both have PVP in some form.
From the way they've talked about PVP in LM, I'd assume it will be 100% consensual where players can build arenas and other "friendly" type combat things. They could possibly have PVP continents with less restrictions on claims and other fun things, but I doubt it is a major priority at the moment.
Hopefully we'll get a better picture after March when they start rolling out more systems into LM.
Comments
We were told the AI would be like this by a poster. All I did was ask if they were sure? Im not going to research other people's claims when they could just answer the question. If people can't back up their own claims, I'm not going to.
Ill come and go as I please thanks for the advice though.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
If they are answering you, it is safe to say they are probably sure. Unless people have the habit of making things up as they go, which is possible. To me it seemed like "How's the weather" "Good" "Are you sure"....sometimes you have to look out the window yourself.
Those that responded to you seemed to share what I believe for the most part. Either we are all wrong or all sort of on the right track.
Maybe if you asked specific questions, you'd get better answers. Although as someone else suggested, the main site and google aren't too hard to use. A lot of the info is scattered but not hard to consume in a short period.
If you just looked into Storybricks which is doing the AI in EQN, you'd have most of your answers most likely. They haven't given step by step details of how things will be, but once you understand what and how Storybricks functions, it is easier to see where the game is going.
The AI and "sandbox" approach are what will most likely make EQN similar to EVE, not a huge reliance on PVP at the forefront of the game. Going back to the OP's statements. The AI will allow for players to experience the world in a new way that will hopefully seem more organic and less hand holding or themeparkish.
Except Smedley CONFIRMED that SOE is headed in the direction of Eve Online with PVP. I pasted his tweets in this thread.
Back in 2010 they said the game was being built from the ground up with PVP In mind.
http://eqnwire.com/2010/08/06/live-blog-eq-next/#more-5112
People rejected that statement months ago as they said it hasn't been confirmed again since they scrapped earlier iterations of the game.
Well now it has been confirmed again by the president of the company. Deny all you want. It doesn't seem logical when you look at the conventional beliefs about what an MMO should be to sell well. That's the point. They're going to solve the problems that make OWPVP fail, probably using big data and the "life of consequence" to keep griefing from being an epidemic.
He also said they would get PVP right in an EQ game or die trying (something like that). Just in case you need more ammunition.
"in the direction" doesn't mean EQN PVP = EVE PVP. Like I said, the simple fact that there will be multiple servers is one indicator that EQN won't have the same system, it just isn't possible from a realistic stand point. Add to that their discussion on having multiple rule sets on servers.
Have they "confirmed" in stone anything specific yet? No. It is all still up in the air, sort of the point of having players involved early on. PVP is not a specific term, your definition is probably not the same as mine. They've confirmed "PVP", EQN will be a "sandbox" in some fashion, and it will resemble other games that fit into that category (EVE, SWG, UO). All 3 of those games have been used as comparisons and all 3 handled PVP completely differently. That's it. No OW, FFA, flag, battlegrounds, contested lands, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely love a "sandbox" mmorpg (especially EQ IP) with PVP as a central element of the game. Knowing what we do so far of what they have planned and previous SOE games, I just don't see it being EVE in Norrath, at least not to the level that you appear to.
I think a "life of consequence" with realistic penalties and rewards for PVP would be a huge boon to get anti-PVP on the other side of the fence or at least peaking over.
Smedly says a lot of things and has strong beliefs on what he personally wants and enjoys. That doesn't mean EQN is his baby. I've said it before, but I doubt he'll even play it with his love of more FPS/MOBA games. Of course he isn't going to admit that, but it is my opinion.
Even if there are PVP servers or if all servers have a flag system, all I'm worried about is it having a reason and point. PVP largely fails because it is pointless.
I'm not a huge EVE fan, but from my understanding, PVP (pew pew type) is overall to control areas of the game, besides just random killing for pleasure/reward. Which then leads to political, economical, societal conflicts and happenings.
There is one thing that sets EQN a part though, it is a fantasy RPG. As EQN will have a story arch and other traditional elements, I don't see them allowing guilds to control Freeport or Lavastorm. Which would lead me to think that the game will have designated PVP areas with good rewards/resources that can be player controlled in some way. Outside of the main story area.
With at least 5 tiers and a huge world, there could be plenty of room for everyone that no one is given a crap version to play because of their preference. Players that want to always be in the mix could simply never leave the huge chunk of the world that is PVP oriented or flip their switch when venturing into the more "story" side of things and hope to run into others that want to fight.
If SOE is smart, they will go after the biggest crowd. From my experience that isn't the hardcore kill everything in sight PVP crowd or the "don't sneeze in my direction" PVE crowd. Most seem to sort of hang in the middle going one way or another depending on the reward and gameplay.
Whatever they decide, I personally don't think we have a clear picture yet and all of our conclusions are mainly based on our personal hopes. It is easy to twist vague details and quotes anyway we want. I'm hoping for the best, but am not going to be surprised by anything.
Like Allein said "in the direction" doesn't mean "exactly like it". His blog mention of EvE wasn't even about PvP, it was about how the game allow players to do everything (as supported by the game). PvP isn't this everything, you can even stay in high-sec and avoid it (for the most part). The everything is running a business, crafting everything that is used by players, mining all the materials, having to transport all that stuff everywhere (aka a trading simulator because in the end that what EvE is about). EQNext isn't going to be a trading simulation, its focus is on adventuring.
Smedley loves PvP, but that doesn't mean that SOE games will all be forced OWPvP. I can already tell you that Landmark isn't going to be.
As for the "PvP in mind" comment, you realize that BioWare/EA said the same thing about SWTOR right? Doesn't mean anything, it's just a way to keep the PvPers interested in the game long enough for them to try it. You know when a MMO focus on PvP, the marketing will focus on it. Like ESO or DAoC or Age of Wushu. Even in GW2 you could tell which PvP was the most important in term of dev time because of marketing (WvW).
Mention of EQNext PvP was a dev slip at SOE Live. They were supposed to talk about it. The only thing it means is that PvP is below Rallying Calls, Multiclassing, Storybricks and the lore and everything else they talked about at SOE Live. Doesn't mean it's not going to be possible in EQNext, it means that from a development perspective, PvP isn't the focus of the game.
As for the "life of consequence", that was in relation to the Emergent AI (aka Storybricks). Not sure how the you can jump from what is talked about in the video that is all about PvE and go OWPvP is super important for EQNext.
Now, don't get me wrong here. I'm all for OWPvP with harsh consequences that cause players to actually not want to kill each others unless the reward is really worth it. I just do not believe that EQNext will focus on that one bit going by everything I've seen and read about the game.
The tweet you pasted from Smed was "Yes" Not exactly a detailed tweet. Think about the thousands of Everquest fans out there... if Smed wants an Eve-like game, he wouldn't slap the Everquest name on it. Open world PvP is not Everquest's legacy. I'm not saying EQN won't have PVP, but I think you're too overly optimistic about this. Edit: "this" being open world pvp.
SWG didn't have the trinity and it was the best MMO I've played. Yet, GW2 didn't and I thought it was meh. I guess it depends on the game and all of it's mechanics.
Don't see it either, I think it's just wishful thinking on the OP's part, LOL.
"An it harm none, do what thou wilt"
Sorry but you don't seem to realize that EVE Online is sooooo much more than just open world pvp. Just because that is the only aspect of that game that interests you doesn't mean that it is the only aspect of the game that Smed is talking about when he says they want to move that direction. Sandbox has a lot fo dimensions to it. Economy, crafting, character progression, open world building. Sandbox doesn't have to refer to pvp ruleset at all. One of the most Sandbox games ever made was A Tale in the Dessert and that has no combat at all.
I very much doubt SOE is planning to rebuild EVE in a fantasy world. That was more Darkfall's thing.
All die, so die well.
The above subhead extrapolates an oft-disputed quote attributed to Mahatma Gandhi: “You must be the change you wish to see in the world.” I think it fits well enough for Smedley’s solution though, which is to focus “on letting players make and be content for each other.” Citing battlegrounds, LOTRO’s music system, and auction houses, his opinion is that it’s important to have additional systems that create new ways for people to play.
Smedley writes, “Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated.” He imagines a city where the rogue’s guild is made up of actual players, and a “political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase.”"
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/952/feature/8220/Smedley-the-Sandbox-and-Online-Society.html
So...tell me again how this will no doubt have OWPVP in it without an option of a PvE server?
Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA
Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others...
Currently Playing: GW2
Nytlok Sylas
80 Sylvari Ranger
If EQN is open PvP myself and my large-ish gaming group will not be playing it..
We were looking forward to it. Too Bad..
Don't worry it's not, if you watched the youtube presentation with all the devs and videos they showed they mentioned PvE more than PvP [mod edit]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Q4nswWwgLEw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=f6w1BGsgLjQ
"An it harm none, do what thou wilt"
the devs have said a lot about the game but have sworn to secrecy on pvp. I wonder why? because, if my theory is rigjt (which it is) they want to reveal this in a very specific way way and get as many skeptics to try it as possible
"An it harm none, do what thou wilt"
So how do the battlegrounds mentioned by Smed fit into your "theory" of open world PVP?
Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA
Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others...
Currently Playing: GW2
Nytlok Sylas
80 Sylvari Ranger
One is not like the other.
Anyway, never played open world PVP before. I don't think I would like it, but would probably give it a chance if I had to.
If it is a server ruleset situation, I'll choose my PvE server then.
Well, Everquest Next may have Open PvP but according to OFFICAL word EQ LANDMARK has no planned PvP
I am not at all interested in EQN only LANDMARK
*******************************************************
Thank you for contacting Sony Online Entertainment. EQNL should not be PVP but this could change you can read more oabout the road map of the game here: https://forums.station.sony.com/eqnlandmark/index.php?threads/eqnl-roadmap.18810/ You do not need a forum account to look at this page. If you have any more questions or concerns, please let me know.
Regards,
Stephanie B
Senior Contact at SOE Account, Billing, and Technical Support
Cheers
EQN:L PvP Nov 2013 Pre-Alpha
Roadmap Phase 3 PvP
Stephanie B seems misinformed. There's a lot of references out there.
Building =/= PvE...
Not sure what you initially asked the TSR, but an Account, Billing, Tech Support Rep probably not the best source of future development of a game. Besides that, the link you provided and multiple other confirmations are out that EQN and LM will both have PVP in some form.
From the way they've talked about PVP in LM, I'd assume it will be 100% consensual where players can build arenas and other "friendly" type combat things. They could possibly have PVP continents with less restrictions on claims and other fun things, but I doubt it is a major priority at the moment.
Hopefully we'll get a better picture after March when they start rolling out more systems into LM.