These stories sound so cute in discussion threads, but they don't stay cute after production release. This is just a common every day every hour occurrence. Two dudes got ganked. One lost all their crap. The other didn't know what to do except run. That doesn't sound special. It sounds like 2 teammates aren't pulling their weight and are burdening the tribe with having to replace valuable resources.
Successful competitive PvP games don't take away long term progress for short term failure. The purpose is to win the competition not grief other players with tedious grind mechanics. This is why MMO/Survival pvp games hit a lower saturation cap than coop pve or competitive pvp games and can never break out of that cap (EVE, ARK, etc).
There is a crowd for these types of games, but it's niche and limited because the majority of people don't want to engage in that cycle. They don't want weeks or months of time to be blown away so a couple of try-hards can get their giggles for 10 minutes. I'm pretty sure Amazon doesn't want to saddle their new flagship title with such a limitation either.
Well, we loved it in Lineage 2.
You saying there is a crowd but it's niche doesn't discount that "there's still a crowd."
Clearly it was meaningful to him. You and other not liking it doesn't diminish that.
Any more that having a party of alliance members getting ganked in the Tower of Insolence and having the entire alliance march up that thing to take out the opposing alliance was some one of the best game experiences I've ever had. You and others thinking it's "cute" is on you. We still cherish these events.
That type of game play, for those who appreciate it, makes the games feel more impactful and real.
The other stuff, fun as it is, feels fluffy.
So sure, there is a smaller group of people who like that. But we still like that. Nothing changes that.
The issue is whether studios can make a game like that and make it actually be good. More often than not there are fans of those games who get together to try but they just don't have the resources, and in many cases, the experience.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
What does "it feels more real and impactful" even mean? I qualified why the experience sucks and you come back with "nuh uh, it feels good so it's obviously valid"? Really? Why does it feel good to have months of progress wiped out and have to start all over again from scratch? Is that what you experienced in L2? I don't think so.
Once again, you use your own place as a measurement for other people. stop that. Really?
Just because you losing items makes you rage (or whatever it is you do) doesn't mean that other people put the same weight into that experience.
And though it's not a completely apples to apples comparison, going red in Lineage 2 and then getting killed and dropping VERY EXPENSIVE or hard to get gear, only to have someone else pick it up is somewhat comparable. I would wonder if the time spent to get that gear is exactly on par for Ark or is it easier in Ark? Or harder?
But that's not the point. This is the point ...
"These stories sound so cute in discussion threads, but they don't stay cute after production release. "
That' you. That's all about how you interface with a game and it's rules and what you think is viable or not. You pretty much dissed his experience because of your own opinion. Crappy thing to do.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
They did math. I hear multibillion companies like math.
They compared the amount of people who play Wow (pvp but not if you don't wanna) to the dozens, literally dozens! Of people playing, say, rise of Agon (open pvp with full loot)
The games with pvp that have success, have mechanisms in place to define portions of the game world as relatively safe (eve) or place harsh penalties on PKs (L2). Let's see where on the pvp spectrum this one falls.
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
I wasn't interested in the game before and this announcement doesn't change anything. I am curious though how much they have compromised their vision of the game in order to grab a larger crowd.
And people complain about game studios not listening to feedback. Perhaps the feedback was too much pvp? Theres a fine line between pushing a personal vision of a game, and making a game people enjoy to play. Studios do have bills to pay, and if they find out the vision they had just wont cut it, they need to adjust somewhat to what players do find enjoyable. I feel they will still have a large portion of Pvp, just not forced like it was before.
Well I can honestly say it is a step in the right direction for me personally. I have nothing against those who love to gank, but you are a dying breed. And it has been proven time and again that a full loot PVP gankfest game has a very limited lifespan. Once the gankers run off all the meat, they turn on each other, and a server dies very quickly for lack of population.
I will say that I played the Alpha. I knew what I was getting into, I figured I would give it a shot anyways, maybe the game was interesting enough to deal with some resource loss, or the occasional gank. Found out quickly the game wasnt for me, so I uninstalled and moved on. I did not go to the forums and cry about the survival mechanics or the PVP. Im not interested in those aspects, so I moved on. Let the game be what it wants.
Apparently I am not alone, so Amazon decided to make changes. I will now be reinstalling and giving the game another try. I guess thats what Amazon expected, and they were right. Maybe there is still a niche market out there somewhere for a full loot gankfest, but they want more. I dont blame them. I was happy letting the game be, if thats what they wanted, but now that they are changing it, I am slightly more interested again. Time will tell.
So we now have an open world PVE game that wasn't meant to be a PVE game?
With what we now know - still not everything - I think it was always going to have PvE alongside PvP. And having both is - almost - as old as mmorpgs.
Whether the "type" of PvP had been nailed down? Don't know. Amazon Games though, within its ranks, has people who know all the pros and cons of every single possibility.
I dont understand the problem here. They didnt removed pvp, they removed forced pvp... Do pvp players have problem play against other pvp players instead of pve ones? Or they think they are so few in numbers and so they need others forced to play their game style?
Amazon simple didnt want their game to end like Archeage or Darkfall etc. PVP players can still pvp. If you just want to fight against unprepared pve players then you are not a pvper.
Will be interesting to see where this lands. I'll most likely pick this up.
The open world FFA pvp had its interesting moments, but as could easily be seen it lead down the dark road it always does.
Non-consensual PVP..only people who complain about NOT having that in a game are people that get their kicks out of ganking lesser skilled players that want to play the game for different reasons. There's no truthful reason for crying about losing that feature other than that.
Love seeing a couple posts pointing fingers at Goons. There were other guilds filled with scum and villainy...
Such a let down for me. Pretty much every MMO leans far on the PvE side and this now sounds like it went exactly the same way as WoW and ESO. Just another drop in the never ending bucket of PvE MMO’s. I thought NW was innovating the genre and going to break the “separate and completely unequal” PvE/PvP approach, but it looks like even Amazon is bowing down to Blizzards formula.
There are 50 v 50 sieges you can sign up for in game - I guess they couldn't make large scale PvP work
The sandbox elements were all removed except for housing related items
Removing survival elements is a good move - but not sure who this will appeal to - the PvE is half assed and PvP is half assed...
Just strange - feels like they are flip flopping without a clear vision and Amazon is just pushing to get this out asap.
The 50v50 sieges are large scale PVP? I think PVE sieges are the only ones you sign up for, but the whole territory claim, and fighting against other companies is still a huge part of the game. In alpha almost everyone wanted way more PVE content, and wanted PVP to be opt-in, specifically when roaming around doing stuff and almost everyone wanted the survival mechanics to be removed. They literally listened to the testers from the persistent alpha on these things, and honestly I think the game is going to be better for these changes, and if anything I think the game has found it's direction more now than it felt like it had in alpha.
Well that probably got a lot more people interested.
At the loss of original fans who were hoping for a full PvP survival game
Not sure there are more people interested- just different people.
Also I seriously doubt the PvE quality and content to be good enough for PvE crowd
I think the opposite is true, when NW was announced people were excited for it until the survival and PVP-centric gameplay was leaked, and that is when a lot of people stopped following it. Alpha feedback also reflected this.
Pretty much, yeah.
It's when I largely stopped paying attention to it.
If I wanted that sort of thing, I'd just jump onto Life is Feudal or one of the million other survival games where you can get this sort of experience already.
Curious to see where they'll go with this now.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
You can spin it as directionless or betrayal. Or you can see it as what every game developer should do: Listen, Adapt, and be ready to "kill your darlings". That is how you improve your chances of making better games.
Such a let down for me. Pretty much every MMO leans far on the PvE side and this now sounds like it went exactly the same way as WoW and ESO. Just another drop in the never ending bucket of PvE MMO’s. I thought NW was innovating the genre and going to break the “separate and completely unequal” PvE/PvP approach, but it looks like even Amazon is bowing down to Blizzards formula.
Probably they actually want to make money instead of catering to players that drive other players away by relentless ganking and stupid behaviour that ultimately reduces the population.
I liked the way Ryzom did PvP. Put the most valuable resources in a PvP zone. And also allow people to individually flag for PvP, so they can do it anywhere with others who are also flagged.
To take over another guild's outpost, that produces resources, the PvP was scheduled.
Full open world PvP only appeals to 10% of the playerbase.
Fact is you could make a good PvP free for all game but one with punishments for behaviour that duplicates crime. Punishments don't go against the ffa concept it just makes it possible for there to be a filter for the type player that plays this game as an asshole, those players will be filtered out.
Fact is you could make a good PvP free for all game but one with punishments for behaviour that duplicates crime. Punishments don't go against the ffa concept it just makes it possible for there to be a filter for the type player that plays this game as an asshole, those players will be filtered out.
The 100 previous attemps at this kind of punishment systems to prevent players from being asholes, have all worked so very well. Yup keep on making that, it will totally work the 101th time.
Fact is you could make a good PvP free for all game but one with punishments for behaviour that duplicates crime. Punishments don't go against the ffa concept it just makes it possible for there to be a filter for the type player that plays this game as an asshole, those players will be filtered out.
The 100 previous attemps at this kind of punishment systems to prevent players from being asholes, have all worked so very well. Yup keep on making that, it will totally work the 101th time.
Never really tried that hard. That’s the problem. ’PvP’ games Never really punished PvP abuse because, you know, it’s a PVP game.
Of all FFA PVP games I played (almost everyone), I found out that usually the population is made by 70% Carebear and 30% full time PVPers.
Carebears are not pure PVErs, they do like PvP but in moderation, and they want to be able to choose when to do it, like taking parts in GvG and RvR battles for example, or entering FFA zones for rare materials. They do not want PVP everywhere.
Yet developers didn’t seem to have picked this up yet. In fact games like EVE seems to go even backward doing the same mistakes other failed FFA games did.
When I wanna do sieges I can toggle pvp. When I want to do some exploring or bestiary hunting I can turn it off. This is perfect. Even though it's an mmo, some days I just don't want to be bothered with other people or group events.
Comments
You saying there is a crowd but it's niche doesn't discount that "there's still a crowd."
Clearly it was meaningful to him. You and other not liking it doesn't diminish that.
Any more that having a party of alliance members getting ganked in the Tower of Insolence and having the entire alliance march up that thing to take out the opposing alliance was some one of the best game experiences I've ever had. You and others thinking it's "cute" is on you. We still cherish these events.
That type of game play, for those who appreciate it, makes the games feel more impactful and real.
The other stuff, fun as it is, feels fluffy.
So sure, there is a smaller group of people who like that. But we still like that. Nothing changes that.
The issue is whether studios can make a game like that and make it actually be good. More often than not there are fans of those games who get together to try but they just don't have the resources, and in many cases, the experience.
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
Just because you losing items makes you rage (or whatever it is you do) doesn't mean that other people put the same weight into that experience.
And though it's not a completely apples to apples comparison, going red in Lineage 2 and then getting killed and dropping VERY EXPENSIVE or hard to get gear, only to have someone else pick it up is somewhat comparable. I would wonder if the time spent to get that gear is exactly on par for Ark or is it easier in Ark? Or harder?
But that's not the point. This is the point ...
"These stories sound so cute in discussion threads, but they don't stay cute after production release. "
That' you. That's all about how you interface with a game and it's rules and what you think is viable or not. You pretty much dissed his experience because of your own opinion. Crappy thing to do.
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
They compared the amount of people who play Wow (pvp but not if you don't wanna) to the dozens, literally dozens! Of people playing, say, rise of Agon (open pvp with full loot)
The games with pvp that have success, have mechanisms in place to define portions of the game world as relatively safe (eve) or place harsh penalties on PKs (L2). Let's see where on the pvp spectrum this one falls.
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Dwight D Eisenhower
My optimism wears heavy boots and is loud.
Henry Rollins
(edited for my pathetic grammar)
I will say that I played the Alpha. I knew what I was getting into, I figured I would give it a shot anyways, maybe the game was interesting enough to deal with some resource loss, or the occasional gank. Found out quickly the game wasnt for me, so I uninstalled and moved on. I did not go to the forums and cry about the survival mechanics or the PVP. Im not interested in those aspects, so I moved on. Let the game be what it wants.
Apparently I am not alone, so Amazon decided to make changes. I will now be reinstalling and giving the game another try. I guess thats what Amazon expected, and they were right. Maybe there is still a niche market out there somewhere for a full loot gankfest, but they want more. I dont blame them. I was happy letting the game be, if thats what they wanted, but now that they are changing it, I am slightly more interested again. Time will tell.
Whether the "type" of PvP had been nailed down? Don't know. Amazon Games though, within its ranks, has people who know all the pros and cons of every single possibility.
But don't wait for me, because I like the overall sound of these changes, so I prbly won't be the mouthpiece you're looking for.
I cut my teeth on LOTRO's 'Moors map, and like that kind of open map opt-in PvP. I did like SWTOR's PvP also though...
I'm an enigma wrapped in a quesadilla.
Gut Out!
What, me worry?
Amazon simple didnt want their game to end like Archeage or Darkfall etc. PVP players can still pvp. If you just want to fight against unprepared pve players then you are not a pvper.
The open world FFA pvp had its interesting moments, but as could easily be seen it lead down the dark road it always does.
Non-consensual PVP..only people who complain about NOT having that in a game are people that get their kicks out of ganking lesser skilled players that want to play the game for different reasons. There's no truthful reason for crying about losing that feature other than that.
Love seeing a couple posts pointing fingers at Goons. There were other guilds filled with scum and villainy...
Pretty much, yeah.
It's when I largely stopped paying attention to it.
If I wanted that sort of thing, I'd just jump onto Life is Feudal or one of the million other survival games where you can get this sort of experience already.
Curious to see where they'll go with this now.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
------------
2025: 48 years on the Net.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
’PvP’ games Never really punished PvP abuse because, you know, it’s a PVP game.
Of all FFA PVP games I played (almost everyone), I found out that usually the population is made by 70% Carebear and 30% full time PVPers.
Carebears are not pure PVErs, they do like PvP but in moderation, and they want to be able to choose when to do it, like taking parts in GvG and RvR battles for example, or entering FFA zones for rare materials.
They do not want PVP everywhere.
Yet developers didn’t seem to have picked this up yet.
In fact games like EVE seems to go even backward doing the same mistakes other failed FFA games did.
Personally I don't like CC though. It robs you of control. Pity most games turn into CC/Splash fiesta few patches down the road.
Even FPS games like Overwatch fall in this category. The CC is bonkers there.