DAoC did it right, why no developer ever bothered to copy that blueprint?
Separate PvE from PvP, and let the player decide when to play what.
Problem is, that PvE content requires lots more coding, so developers prefer to try their luck with half assed FFA PvP hoping that somewhat it will be a success.
I don't feel sorry for a company having to work to earn their cash. They don't want to put in the effort to bring in and keep their customers, they don't deserve a paycheck. I've had to work hard at my jobs for very little payout, they can too.
It's been mentioned a few times now how to do open world PvP right... copy DAoCs method. A separate zone to build strongholds and fight other players. Maybe toss in some resources that can only be found in the PvP zones and you have a reason to be there beyond just ganking each other. From there, a lot can be added over time to make people want to PvP more.
DAoC did it right, why no developer ever bothered to copy that blueprint?
Separate PvE from PvP, and let the player decide when to play what.
Problem is, that PvE content requires lots more coding, so developers prefer to try their luck with half assed FFA PvP hoping that somewhat it will be a success.
ESO actually did copy DAOC, and it mostly works. Three sides, a PvP zone that you don't have to go in if you don't like PvP.
Their problem was mainly that the engine they use can't handle it. Some of us still remember the time the deer had to be sacrificed to squeeze out the last bit of performance. The poor deer were using too many CPU cycles.
But ESO PvP also has other problems. PvP and PvE skills are not separate, so tweaking in one area affects the other. And there's been constant changes. And unlike DAOC, the three sides in ESO have the same classes, instead of unique classes. And since the game was designed for a console controller, you only get a few skills to use, and there are only a few classes.
Taking keeps is still fun, though, in the old way DAOC was fun.
Thank-you Tim for one of the few accurate and honest pieces on this debacle. Most, including may of your commenters, are basing their opinions on feelings and not facts, and that is simply not productive.
First of all, for those who say the game still has PvP...no, not really. You have opt-in PvP in open world, which is absurd in a territorial conquest MMO, and for sieges, the battles are restricted access, scheduled, limited to 50 people total per side (and good luck either ensuring you are or being one of those 50), and further limited to enemy factions. This means if an individual is competing for your resources, and they have opted out of PvP, you cannot kill them. Even if they HAVE opted in, you cannot loot them - so you are essentially given them a free ride home with the resources they harvested in your territory. If you want to remove said competitor from your region, you cannot even do THAT if they are in your faction. Anyone who considers the above to be anything but a token PvP system is simply not being honest.
Second, the idea what the Alpha state of the game as regards PvP or griefing is what would have happened in release. The ridiculousness of this should be obvious, but as it appears to be data AGS based this dramatic and drastic reversal on, clearly it was not. The excessive new player killing, and killing of the same players repeatedly, which AGS seems to indicate was the main data point behind their decision, was the result of specific circumstances in alpha, and ironically, these were of their own making...
They invited a large infamous gaming group to the game, and said group indicated very loudly and clearly that they intended to destroy every established guild in the game, dominate the server and indeed derail the alpha test. As a result, all of the major guilds held a meeting, many of which were enemies, and decided to adopt a strategy of slowing the invader's leveling and harvesting progress through a campaign of constant killing. This would give the community time to react, and hopefully take the wind out of their sails - and it did in fact work. It had the unintended consequence of causing a large amount of collateral damage, impacting non-invader new players, and this is a huge part of the flawed foundation AGS based their decision on.
In addition to the above, we're talking about data from an alpha where wipes were impending, the map was a fraction of it's release state size, there was no content aside from PvP to speak of, and new players were regularly being thrown into the world with no information on how to avoid most of the victimization at the hands of PvPs - again, due to the NDA, again, the fault of AGS - at a huge disadvantage in skill and understanding of the game, something that would not be the case at release. On top of everything else, no effort of any kind was made to segregate these new players from the veteran PvPers.
Lastly, as Tim points out, AGS COULD have made some kind of effort, as many games have done, to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater, betraying every statement and bit of marketing about the game for years, and disappointing not only the hardcore PvP crowd, but those who enjoy freebuilding and crafting - two systems equally impacted by this change in direction. There is a whole spectrum of grief-avoiding systems in PvP games today, from EVE Online to Gloria Victis, which given the absence of the alpha-specific issues would absolutely have been viable. Instead, they betrayed everyone, including themselves, with this incarnation which offers little to nothing to PvPers and a hodgepodge of ideas and content to the PVE crowd, who absolutely will grow tired of the title much more quickly. AGS will be competing with itself in this respect with it's LotR game...at this point, New World is basically a glorified tech demo.
It's a sad and mind-numbing case of a large entity basing major decisions on data, without understanding the precursors of that data. Aside from New World and it's fate, it's honestly a frightening and depressing statement on the world in general, and a great example of how perfectly someone can ruin something no matter how elevated a position they are in. Terrible.
Thank-you Tim for one of the few accurate and honest pieces on this debacle. Most, including may of your commenters, are basing their opinions on feelings and not facts, and that is simply not productive.
The irony is your entire post is based on opinions and feelings. Not sure it's cool to be dismissive of others' opinions and feelings when you feel free to make the same type of post.
If anything, one's opinions and feelings are probably what is going to drive their interest to or away from this game.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
It's a sad and mind-numbing case of a large entity basing major decisions on data, without understanding the precursors of that data. Aside from New World and it's fate, it's honestly a frightening and depressing statement on the world in general, and a great example of how perfectly someone can ruin something no matter how elevated a position they are in. Terrible.
Like @Sorvath said, most of this entire post is your opinion. In the quoted portion above, a perfectly valid interpretation of the 'major decisions' would be that Amazon acted to 1) protect the profitability of their game, and 2) protect their reputation as a business entity. Producing a game where customers are punished by the actions of others generates animosity in the aggrieved party against both the perpetrator and the company. AGS acted proactively to regulate behavior of the unruly element.
Let's wait until the game is actually released, and see the final form of the changes that have been hinted at before we judge Amazon and New World. I still believe that significant portions of the game will still involve PvP activity.
I will agree with you that the instanced 50x50 battles are probably not going to work as Amazon expects. PWI uses almost the same situation, although I believe the side limits may not be 50 per side.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
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
Wait what ????
Isn't gonna be a sub based MMO ????
Cause i'm about to flip out if i see gold sellers again.
"Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know, that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom. (Death)” ― Terry Pratchett,
I'm not really sure about this idea of PvPers being enough to prop any game up for longevity. We have yet to see a western MMO with a PvP focus last in any real sense or even bring in true masses. The only exception to this is possibly EVE and in that case you would have to ignore the game being in reality almost entirely PvE outside of when a massive Corp decides it wants to get involved in a big war every few years. Every major MMO success concerning western consumers has been PvE focused. Unfortunately that means high development costs to create a constant stream of content every few months.
We have spent what feels like the last 10 years or so waiting for a mythical sandbox with near full PvP and emergent PvE that MMO fans will refuse to put down. Nothing has come remotely close upon actual release and everything else has either been canceled or turned out to be a crowdfunding scam.
Dark Age of Camelot..a .pvp/realm vs realm is a monthly subscriptiion mmog..I repeat monthly subscription game that is close to 20 years old. They have proven people will play a pvp game in droves...when you have no player looting and safe areas and not safe areas. Has Keep fights any time...not scheduled.
The game is faction driven and the reason for conflict. Realm pride is a major part of the game.
I'm not really sure about this idea of PvPers being enough to prop any game up for longevity. We have yet to see a western MMO with a PvP focus last in any real sense or even bring in true masses. The only exception to this is possibly EVE and in that case you would have to ignore the game being in reality almost entirely PvE outside of when a massive Corp decides it wants to get involved in a big war every few years. Every major MMO success concerning western consumers has been PvE focused. Unfortunately that means high development costs to create a constant stream of content every few months.
We have spent what feels like the last 10 years or so waiting for a mythical sandbox with near full PvP and emergent PvE that MMO fans will refuse to put down. Nothing has come remotely close upon actual release and everything else has either been canceled or turned out to be a crowdfunding scam.
Dark Age of Camelot..a .pvp/realm vs realm is a monthly subscriptiion mmog..I repeat monthly subscription game that is close to 20 years old. They have proven people will play a pvp game in droves...when you have no player looting and safe areas and not safe areas. Has Keep fights any time...not scheduled.
The game is faction driven and the reason for conflict. Realm pride is a major part of the game.
Unfortunately one of the last bastions of the sub only model recently fell prey to the F2P scourge.
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
Solution to the problem is having PvP and PvE servers. Let the folks go where they want. Or an On or Off option for pvp. Seems simple to me.
Bah, what do armchair developers know?
For a poorly designed game like this maybe.
Image if eve had pve/pop servers tho...
People have often made similar arguments EVE could never have thrived under such a split server system for many of the same reasons given in this thread against New World.
I used to agree with them back in the early years, but CCP has added a ton of PVE content and I believe with relatively few changes a PVE only or one with a much more restrictive PVP design could do very well.
PVPers have long had a mistaken belief that PVEers needed them to make the game viable but I know in my case some well designed NPCs which they already have would more than fill the need for "an enemy" to rally against.
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
Great article, I can understand why people would be angry with those changes, although the original plan seemed pretty bad anyway. That whole genre of owpvp with massive gear/level gaps has always been a massive pain in the arse. Its basically a griefer's paradise.
Obviously a lot of people were eager to go and grind pve so that they could pawn some low level under-geared noobs. Now that is no longer an option, why play the game?
Great article, I can understand why people would be angry with those changes, although the original plan seemed pretty bad anyway. That whole genre of owpvp with massive gear/level gaps has always been a massive pain in the arse. Its basically a griefer's paradise.
Obviously a lot of people were eager to go and grind pve so that they could pawn some low level under-geared noobs. Now that is no longer an option, why play the game?
The real problem is they didn’t put any thought into it. They saw some complaints, got scared, and did a complete shift. They tried a Darkfall Online approach and when they didn’t work (duh) they skipped over Eve, DAOC, SWG, UO, Albion and went straight to... we’ll tbh I don’t know where they went. We’ll see I guess.
Solution to the problem is having PvP and PvE servers. Let the folks go where they want. Or an On or Off option for pvp. Seems simple to me.
Bah, what do armchair developers know?
For a poorly designed game like this maybe.
Image if eve had pve/pop servers tho...
That would kill EVE PvP server. PvPers whine about Carebears all the time, and actively try to push them out of the game. But if all Carebears quit EvE, the game will die pretty quick. Not saying the PvE server will necessarily be a success, just that the PvP server won’t survive.
I would like to see the "Next Generation" of ANY genre of game. I think we've been waiting since 2005 for ANY game to do this again. Noone has even come close. We got prettier games but we absolutely haven't seen any innovation in 15 years.
At this point I think the server could be made smart enough to give a wrath of the gods kind of feel where through a convoluted seemingly random set of circumstances a buff is given or an ability is taken etc. etc.
. PVP servers will never be fair to everyone... so why try? Why can't we make it fair sometimes and Have the deck stacked against you in others? Lets let the noob get lucky and smoke the highest best character(s) on the battlefield for a few minutes? Lets let evil reign and make those great players godlike for a while. Lets let the forces of the world plant their soldiers around to help their cause?
I think any number of 100 things could be done to keep PVP spiced up and risky. I think it could be done where a player couldn't"break the game and get X buff all the time" It might never be perfect but it would be interesting and ever changing. This game looks to have the story to pull such a thing off and not seem out of place. It used to be a GM could spot the perfect place to do such things. It seems to me the server should now be able to approximate that ability.
Great article, I can understand why people would be angry with those changes, although the original plan seemed pretty bad anyway. That whole genre of owpvp with massive gear/level gaps has always been a massive pain in the arse. Its basically a griefer's paradise.
Obviously a lot of people were eager to go and grind pve so that they could pawn some low level under-geared noobs. Now that is no longer an option, why play the game?
The real problem is they didn’t put any thought into it. They saw some complaints, got scared, and did a complete shift. They tried a Darkfall Online approach and when they didn’t work (duh) they skipped over Eve, DAOC, SWG, UO, Albion and went straight to... we’ll tbh I don’t know where they went. We’ll see I guess.
From what I understand, they didn't see "some complaints", there were a lot of complaints.
I agree with the reaction being overboard. There are so many viable options they could have move to. Instead, they went full retard and gutted the games entire concept. Flagged OWPvP is about as useless as full loot OWPvP.
You would think with all the market savvy of amazon they would have realized a lot sooner that OWFFAPVPMMORPG's are very niche and for the most part a recipe for disaster. You don't even have to venture too far back in history to see that, Darkfall, Mortal Online anyone?
You would think with all the market savvy of amazon they would have realized a lot sooner that OWFFAPVPMMORPG's are very niche and for the most part a recipe for disaster. You don't even have to venture too far back in history to see that, Darkfall, Mortal Online anyone?
What I really think happened is they grossly underestimated the number and cost of coding the number of controls which are necessary to maintain some semblance of order.
Most of all I think the time needed to do such really drove their decisions, clearly their execs want this game released now, rather than in another year or two, for "reasons."
Not an uncommon occurrence, especially when the top Execs have little knowledge of the game development process nor the consequences of such rush job decisions.
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
You would think with all the market savvy of amazon they would have realized a lot sooner that OWFFAPVPMMORPG's are very niche and for the most part a recipe for disaster. You don't even have to venture too far back in history to see that, Darkfall, Mortal Online anyone?
What I really think happened is they grossly underestimated the number and cost of coding the number of controls which are necessary to maintain some semblance of order.
Most of all I think the time needed to do such really drove their decisions, clearly their execs want this game released now, rather than in another year or two, for "reasons."
Not an uncommon occurrence, especially when the top Execs have little knowledge of the game development process nor the consequences of such rush job decisions.
There were clearly some kind of unrealistic expectations for New World. I don't think they understood the technical aspects of building a game, and they certainly didn't think about the needs/wants of their potential customers. Bad behavior ensued, and the shock wave of understanding rippled through AGS. Maybe some benevolent views of players were shattered, or at least tempered by the reality that some people, in an anonymous setting without real consequences, will indeed act in inhuman, antisocial ways.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I agree with the article for the most part.. good job!
This game will die in less than a year without some major changes to what they've shown, kill 20 wolves quests suck, we're all sick of them..
Well as to the PvE part yes, I'm tired of individual quests as well as instanced group content whether it's kill 20 rats or something else. That shit is beyond stale.
All that PvE has going for it that even mildly interests me is the bad guy invasion events. I loved those in Rift as a way to casually group in the open world and IMO, MMOs should really emphasize the crap out of that kind of PvE that makes the games feel like bona fide massively multiplayer games.
We shall see if they leverage those to be the core PvE experience in interesting ways or not.
"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
PvErs not loyal? Biased much? Give me a compelling PvE game and I'll play it for 20 years like I still do EverQuest. The fuck outta here with that PvErs not loyal nonsense. Sadly, your kind ruins potentially good PvE games with constant complaining about PvP balance which PvE gets to suffer for.
I'm not really sure about this idea of PvPers being enough to prop any game up for longevity. We have yet to see a western MMO with a PvP focus last in any real sense or even bring in true masses. The only exception to this is possibly EVE and in that case you would have to ignore the game being in reality almost entirely PvE outside of when a massive Corp decides it wants to get involved in a big war every few years. Every major MMO success concerning western consumers has been PvE focused. Unfortunately that means high development costs to create a constant stream of content every few months.
We have spent what feels like the last 10 years or so waiting for a mythical sandbox with near full PvP and emergent PvE that MMO fans will refuse to put down. Nothing has come remotely close upon actual release and everything else has either been canceled or turned out to be a crowdfunding scam.
Dark Age of Camelot..a .pvp/realm vs realm is a monthly subscriptiion mmog..I repeat monthly subscription game that is close to 20 years old. They have proven people will play a pvp game in droves...when you have no player looting and safe areas and not safe areas. Has Keep fights any time...not scheduled.
The game is faction driven and the reason for conflict. Realm pride is a major part of the game.
But the DAoC approach failed hard when applied to ESO. Didn't gauge their audience properly.
New World devs might have done the same when trying to apply their open world pvp concept to an MMO environment.
New World would be considered a huge disaster if it did as 'well' as present day DAoc.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Comments
I don't feel sorry for a company having to work to earn their cash. They don't want to put in the effort to bring in and keep their customers, they don't deserve a paycheck. I've had to work hard at my jobs for very little payout, they can too.
ESO actually did copy DAOC, and it mostly works. Three sides, a PvP zone that you don't have to go in if you don't like PvP.
Their problem was mainly that the engine they use can't handle it. Some of us still remember the time the deer had to be sacrificed to squeeze out the last bit of performance. The poor deer were using too many CPU cycles.
But ESO PvP also has other problems. PvP and PvE skills are not separate, so tweaking in one area affects the other. And there's been constant changes. And unlike DAOC, the three sides in ESO have the same classes, instead of unique classes. And since the game was designed for a console controller, you only get a few skills to use, and there are only a few classes.
Taking keeps is still fun, though, in the old way DAOC was fun.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
First of all, for those who say the game still has PvP...no, not really. You have opt-in PvP in open world, which is absurd in a territorial conquest MMO, and for sieges, the battles are restricted access, scheduled, limited to 50 people total per side (and good luck either ensuring you are or being one of those 50), and further limited to enemy factions. This means if an individual is competing for your resources, and they have opted out of PvP, you cannot kill them. Even if they HAVE opted in, you cannot loot them - so you are essentially given them a free ride home with the resources they harvested in your territory. If you want to remove said competitor from your region, you cannot even do THAT if they are in your faction. Anyone who considers the above to be anything but a token PvP system is simply not being honest.
Second, the idea what the Alpha state of the game as regards PvP or griefing is what would have happened in release. The ridiculousness of this should be obvious, but as it appears to be data AGS based this dramatic and drastic reversal on, clearly it was not. The excessive new player killing, and killing of the same players repeatedly, which AGS seems to indicate was the main data point behind their decision, was the result of specific circumstances in alpha, and ironically, these were of their own making...
They invited a large infamous gaming group to the game, and said group indicated very loudly and clearly that they intended to destroy every established guild in the game, dominate the server and indeed derail the alpha test. As a result, all of the major guilds held a meeting, many of which were enemies, and decided to adopt a strategy of slowing the invader's leveling and harvesting progress through a campaign of constant killing. This would give the community time to react, and hopefully take the wind out of their sails - and it did in fact work. It had the unintended consequence of causing a large amount of collateral damage, impacting non-invader new players, and this is a huge part of the flawed foundation AGS based their decision on.
In addition to the above, we're talking about data from an alpha where wipes were impending, the map was a fraction of it's release state size, there was no content aside from PvP to speak of, and new players were regularly being thrown into the world with no information on how to avoid most of the victimization at the hands of PvPs - again, due to the NDA, again, the fault of AGS - at a huge disadvantage in skill and understanding of the game, something that would not be the case at release. On top of everything else, no effort of any kind was made to segregate these new players from the veteran PvPers.
Lastly, as Tim points out, AGS COULD have made some kind of effort, as many games have done, to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater, betraying every statement and bit of marketing about the game for years, and disappointing not only the hardcore PvP crowd, but those who enjoy freebuilding and crafting - two systems equally impacted by this change in direction. There is a whole spectrum of grief-avoiding systems in PvP games today, from EVE Online to Gloria Victis, which given the absence of the alpha-specific issues would absolutely have been viable. Instead, they betrayed everyone, including themselves, with this incarnation which offers little to nothing to PvPers and a hodgepodge of ideas and content to the PVE crowd, who absolutely will grow tired of the title much more quickly. AGS will be competing with itself in this respect with it's LotR game...at this point, New World is basically a glorified tech demo.
It's a sad and mind-numbing case of a large entity basing major decisions on data, without understanding the precursors of that data. Aside from New World and it's fate, it's honestly a frightening and depressing statement on the world in general, and a great example of how perfectly someone can ruin something no matter how elevated a position they are in. Terrible.
If anything, one's opinions and feelings are probably what is going to drive their interest to or away from this game.
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
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
MAGA
"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
Isn't gonna be a sub based MMO ????
Cause i'm about to flip out if i see gold sellers again.
― Terry Pratchett,
Dark Age of Camelot..a .pvp/realm vs realm is a monthly subscriptiion mmog..I repeat monthly subscription game that is close to 20 years old. They have proven people will play a pvp game in droves...when you have no player looting and safe areas and not safe areas. Has Keep fights any time...not scheduled.
The game is faction driven and the reason for conflict. Realm pride is a major part of the game.
Camelot has fallen.
https://massivelyop.com/2019/11/12/dark-age-of-camelot-is-officially-going-free-to-play-today-with-endless-conquest/
"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
Image if eve had pve/pop servers tho...
I used to agree with them back in the early years, but CCP has added a ton of PVE content and I believe with relatively few changes a PVE only or one with a much more restrictive PVP design could do very well.
PVPers have long had a mistaken belief that PVEers needed them to make the game viable but I know in my case some well designed NPCs which they already have would more than fill the need for "an enemy" to rally against.
"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
Obviously a lot of people were eager to go and grind pve so that they could pawn some low level under-geared noobs. Now that is no longer an option, why play the game?
PvPers whine about Carebears all the time, and actively try to push them out of the game.
But if all Carebears quit EvE, the game will die pretty quick.
Not saying the PvE server will necessarily be a success, just that the PvP server won’t survive.
At this point I think the server could be made smart enough to give a wrath of the gods kind of feel where through a convoluted seemingly random set of circumstances a buff is given or an ability is taken etc. etc.
. PVP servers will never be fair to everyone... so why try? Why can't we make it fair sometimes and Have the deck stacked against you in others? Lets let the noob get lucky and smoke the highest best character(s) on the battlefield for a few minutes? Lets let evil reign and make those great players godlike for a while. Lets let the forces of the world plant their soldiers around to help their cause?
I think any number of 100 things could be done to keep PVP spiced up and risky. I think it could be done where a player couldn't"break the game and get X buff all the time" It might never be perfect but it would be interesting and ever changing. This game looks to have the story to pull such a thing off and not seem out of place. It used to be a GM could spot the perfect place to do such things. It seems to me the server should now be able to approximate that ability.
From what I understand, they didn't see "some complaints", there were a lot of complaints.
Most of all I think the time needed to do such really drove their decisions, clearly their execs want this game released now, rather than in another year or two, for "reasons."
Not an uncommon occurrence, especially when the top Execs have little knowledge of the game development process nor the consequences of such rush job decisions.
"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
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
All that PvE has going for it that even mildly interests me is the bad guy invasion events. I loved those in Rift as a way to casually group in the open world and IMO, MMOs should really emphasize the crap out of that kind of PvE that makes the games feel like bona fide massively multiplayer games.
We shall see if they leverage those to be the core PvE experience in interesting ways or not.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
New World devs might have done the same when trying to apply their open world pvp concept to an MMO environment.
New World would be considered a huge disaster if it did as 'well' as present day DAoc.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.