There's often a debate over the term MMO where I feel the first two letters stand for Massively Multiplayer represents far more than 64 or 128 players per server.
Once you say open "world" the pvp must pretty much cover every zone in the game world outside of a few small safe areas.
When talking about the real "world" we don't restrict the definition to just one part of it, rather we are talking about every place in it, same goes for game worlds, at least in my way of thinking.
I also take issue with calling games that permit players to freely move through the world with no fear of attack due to flagging or level based restrictions open world PVP hence titles such as WOW and BDO don't really qualify.
Mega server games with multiple instances of the same zone that players freely switch between (or escape to) also are outside of the definition as far as I'm concerned, but that is an entirely different debate for another day.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I also take issue with calling games that permit players to freely move through the world with no fear of attack due to flagging or level based restrictions open world PVP hence titles such as WOW and BDO don't really qualify.
But that is why we have this thing called free for all PVP (FFA). IF we're going to be sticklers about words and all . Which means attackable by all at all times. World PVP just means the PVP isn't separated into zones or BG matches.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
It's odd how some issues one sees very clearly as one thing can be argued as another with not very convincing arguments though in this case but nevertheless this is the human condition.
No not open world just area PvP. Seeing as there are two areas that makes it two areas for PvP. The area can be persistent but that does not change its confinement to one area. Open world is a term that should be self explanatory but alas it seems not.
I think this thread is pointless as people basically disagree with the meaning of 'Open World' particularly when associated with PvP.
Version 1 = Any zone or map which is not instanced and it's part of a seamless world (me and some others) Version 2 = The term can only be used if PvP is enabled in the entire World Map (others)
To be fair the right definition of 'Version 1' should be 'Non Instanced PvP' but I still call it 'Open World PvP' which only make sense if put in the right context. So when I say that that game has an 'Open World PvP' ZONE it's obvious what I am referring to, though I agree, it is not actually the most accurate definition.
Once you say open "world" the pvp must pretty much cover every zone in the game world outside of a few small safe areas.
That is the issue, right there. "Pretty much". As soon as you use terminology like that, you are simply drawing an arbitrary line in the sand and your point falls apart.
It's either absolutely everywhere, no restrictions at all (i.e. no safe zones at all), or you allow for restrictions. I don't know EVE at all, but a quick Google tells me UO had a safe zone, looks like Albion and Darkfall both have safe zones too.
So, if you are allowing safe zones, how is that different to LotRO? Granted, LotRO's safe zone is 99% of the game..
The important bit for me is the actual gameplay associated with open world pvp. Are there numbers restrictions? Are there gameplay restrictions? Am I forced into groups? Is the area I'm fighting in persistent? Are there win / lose conditions?
LotRO's Ettenmoors meets all these criteria easily. The type of gameplay I experienced for years in the Ettens is the same gameplay I experienced PvPing in SWG with it's flagging mechanism, it's the same as I experienced in the PvP lakes of WAR, and the same as Ilum in SW:TOR. The only difference is the available area in which to experience that gameplay.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
No not open world just area PvP. Seeing as there are two areas that makes it two areas for PvP. The area can be persistent but that does not change its confinement to one area. Open world is a term that should be self explanatory but alas it seems not.
That's a bizarre attitude to take, because that would mean if Lotro devs removed all areas except Ettenmoors it would make Ettenmoors open world PvP. Also if Darkfall added a PvE only continent, that would remove open world PvP from the whole game.
Open world PvP is an action that you can do in the game. If the game has large enough open world area where people can and do PvP, then it has open world PvP. The existence of other areas for other activities inside the game does not detract from that open world PvP in any way, and no game can ever be made open world PvP by removing other areas with other activities.
Once you say open "world" the pvp must pretty much cover every zone in the game world outside of a few small safe areas.
That is the issue, right there. "Pretty much". As soon as you use terminology like that, you are simply drawing an arbitrary line in the sand and your point falls apart.
It's either absolutely everywhere, no restrictions at all (i.e. no safe zones at all), or you allow for restrictions. I don't know EVE at all, but a quick Google tells me UO had a safe zone, looks like Albion and Darkfall both have safe zones too.
So, if you are allowing safe zones, how is that different to LotRO? Granted, LotRO's safe zone is 99% of the game..
The important bit for me is the actual gameplay associated with open world pvp. Are there numbers restrictions? Are there gameplay restrictions? Am I forced into groups? Is the area I'm fighting in persistent? Are there win / lose conditions?
LotRO's Ettenmoors meets all these criteria easily. The type of gameplay I experienced for years in the Ettens is the same gameplay I experienced PvPing in SWG with it's flagging mechanism, it's the same as I experienced in the PvP lakes of WAR, and the same as Ilum in SW:TOR. The only difference is the available area in which to experience that gameplay.
except, historically, when people talk about "open world" pvp they are talkign about "the world".
Most likely because that is where it originated, in games where the entire world except for a few safe zones, are open world. It's not an "arbitrary" line, the line is pretty delineated in that many open world pvp games have some safe zones. The world of Lord of the Rings online isn't "a safe zone" it's a completely different place.
So, in lineage 2 the towns were safe zones, small oases in the middle of open pvp world. In Lord of the Rings the Ettenmoors is it's own thing. It is not an oasis.
The whole purpose for being in the Ettenmoors is pvp. Unlike an open world pvp game where a lot of activities can happen in the world, including pvp, the Ettenmoors is "about" pvp.
So I suppose one can say the Ettenmoors is an open pvp zone and that would be just fine. It's not a world so it's not "open world pvp".
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Once you say open "world" the pvp must pretty much cover every zone in the game world outside of a few small safe areas.
That is the issue, right there. "Pretty much". As soon as you use terminology like that, you are simply drawing an arbitrary line in the sand and your point falls apart.
It's either absolutely everywhere, no restrictions at all (i.e. no safe zones at all), or you allow for restrictions. I don't know EVE at all, but a quick Google tells me UO had a safe zone, looks like Albion and Darkfall both have safe zones too.
So, if you are allowing safe zones, how is that different to LotRO? Granted, LotRO's safe zone is 99% of the game..
The important bit for me is the actual gameplay associated with open world pvp. Are there numbers restrictions? Are there gameplay restrictions? Am I forced into groups? Is the area I'm fighting in persistent? Are there win / lose conditions?
LotRO's Ettenmoors meets all these criteria easily. The type of gameplay I experienced for years in the Ettens is the same gameplay I experienced PvPing in SWG with it's flagging mechanism, it's the same as I experienced in the PvP lakes of WAR, and the same as Ilum in SW:TOR. The only difference is the available area in which to experience that gameplay.
I can kill you in UO(Felucca) in town 15 different ways , its not a "Safe-Zone"
It takes 2:45 to cross Ettenmoors E-W.. 3:55 N-S (because of ravine) This is an extremely small ,walled in area , A glorified BG .. And yes there are Win conditions , hence why the Freeps will get a Buff when Keeps captured ..
Yes there are restrictions as Ettenmoors bogs down performance badly with 100 plus in there ....ive seen it happen , but now, the pop doesnt let that happen any longer
And yes you must get in a raid (group ) in Ettenmoors , otherwise you are mostly useless, it is impossible to achive any of the win conditions without doing so ..
And there are no quests in Ettenmoors , not imo , they are all kill/collect tasks , i dont consider these quests .. And neither should anyone else
Ive played LOTRO for all 9 years its been up UO for 20 and War to RR 93 and still play on the emu server ...
Its a completly different eveperience than Ettenmoors particularly a game like UO or EVE , its nothing like Ettenmoors in anyway .....imo ...I also participated in SWG pvp i dont know how you can make that statement .. Traveling to another planet , crossing very large expansive areas ,skirmishing along the way to raid an enemy town ... Just because you can .. Is not like Ettemoors in my experience... SWG had a much stronger OPenWorld pvp feel .. Ettenmoors has a BG feel
Ettenmoors has the layout, mechainics and feel of any other BG in Wow for ex..
Once you say open "world" the pvp must pretty much cover every zone in the game world outside of a few small safe areas.
That is the issue, right there. "Pretty much". As soon as you use terminology like that, you are simply drawing an arbitrary line in the sand and your point falls apart.
It's either absolutely everywhere, no restrictions at all (i.e. no safe zones at all), or you allow for restrictions. I don't know EVE at all, but a quick Google tells me UO had a safe zone, looks like Albion and Darkfall both have safe zones too.
So, if you are allowing safe zones, how is that different to LotRO? Granted, LotRO's safe zone is 99% of the game..
The important bit for me is the actual gameplay associated with open world pvp. Are there numbers restrictions? Are there gameplay restrictions? Am I forced into groups? Is the area I'm fighting in persistent? Are there win / lose conditions?
LotRO's Ettenmoors meets all these criteria easily. The type of gameplay I experienced for years in the Ettens is the same gameplay I experienced PvPing in SWG with it's flagging mechanism, it's the same as I experienced in the PvP lakes of WAR, and the same as Ilum in SW:TOR. The only difference is the available area in which to experience that gameplay.
I can kill you in UO(Felucca) in town 15 different ways , its not a "Safe-Zone"
It takes 2:45 to cross Ettenmoors E-W.. 3:55 N-S (because of ravine) This is an extremely small ,walled in area , A glorified BG .. And yes there are Win conditions , hence why the Freeps will get a Buff when Keeps captured ..
Yes there are restrictions as Ettenmoors bogs down performance badly with 100 plus in there ....ive seen it happen , granet , the pop doesnt let that happen any longer
And yes you must get in a raid (group ) in Ettenmoors , otherwise you are mostly useless, it is impossible to achive any of the win conditions without doing so ..
And there are no quests in Ettenmoors , not imo , they are all kill/collect tasks , i dont consider these quests .. And neither should anyone else
Ive played LOTRO for all 9 years its been up UO for 20 and War to RR 93 and still play on the emu server ...
Its a completly different eveperience that Ettenmoors partiularly a game like UO or EVE , its nothing like Ettenmoors in anyway .....imo ...I also participated in SWG pvp i dont know how you can make that statement .. Traveling to another planet , crossing very large expansive areas ,skirmishing along the way to raid an enemy town ... Just because you can .. Is not like Ettemoors in my experience... SWG had a much stronger OPenWorld pvp feel .. Ettenmoors has a BG feel
Ettenmoors has the layout, mechainics and feel of any other BG in Wow for ex..
"Eveperience"... I liked that. Great Freudian slip
And yes I agree with you. One (or two zones) that are the exception don't define the game.
Even in ESO with its one huge PVP zone is definitely not an open world PVP game even though that one zone mimics the open world PVP experience.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Distopia said: But that is why we have this thing called free for all PVP (FFA). IF we're going to be sticklers about words and all . Which means attackable by all at all times. World PVP just means the PVP isn't separated into zones or BG matches.
No. FFA - free for all, can be a bg instance mode.
Once you say open "world" the pvp must pretty much cover every zone in the game world outside of a few small safe areas.
That is the issue, right there. "Pretty much". As soon as you use terminology like that, you are simply drawing an arbitrary line in the sand and your point falls apart.
It's either absolutely everywhere, no restrictions at all (i.e. no safe zones at all), or you allow for restrictions. I don't know EVE at all, but a quick Google tells me UO had a safe zone, looks like Albion and Darkfall both have safe zones too.
So, if you are allowing safe zones, how is that different to LotRO? Granted, LotRO's safe zone is 99% of the game..
The important bit for me is the actual gameplay associated with open world pvp. Are there numbers restrictions? Are there gameplay restrictions? Am I forced into groups? Is the area I'm fighting in persistent? Are there win / lose conditions?
LotRO's Ettenmoors meets all these criteria easily. The type of gameplay I experienced for years in the Ettens is the same gameplay I experienced PvPing in SWG with it's flagging mechanism, it's the same as I experienced in the PvP lakes of WAR, and the same as Ilum in SW:TOR. The only difference is the available area in which to experience that gameplay.
I can kill you in UO(Felucca) in town 15 different ways , its not a "Safe-Zone"
It takes 2:45 to cross Ettenmoors E-W.. 3:55 N-S (because of ravine) This is an extremely small ,walled in area , A glorified BG .. And yes there are Win conditions , hence why the Freeps will get a Buff when Keeps captured ..
Yes there are restrictions as Ettenmoors bogs down performance badly with 100 plus in there ....ive seen it happen , but now, the pop doesnt let that happen any longer
And yes you must get in a raid (group ) in Ettenmoors , otherwise you are mostly useless, it is impossible to achive any of the win conditions without doing so ..
And there are no quests in Ettenmoors , not imo , they are all kill/collect tasks , i dont consider these quests .. And neither should anyone else
Ive played LOTRO for all 9 years its been up UO for 20 and War to RR 93 and still play on the emu server ...
Its a completly different eveperience than Ettenmoors particularly a game like UO or EVE , its nothing like Ettenmoors in anyway .....imo ...I also participated in SWG pvp i dont know how you can make that statement .. Traveling to another planet , crossing very large expansive areas ,skirmishing along the way to raid an enemy town ... Just because you can .. Is not like Ettemoors in my experience... SWG had a much stronger OPenWorld pvp feel .. Ettenmoors has a BG feel
Ettenmoors has the layout, mechainics and feel of any other BG in Wow for ex..
I completely disagree that the ettens felt like a BG.
When I was playing (from release until sw:tor came out), there were no buffs for "winning". There was no such thing as winning. There were no time limits, there were no player limits beyond technical limitations. You say you were forced into raids, that was not my experience at all. I was solo / small group probably 90% of the time in the ettens and was always able to find enjoyable encounters and could take part in all the big action without any downsides. Hell, you could capture every single keep in the Ettens with a 6man group as long as you weren't spotted.
As to how I can call them similar experiences? Easy. They were all tab-target. They were all pvp encounters. They all had no time limits. They all had no player restrictions. They all had no win/lose conditions.
The differences, and thus the different feelings, all came about from the specific mechanics introduced to those games, not from the size of the zones we were fighting in. A 20v20 skirmish around the Elf Camp in the Ettens was no different than a 20v20 skirmish around anchorhead - both could last for hours, both could have unlimited kills / deaths / respawns. Both could be raid vs raid or everyone solo. The differences only came from the aesthetics of the area you're fighting in, plus the actual combat mechanics. The feel of it, the ebb and flow of the battle, the calls for reinforcements etc, that is what remained the same and it is that feeling (of scale and openness) which is the most important factor.
Anyways, ultimately it doesn't really matter. I love PvP, specifically objective-based open world (area) pvp. If it is restricted to a zone like the Ettenmoors, multiple zones like WAR, or is game-wide really doesn't make any difference. Regardless of the zone size, the population always ends up concentrated in 2-3 key spots anyway
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Once you say open "world" the pvp must pretty much cover every zone in the game world outside of a few small safe areas.
That is the issue, right there. "Pretty much". As soon as you use terminology like that, you are simply drawing an arbitrary line in the sand and your point falls apart.
It's either absolutely everywhere, no restrictions at all (i.e. no safe zones at all), or you allow for restrictions. I don't know EVE at all, but a quick Google tells me UO had a safe zone, looks like Albion and Darkfall both have safe zones too.
So, if you are allowing safe zones, how is that different to LotRO? Granted, LotRO's safe zone is 99% of the game..
The important bit for me is the actual gameplay associated with open world pvp. Are there numbers restrictions? Are there gameplay restrictions? Am I forced into groups? Is the area I'm fighting in persistent? Are there win / lose conditions?
LotRO's Ettenmoors meets all these criteria easily. The type of gameplay I experienced for years in the Ettens is the same gameplay I experienced PvPing in SWG with it's flagging mechanism, it's the same as I experienced in the PvP lakes of WAR, and the same as Ilum in SW:TOR. The only difference is the available area in which to experience that gameplay.
I can kill you in UO(Felucca) in town 15 different ways , its not a "Safe-Zone"
It takes 2:45 to cross Ettenmoors E-W.. 3:55 N-S (because of ravine) This is an extremely small ,walled in area , A glorified BG .. And yes there are Win conditions , hence why the Freeps will get a Buff when Keeps captured ..
Yes there are restrictions as Ettenmoors bogs down performance badly with 100 plus in there ....ive seen it happen , but now, the pop doesnt let that happen any longer
And yes you must get in a raid (group ) in Ettenmoors , otherwise you are mostly useless, it is impossible to achive any of the win conditions without doing so ..
And there are no quests in Ettenmoors , not imo , they are all kill/collect tasks , i dont consider these quests .. And neither should anyone else
Ive played LOTRO for all 9 years its been up UO for 20 and War to RR 93 and still play on the emu server ...
Its a completly different eveperience than Ettenmoors particularly a game like UO or EVE , its nothing like Ettenmoors in anyway .....imo ...I also participated in SWG pvp i dont know how you can make that statement .. Traveling to another planet , crossing very large expansive areas ,skirmishing along the way to raid an enemy town ... Just because you can .. Is not like Ettemoors in my experience... SWG had a much stronger OPenWorld pvp feel .. Ettenmoors has a BG feel
Ettenmoors has the layout, mechainics and feel of any other BG in Wow for ex..
I completely disagree that the ettens felt like a BG.
When I was playing (from release until sw:tor came out), there were no buffs for "winning". There was no such thing as winning. There were no time limits, there were no player limits beyond technical limitations. You say you were forced into raids, that was not my experience at all. I was solo / small group probably 90% of the time in the ettens and was always able to find enjoyable encounters and could take part in all the big action without any downsides. Hell, you could capture every single keep in the Ettens with a 6man group as long as you weren't spotted.
As to how I can call them similar experiences? Easy. They were all tab-target. They were all pvp encounters. They all had no time limits. They all had no player restrictions. They all had no win/lose conditions.
The differences, and thus the different feelings, all came about from the specific mechanics introduced to those games, not from the size of the zones we were fighting in. A 20v20 skirmish around the Elf Camp in the Ettens was no different than a 20v20 skirmish around anchorhead - both could last for hours, both could have unlimited kills / deaths / respawns. Both could be raid vs raid or everyone solo. The differences only came from the aesthetics of the area you're fighting in, plus the actual combat mechanics. The feel of it, the ebb and flow of the battle, the calls for reinforcements etc, that is what remained the same and it is that feeling (of scale and openness) which is the most important factor.
Anyways, ultimately it doesn't really matter. I love PvP, specifically objective-based open world (area) pvp. If it is restricted to a zone like the Ettenmoors, multiple zones like WAR, or is game-wide really doesn't make any difference. Regardless of the zone size, the population always ends up concentrated in 2-3 key spots anyway
The buff the freeps get for Keep capture has been there since day one ... And you may have wandered around a bit solo and small group.. Not the point i was making ..Like i said Its Impossible to complete any of the win condidtions without a raid .. this is a fact ...
The issue with calling keep buffs a victory condition is that it's a singular objective and not some kind of final victory.
It's not like a true victory condition where you get X kills, capture X flags, or whatever have you and then a menu pops up saying "Victory" or "Defeat" and it cuts to the post battle stats.
If you were to take an objective in a battleground that gives you a buff would you be like: "Victory! It's over! We won!" While the match is still running and there is still fighting going on? No. It's simply another step in the process of a battle. And in the Ettenmoors that battle is never over.
The issue with calling keep buffs a victory condition is that it's a singular objective and not some kind of final victory.
It's not like a true victory condition where you get X kills, capture X flags, or whatever have you and then a menu pops up saying "Victory" or "Defeat" and it cuts to the post battle stats.
If you were to take an objective in a battleground that gives you a buff would you be like: "Victory! It's over! We won!" While the match is still running and there is still fighting going on? No. It's simply another step in the process of a battle. And in the Ettenmoors that battle is never over.
ive been playing LOTRO and Ettemoors for 9 years now , and i cant tell you how many times in raid/chat/voice/worldchat/guildchat .. the phrases..
"We Won" "We Lost" "We got this " "We got our butts kicked " "We are going to lose here"
i wonder what we have been winning and losing .. its capture x keep , capture x outposts .. and then it will announce that Free Peoples of Middle Earth have won a Victory ...and buff kicks in
go figure its is a final Victory .. the Freeps wont get the buff till all condidtions are met .. then the cycle starts over when the keeps can be taken again
ive been playing LOTRO and Ettemoors for 9 years now , and i cant tell you how many times in raid/chat/voice/worldchat/guildchat .. the phrases..
"We Won" "We Lost" "We got this " "We got our butts kicked " "We are going to lose here"
i wonder what we have been winning and losing .. its capture x keep , capture x outposts .. and then it will announce that Free Peoples of Middle Earth have won a Victory ...and buff kicks in
go figure
Once again when you captured a keep or artifact in DAoC have you won the game or won a battle in a never ending war?
ive been playing LOTRO and Ettemoors for 9 years now , and i cant tell you how many times in raid/chat/voice/worldchat/guildchat .. the phrases..
"We Won" "We Lost" "We got this " "We got our butts kicked " "We are going to lose here"
i wonder what we have been winning and losing .. its capture x keep , capture x outposts .. and then it will announce that Free Peoples of Middle Earth have won a Victory ...and buff kicks in
go figure
Once again when you captured a keep or artifact in DAoC have you won the game or won a battle in a never ending war?
umm yea have captured Artis in DAOC ,and yea its alotta work a pretty big Celebration and Victory ... by wording won the game is misleading and you know it ...
Distopia said: But that is why we have this thing called free for all PVP (FFA). IF we're going to be sticklers about words and all . Which means attackable by all at all times. World PVP just means the PVP isn't separated into zones or BG matches.
No. FFA - free for all, can be a bg instance mode.
It just means "everyone vs everyone".
(Open) World PVP is just that - pvp everywhere.
That's essentially what I meant, I didn't mean to imply FFA had to be any certain way.... There can be all kinds of FFA PVP be it AOC's PVP servers,wide open areas like EVE, Death match modes in FPS games etc...
My main point was that Open world PVP doesn't have to be FFA. Which is what Kyleran seemingly implied. His definition would exclude a number of games, like SWG, Which allowed PVP every where. It just offered a non combatant status. Which makes perfect sense for any "war" game..
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
That's essentially what I meant, I didn't mean to imply FFA had to be any certain way.... There can be all kinds of FFA PVP be it AOC's PVP servers,wide open areas like EVE, Death match modes in FPS games etc...
My main point was that Open world PVP doesn't have to be FFA. Which is what Kyleran seemingly implied. His definition would exclude a number of games, like SWG, Which allowed PVP every where. It just offered a non combatant status. Which makes perfect sense for any "war" game..
I see, my complete fail and apology. I misread your post and post you were replying to.
ive been playing LOTRO and Ettemoors for 9 years now , and i cant tell you how many times in raid/chat/voice/worldchat/guildchat .. the phrases..
"We Won" "We Lost" "We got this " "We got our butts kicked " "We are going to lose here"
i wonder what we have been winning and losing .. its capture x keep , capture x outposts .. and then it will announce that Free Peoples of Middle Earth have won a Victory ...and buff kicks in
go figure
Once again when you captured a keep or artifact in DAoC have you won the game or won a battle in a never ending war?
umm yea have captured Artis in DAOC ,and yea its alotta work a pretty big Celebration and Victory ... by wording won the game is misleading and you know it ...
you seem to imply that people are winning the Ettenmoors when they are doing something similar to DAoC victories.
That's because Open World PvP means PvP in an Open World not the the entire world is Open PvP. Everything struggles to live up to the later definition. The fact that's so hard for people is mind boggling to to me.
You will die if you attack anyone in high sec and EVE without a wardec.
You be near guaranteed death if you attacked someone in a town in Darkfall or Mortal Online without a wardec.
In all of those titles you can straight up dodge wardecs by not joining guilds.
Most other games have zones that PvP is straight up forbidden including Darkfall Unholy Wars.
If we go by your definition it's not a concept worth discussing because almost nothing really lives up to it. Which is why non-biased searches have failed to produce a single articulate poster anywhere on the internet that seems to have written any definition that matches your description while I quickly and easily found three that pretty much mirror what I am saying in the first page of "Define Open World PvP"
Comments
Open world pvp just like open world PVE means to me that I can do both of the above anywhere I want.
Open world mmo's mean to me that there are no instances and it's literally one big map with dungeons and cities.
Lotro is a PVE mmo with one zone you can pvp in and thank God for that.
There's often a debate over the term MMO where I feel the first two letters stand for Massively Multiplayer represents far more than 64 or 128 players per server.
Once you say open "world" the pvp must pretty much cover every zone in the game world outside of a few small safe areas.
When talking about the real "world" we don't restrict the definition to just one part of it, rather we are talking about every place in it, same goes for game worlds, at least in my way of thinking.
I also take issue with calling games that permit players to freely move through the world with no fear of attack due to flagging or level based restrictions open world PVP hence titles such as WOW and BDO don't really qualify.
Mega server games with multiple instances of the same zone that players freely switch between (or escape to) also are outside of the definition as far as I'm concerned, but that is an entirely different debate for another day.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
No not open world just area PvP. Seeing as there are two areas that makes it two areas for PvP. The area can be persistent but that does not change its confinement to one area. Open world is a term that should be self explanatory but alas it seems not.
Version 1 = Any zone or map which is not instanced and it's part of a seamless world (me and some others)
Version 2 = The term can only be used if PvP is enabled in the entire World Map (others)
To be fair the right definition of 'Version 1' should be 'Non Instanced PvP' but I still call it 'Open World PvP' which only make sense if put in the right context.
So when I say that that game has an 'Open World PvP' ZONE it's obvious what I am referring to, though I agree, it is not actually the most accurate definition.
It's either absolutely everywhere, no restrictions at all (i.e. no safe zones at all), or you allow for restrictions. I don't know EVE at all, but a quick Google tells me UO had a safe zone, looks like Albion and Darkfall both have safe zones too.
So, if you are allowing safe zones, how is that different to LotRO? Granted, LotRO's safe zone is 99% of the game..
The important bit for me is the actual gameplay associated with open world pvp. Are there numbers restrictions? Are there gameplay restrictions? Am I forced into groups? Is the area I'm fighting in persistent? Are there win / lose conditions?
LotRO's Ettenmoors meets all these criteria easily. The type of gameplay I experienced for years in the Ettens is the same gameplay I experienced PvPing in SWG with it's flagging mechanism, it's the same as I experienced in the PvP lakes of WAR, and the same as Ilum in SW:TOR. The only difference is the available area in which to experience that gameplay.
Open world PvP is an action that you can do in the game. If the game has large enough open world area where people can and do PvP, then it has open world PvP. The existence of other areas for other activities inside the game does not detract from that open world PvP in any way, and no game can ever be made open world PvP by removing other areas with other activities.
Most likely because that is where it originated, in games where the entire world except for a few safe zones, are open world. It's not an "arbitrary" line, the line is pretty delineated in that many open world pvp games have some safe zones. The world of Lord of the Rings online isn't "a safe zone" it's a completely different place.
So, in lineage 2 the towns were safe zones, small oases in the middle of open pvp world. In Lord of the Rings the Ettenmoors is it's own thing. It is not an oasis.
The whole purpose for being in the Ettenmoors is pvp. Unlike an open world pvp game where a lot of activities can happen in the world, including pvp, the Ettenmoors is "about" pvp.
So I suppose one can say the Ettenmoors is an open pvp zone and that would be just fine. It's not a world so it's not "open world pvp".
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
It takes 2:45 to cross Ettenmoors E-W.. 3:55 N-S (because of ravine) This is an extremely small ,walled in area , A glorified BG .. And yes there are Win conditions , hence why the Freeps will get a Buff when Keeps captured ..
Yes there are restrictions as Ettenmoors bogs down performance badly with 100 plus in there ....ive seen it happen , but now, the pop doesnt let that happen any longer
And yes you must get in a raid (group ) in Ettenmoors , otherwise you are mostly useless, it is impossible to achive any of the win conditions without doing so ..
And there are no quests in Ettenmoors , not imo , they are all kill/collect tasks , i dont consider these quests .. And neither should anyone else
Ive played LOTRO for all 9 years its been up UO for 20 and War to RR 93 and still play on the emu server ...
Its a completly different eveperience than Ettenmoors particularly a game like UO or EVE , its nothing like Ettenmoors in anyway .....imo ...I also participated in SWG pvp i dont know how you can make that statement .. Traveling to another planet , crossing very large expansive areas ,skirmishing along the way to raid an enemy town ... Just because you can .. Is not like Ettemoors in my experience... SWG had a much stronger OPenWorld pvp feel .. Ettenmoors has a BG feel
Ettenmoors has the layout, mechainics and feel of any other BG in Wow for ex..
And yes I agree with you. One (or two zones) that are the exception don't define the game.
Even in ESO with its one huge PVP zone is definitely not an open world PVP game even though that one zone mimics the open world PVP experience.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
FFA - free for all, can be a bg instance mode.
It just means "everyone vs everyone".
(Open) World PVP is just that - pvp everywhere.
When I was playing (from release until sw:tor came out), there were no buffs for "winning". There was no such thing as winning. There were no time limits, there were no player limits beyond technical limitations. You say you were forced into raids, that was not my experience at all. I was solo / small group probably 90% of the time in the ettens and was always able to find enjoyable encounters and could take part in all the big action without any downsides. Hell, you could capture every single keep in the Ettens with a 6man group as long as you weren't spotted.
As to how I can call them similar experiences? Easy. They were all tab-target. They were all pvp encounters. They all had no time limits. They all had no player restrictions. They all had no win/lose conditions.
The differences, and thus the different feelings, all came about from the specific mechanics introduced to those games, not from the size of the zones we were fighting in. A 20v20 skirmish around the Elf Camp in the Ettens was no different than a 20v20 skirmish around anchorhead - both could last for hours, both could have unlimited kills / deaths / respawns. Both could be raid vs raid or everyone solo. The differences only came from the aesthetics of the area you're fighting in, plus the actual combat mechanics. The feel of it, the ebb and flow of the battle, the calls for reinforcements etc, that is what remained the same and it is that feeling (of scale and openness) which is the most important factor.
Anyways, ultimately it doesn't really matter. I love PvP, specifically objective-based open world (area) pvp. If it is restricted to a zone like the Ettenmoors, multiple zones like WAR, or is game-wide really doesn't make any difference. Regardless of the zone size, the population always ends up concentrated in 2-3 key spots anyway
It's not like a true victory condition where you get X kills, capture X flags, or whatever have you and then a menu pops up saying "Victory" or "Defeat" and it cuts to the post battle stats.
If you were to take an objective in a battleground that gives you a buff would you be like: "Victory! It's over! We won!" While the match is still running and there is still fighting going on? No. It's simply another step in the process of a battle. And in the Ettenmoors that battle is never over.
Guess in DAoC you won when you have the buffs.
"We Won" "We Lost" "We got this " "We got our butts kicked " "We are going to lose here"
i wonder what we have been winning and losing .. its capture x keep , capture x outposts .. and then it will announce that Free Peoples of Middle Earth have won a Victory ...and buff kicks in
go figure its is a final Victory .. the Freeps wont get the buff till all condidtions are met .. then the cycle starts over when the keeps can be taken again
Once again when you captured a keep or artifact in DAoC have you won the game or won a battle in a never ending war?
My main point was that Open world PVP doesn't have to be FFA. Which is what Kyleran seemingly implied. His definition would exclude a number of games, like SWG, Which allowed PVP every where. It just offered a non combatant status. Which makes perfect sense for any "war" game..
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
you seem to imply that people are winning the Ettenmoors when they are doing something similar to DAoC victories.
Open World PvP is when the World, not a Zone, not a section of a zone,) but the Game World is Open PvP.
Otherwise it would called "Open Zone PvP" which is what is commonly called a "Battlefield"
The fact that people struggle with this, is mind boggling.
You will die if you attack anyone in high sec and EVE without a wardec.
You be near guaranteed death if you attacked someone in a town in Darkfall or Mortal Online without a wardec.
In all of those titles you can straight up dodge wardecs by not joining guilds.
Most other games have zones that PvP is straight up forbidden including Darkfall Unholy Wars.
If we go by your definition it's not a concept worth discussing because almost nothing really lives up to it. Which is why non-biased searches have failed to produce a single articulate poster anywhere on the internet that seems to have written any definition that matches your description while I quickly and easily found three that pretty much mirror what I am saying in the first page of "Define Open World PvP"